|
At 20th level, the paladin with 22 CHA can (in theory) heal 960 (!!!) HPs per day, or deal the same amount as damage to undead. Comparing to 3E, that’s a *HUGE* boost, and I’m not sure I like it, because to me it feels like an overkill.
Is this a joke?
Comparing a 20 lvl Palidin to a 20 lvl Cleric is like comparing a 20 level warrior to Fighter.
A 20 level can cast at least 4 mass heal / day. IN a party of 6 players he would heal 1500 HP per rounds. In 4 rounds he would heal 6 000 HP. In a party of 10 it would add up to 10 000 HP.
And with a wisdom score at 28 and the healing domain....hey it's 6 mass heal / day.And sniffin a little Incense of Meditation he would the continue to cast his level 8 spells, Cure Critical Wounds, Mass. In a 6 people party that's 52 HP * 6 Each round = 320 HP / round.
...and then the level 7 spells
And then the level 6 spells
and then......
Actually, I'm not comparing a 20th level Paladin to a 20th level Cleric -- I'm comparing a 20th level "updated" Pathfinder Beta Paladin to 3E Paladin. I don't know about you, but I consider that "bump" from 120 HPs to 960 HPs a huge boost, and I'm worried about how it affects game balance. Of course, it's a lot less, for example, at 10th level, but the fact remains that PF Paladin (with the changes proposed on this thread) heals a lot more HPs than his 3E counterpart.
Your argument is also a bit false in the sense that following your logic, it seems to me that it would be OK by you to "boost" a class feature, if there's another class which is even "better" at it (e.g. as long as the cleric is better at healing than the paladin). Would it be okay, if the bard's spellcasting abilities got a boost by, say, upgrading their caster level and spells per day to 3/4 * class level? They would gain access to 8th level spells, but then again, they'd still be "worse" than wizards as arcane spellcasters.
As I said, I'm concerned over how each change will affect the overall "attractiveness" of the class and balance. IMO these changes may prove to be too much, unless the rest of the classes get more "oomph" as well.
|
Actually, I'm not comparing a 20th level Paladin to a 20th level Cleric -- I'm comparing a 20th level "updated" Pathfinder Beta Paladin to 3E Paladin. I don't know about you, but I consider that "bump" from 120 HPs to 960 HPs a huge boost, and I'm worried about how it affects game balance. Of course, it's a lot less, for example, at 10th level, but the fact remains that PF Paladin (with the changes proposed on this thread) heals a lot more HPs than his 3E counterpart.
Yeah, but considering the suckfest that was 3E paladin to begin with (the only time it was even a decent class was when you splat booked it all to heck, and that meant opening other classes to splatbooking that didn't need it) That is a wholely good thing. Lets face it, although you never compared it to a cleric, the cleric is the standard and the paladin still falls well behind.
Your argument is also a bit false in the sense that following your logic, it seems to me that it would be OK by you to "boost" a class feature, if there's another class which is even "better" at it (e.g. as long as the cleric is better at healing than the paladin). Would it be okay, if the bard's spellcasting abilities got a boost by, say, upgrading their caster level and spells per day to 3/4 * class level? They would gain access to 8th level spells, but then again, they'd still be "worse" than wizards as arcane spellcasters.
heh, honestly that might not be that bad an idea lol
As I said, I'm concerned over how each change will affect the overall "attractiveness" of the class and balance. IMO these changes may prove to be too much, unless the rest of the classes get more "oomph" as well.
So what class are you worried will become less attractive if the paladin is boosted then?
Yes yes lets improve the bard, the poor spoony bard isn't given his due!
Other than that, the paladin finally has class features past 4th level that are worth something, and even at lower levels are worth using.
He is no longer the fighter without bonus feats that gets a free horsy and doesn't have to worry about what he'll catch at the local brothel.
He's the guy that stands beside the fighter and makes sure he doesn't falter, as a boon companion. That's a good role for the paladin.
HA + Smite: absolutely
LoH and Channel: seperate back out - not a universal pool of daily uses.
Mettle: Should be 11th level ability - replace the aura that allows party to use smite evil.
Caster level: Cleric -3, and even full caster level is not unfair - considering the paladin spells are not game-breakers and mostly just personal buffs and/or malady remedies.
Spontaneous Casting - Not necessary
Bonded Shield - being able to split the enhancement bonus between sword and shield makes sense. I wont pout if its not implemented, but it makes sense and would be cool.One last comment; the designers thought to increase the Will save to that of a cleric as one of the interventions to make the paladin better - I wholeheartedly feel that this is not the way to fix it - if the above is implemented at the expense of reducing the saves back to the way they were, Im all for that.
I firmly feel that the above it what is needed to fix the paladin - NOT the increase in will saves, and not spell resistance as has been a suggestion a few times.
The paladin already has some of the best saves, and most of the Will Saving throw issues are irrelevant as the paladin advances anyways: Charms, Compulsions and Fear all become no-issues eventually.
So if the Will save increase was done for the purpose of that being the oil on our squeaky wheel, I have to call foul and say thats the wrong approach, the other aspects is what is needed, so if something has to be taken back away from the paladin to facilitate these power increases - then have at it. I'm okay without the better Will saves.
Robert
Im with you hear Robert, all except 2 things. I like the spontaneous casting, I think it fits and would not be over powerful.
I also really like the Will save being "good". I see what you are saying but for what a paladin "IS" it simply should be that way. There is no other way around it, that is what his will save should be....his mental is JUST as tough as his physical (good fort/good will).
I want to plug one more thing here on top of these listed changes. I think with all of these we have a perfect paladin. Or almost perfect. We have gotten away from the prospect of giving them a few bonus feats. Should we still add this? I say yes, give them a bonus feat at 1st, then one at 5 and then one every 5th. So 1, 5, 10, 15 and 20. Or even just one at 1, 10 and 20. Just a small boost but something to play up the "martial" side. you could even say that these feats can be picked as fighter bonus feats...there are just WAY fewer of them.
These bonuses can be added to the weapon or they can be used to add any of the following weapon properties: axiomatic, brilliant energy, defending, disruption, flaming, flaming burst, holy, keen, merciful, and speed. Adding these properties consumes an amount of bonus equal to the property’s cost. These bonuses do not stack with any properties the weapon already has.I just wanted to clarify this statement: whenever you say that "these bonuses do not stack with any properties the weapon already has", you mean to say that you cannot stack the Flaming property on a sword that already has the Flaming property, correct?Absolutely! That was asked before and clarified.
You can add a +1 enhancement to a +1 weapon and make it a +2; you can add flaming to a +1 weapon, you can add keen to a +1 flaming weapon, but you cannot add keen to a +1 keen weapon or flaming to a +1 flaming weapon
Robert
Thanks for the clarification!
All in all, I'm I think I'm happy with the Paladin changes. I'm not sure if I like the fact that Paladin mounts have lost the ability to Command Animals and lack Improved Speed, but I don't know if these abilities are really something that Paladins are going to miss...
|
|
Thanks for the clarification!All in all, I'm I think I'm happy with the Paladin changes. I'm not sure if I like the fact that Paladin mounts have lost the ability to Command Animals and lack Improved Speed, but I don't know if these abilities are really something that Paladins are going to miss...
Jason has mentioned that after we've played with the new AnCo rules for a while he'll consider adding back in paladin specific stuff written into the class.
Personally I miss them and I never had them to begin with. (speed being something of a necessity in my game since people always run away)
|
|
or perhaps a Paladin that really sucks?, The 3E Paladin?
;-)
If the paizo paladin makes players not want to play the 3.5 paladin as far as I'm concerned thats a win. :D
I think his fear though is that if we have the paladin be super awesome no one will want to play the fighter.
Even ignoring the alignment and code restrictions (lets say your DM houseruled them out) I don't see it as an issue.
a) you won't choose the paladin if you were looking for a non-magical character.
b) you won't choose the paladin if you don't want to have healing powers
c) you won't choose the paladin to be a healer because the cleric can do it better
d) a paladin can't compete with a fighters customizability, and will still suck against certain allignments (nuetral)
e) the fighter has way more reliable powers and never burns out of uses.
We have had some great conversation here. I have decided to put a final list together of all that we have agreed on. I think if we could raise our voices behind one unanimous decision that it would be received well. So I give you the paladin as created by the people who really care about him. A paladin you can live (nay SURVIVE!) with!
The paladin will retain all restrictions listed in the beta.
He will retain full BAB. He will add in a good will save.
Other changes will be listed by level.
Unless otherwise specified, the description of the ability listed is exactly like the description in the Beta.
Level 1: Aura of Good, Detect Evil, Smite Evil 1/day + Holy Avenger, Bonus Feat (selected from any feat that extends paladin abilities, or the weapon focus/spec tree, previously limited to fighter only). He gains an additional bonus feat at 5th level and then another one every 5 levels after that (10th, 15th, and 20th.).
Detect Evil (Sp): At will, a paladin can use detect evil, as the spell. A paladin can, as a move action, concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil, learning its strength as if having studied it for 3 rounds. While focusing on one individual or object, the paladin does not detect evil in any other object or individual within range.
I think this was originally posted by Jason Nelson but I could not find his post. I think he and Robert worked closely on it so I felt it ok to post it this way. I also feel that this was the suggestion that had the most support and after reading Jason N’s lengthy explanation I am inclined to agree with it as well. Also the name “Holy Avenger” is up for debate but I listed it under this name as it was the first one suggested and the orginal description.
HOLY AVENGER: A paladin may focus divine energy from his god to course through his body and become an extension of its might. For 1 round + 1 rd per CHA MOD, the paladin gains a bonus to all attack rolls made against evil targets equal to their CHA mod, and an amount of damage equal to his paladin level. Also he gains a bonus to his AC equal to his CHA MOD as a Sacred Bonus. Using this ability uses one of his daily Smite Evil attempts.
SMITE EVIL: 1+CHA mod per day, the paladin may declare a strike to Smite Evil. During this attack, the paladin adds half his paladin level to his attack roll, and deals 1d6 of holy damage / 2 paladin levels. This smite is not used up for the day, if the paladin misses with his attack roll, but if he tries to smite a target that is not evil, the use if expended, but no benefits are gained from it. Smite evil bypasses all forms of Damage reduction. The paladin gains an additional use of smite evil at level 4 and then another at every 3 levels there after. All of these uses can be used for Smite evil or Holy Avenger.
Level 2: Divine Grace, Lay on Hands.
Lay On Hands (Su): Beginning at 2nd level, a paladin can heal wounds (her own or those of others) by touch. Each day she can use this ability a number of times equal to 1/2 her paladin level plus her Charisma bonus. With one use of this ability, a paladin can heal 1d6 hit points of damage for every two paladin levels she possesses. Using this ability is a standard action, unless the paladin target’s herself, in which case it is a swift action. As a paladin gains levels, she can use this ability to create other effects. The DC for any of these abilities is based off the paladin’s Charisma. Using any other ability is a standard action, regardless of the target.
Alternatively, a paladin can use this healing power to deal damage to undead creatures, dealing 1d6 points of damage for every two levels the paladin possesses. Using lay on hands in this way requires a successful melee touch attack and doesn’t provoke an attack of opportunity. Undead do not receive a saving throw against this damage.
Level 3: Aura of Courage, Divine Health.
Level 4: Channel Positive Energy, Smite Evil 2/day. (spells).
Other listed changes here are the paladin’s caster level becomes Paladin level –3 and he gains spontaneous casting from the whole list. I also modified Jason B’s listed change of Channel Positive Energy to only use up one use of Lay on Hands instead of 2, I feel this fixes that problem. With the improved way it works now I am okay with giving up one of my LoH (which is also greatly improved) to heal an area.
Channel Positive Energy (Su): When a paladin reaches 4th level, she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy as a cleric. Using this ability consumes ONE use of her lay on hands ability. A paladin uses her level as her effective cleric level when channeling positive energy.
Level 5 Divine Bond. Second Bonus Feat.
Another change that I love was the addition of being able to divide your weapon bond to bonuses to your shield as well, I think this is an amazing addition. Of course the same rules would apply for the +1 and the additional shield abilities would be drawn from; Bashing, Arrow deflection, Animated (sorry Jason N. I love it! Hehe), blinding. “element” resistance, Fortification (light, moderate or Heavy), Ghost touch, and Reflecting.
I would also add Ghost touch to the list of weapons and Bane with the restriction of undead or evil outsiders.
Divine Bond (Sp): Upon reaching 5th level, a paladin forms a divine bond with her god. This bond can take one of two forms.
The first bond allows her to enhance her weapon as a standard action by calling upon the aid of a celestial spirit for 1 minute per paladin level. When called, the spirit causes the weapon to shed light as a torch. At 5th level, this spirit grants the weapon a +1 enhancement bonus. For every three levels beyond 5th, the weapon gains another +1 enhancement bonus, to a maximum of +6 at 20th level. These bonuses can be added to the weapon or they can be used to add any of the following weapon properties: axiomatic, brilliant energy, defending, disruption, flaming, flaming burst, holy, keen, merciful, and speed. Adding these properties consumes an amount of bonus equal to the property’s cost. These bonuses do not stack with any properties the weapon already has. If the weapon is not magical, at least a +1 enhancement bonus must be added before any other properties can be added. The bonus and properties granted by the spirit are determined when the spirit is called and cannot be changed until the spirit is called again. The celestial spirit imparts no bonuses if the weapon is held by anyone other than the paladin, but resumes giving bonuses if returned to the paladin. These bonuses apply to only one end of a double weapon. A paladin can use this ability once per day at 5th level, and one additional time per day for every four levels beyond 5th, to a total of four times per day at 17th level.
If a weapon bearing a celestial spirit is destroyed, the paladin loses the use of this ability for 30 days, or until she gains a level, whichever comes first. During this 30-day period, the paladin takes a –1 penalty on attack and weapon damage rolls.
The second bond allows a paladin to gain the service of an unusually intelligent, strong, and loyal steed to serve her in her crusade against evil. This mount is usually a heavy warhorse (for a Medium paladin) or a warpony (for a Small paladin), although more exotic mounts, such as a boar, camel, or dog are also suitable. This mount functions as a druid’s animal companion, using the paladin’s level as her effective druid level. Bonded mounts have an Intelligence of at least 6.
Once per day, as a full-round action, a paladin may magically call her mount to her side. This ability is the equivalent of a spell of a level equal to one-third the paladin’s level. The mount immediately appears adjacent to the paladin. A paladin can use this ability once per day at 5th level, and one additional time per day for every 4 levels thereafter, for a total of four times per day at 17th level.
At 11th level, a paladin’s mount gains the celestial template. At 15th level, a paladin’s mount gains spell resistance equal to the paladin’s level +11.
Should the paladin’s mount die, the paladin may not summon another mount for 30 days or until she gains a paladin level, whichever comes first. During this 30-day period, the paladin takes a –1 penalty on attack and weapon damage rolls.
Level 6: Remove Disease.
Remove Disease: A simple fix would be to allow a paladins remove disease to actually restore all ability damage lost to the disease. A cleric would take two spells (remove disease and lesser restoration) to do that. Therefor it doesn't feel like a dead level.
Level 7: Smite Evil 3/day.
Level 8: Aura of Resolve.
Level 9: Remove Curse.
Level 10: Smite Evil 4/day. Third Bonsu feat.
Level 11: REMOVE Aura of Justice, ADD Mettle (or whatever OGL name you want.)
Mettle (Ex): You can resist magical attacks with greater effectiveness than other warriors. By drawing on your boundless energy and dedication to your cause, you can shrug off effects that would hinder even the toughest warrior. If you succeed on a Fortitude or Will save against an attack that would normally produce a lesser effect on a successful save (such as a spell with a saving throw entry of Will half or Fortitude partial), you instead negate the effect. You do not gain the benefit of mettle when you are unconscious or sleeping.
Level 12: Neutralize Poison.
Level 13: Smite Evil 5/day.
Level 14: Aura of Faith.
I would suggest that this read “a paladin’s weapons are considered to have the “Holy” property” and any attacks made against an enemy within 10 feat of her is treated as good aligned for the purposes of bypassing damage reduction.
This ability functions while the paladin is conscious, but not if she is unconscious or dead.
Level 15: Break enchantment. Fourth bonus feat.
Level 16: Smite Evil 6/day.
Level 17: Aura of Righteousness.
It should be noted that the damage reduction should read, DR 5/-.
Level 18: Heal.
Level 19: Smite Evil 7/day.
Level 20: Holy Champion. Fifth bonus feat.
It should also be noted that the damage reduction should read, DR increases to 10/-.
Holy Champion (Su): At 20th level, a paladin becomes a conduit for the power of her god. Her DR increases to 10/evil. Whenever she uses smite evil and successfully strikes an evil outsider, the outsider is also subject to a banishment, using her paladin level as the caster level (her weapon and holy symbol automatically count as objects that the subject hates). In addition, whenever she channels positive energy or uses lay on hands to heal a creature, she heals the maximum possible amount.
I think with these changes gathered from everyone here who really cares what becomes of the paladin, that we have a balanced and capable class; one that is fun to play and fun to have in a group. A paladin that exemplifies the descriptions given for it and truly stands where he should in the fight against evil and the quest to uphold the values of courage, honor, and wisdom.
|
We have had some great conversation here. I have decided to put a final list together of all that we have agreed on. I think if we could raise our voices behind one unanimous decision that it would be received well. So I give you the paladin as created by the people who really care about him. A paladin you can live (nay SURVIVE!) with!
Great summation, Vult. Thanks for posting that. The bulk of the post if relevant to many of us - there will of course be slight variances of opinions:
mine include:
1)Add Tower Shield to the armor options of the class
2)I dont need high will saves; I wont protest if their added - but if something had to be taken off the list -thats one of the two I would say to dump.
3) Spontanteous casting - that would be the first one to dump; I dont think it's necessary.
4) Divine Bond weapon/shield. I think animated shield is not "paladin" related - I dont see it as relevant as an option. Bane - Dragons on the sword is, however and should be added to your Undead and Evil outsiders options.
5) Neutralize Poison: If the 6th level Remove Disease is changed as per LKL idea - which is wonderful btw, and all stat damage is removed upon a paladin removing the disease - the same mechanic should then be applied to the N.Poison idea. Lets be honest - by 12th level, a cleric will have been removing diseases for nearly half of his career by then. Adding that ability in the exact spell-descripition-form at 12th level is behind the curve and superfluous. Having it have MORE effect is appropriate for a double-digit level ability IMO. Divine Antidote (SU): With a touch of the paladin's hand upon a creature who has been poisoned, he can focus divine healing that not only removes all toxins, but restores the creature's ability damage from that poison back to full health. This is a full-round action.
Other than these expressed opinions of mine - your post is quite succinct and concise. Good job.
Robert
Thanx Robert. I think I could live with the changes you listed, but I would leave in the good will save (I love it). Also the addition of the same effect to remove poison as remove disease makes sense.
I just needed to put everything all in one place. I wish they would just look at that and go, hah well there is our paladin good job all of you guys that worked for it. We have our final release paladin right here, you may begin using it this way now. :)
|
|
Level 4: Channel Positive Energy, Smite Evil 2/day. (spells).
Other listed changes here are the paladin’s caster level becomes Paladin level –3 and he gains spontaneous casting from the whole list. I also modified Jason B’s listed change of Channel Positive Energy to only use up one use of Lay on Hands instead of 2, I feel this fixes that problem. With the improved way it works now I am okay with giving up one of my LoH (which is also greatly improved) to heal an area.
Channel Positive Energy (Su): When a paladin reaches 4th level, she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy as a cleric. Using this ability consumes ONE use of her lay on hands ability. A paladin uses her level as her effective cleric level when channeling positive energy. She also gains an additional # of lay of hands equal to her charisma modifier
I hate to be the voice of dissent (and thank you for the summary) but the only way I could get behind the level 4 change is if the extra bolded part was added. The cost of channeling may be fixed but the cost of burning channels from such a limited pool isn't. If I only have 5 LoH a day, burning 3 for my law devotion takes away 60% of my healing where before it was only 33%. the boost of extra uses means that I can afford to burn channels for feats as before.
|
|
These changes and suggestions are starting to get messy . An update to any class should have some consistency and elegance, imho. We already have rules for divine magic, channeling, weapon buffing spells, favored enemies and animal companions, but the paladin needs a completely separate baseline?
- Can we consider dipping into Domains (Glory, Law, Good, Protection)?
- Maybe give them spells sooner and say they can cast self or weapon affecting spells as swift actions? They could “lay on hands” with cure spells and “smite” with buffs.
- Give them Favored Enemies: Outsider Evil, Undead?
This probably throws a wrench in backwards compatibility, but the new suggestions – as cool as they are – are piecemeal.
|
|
These changes and suggestions are starting to get messy . An update to any class should have some consistency and elegance, imho. We already have rules for divine magic, channeling, weapon buffing spells, favored enemies and animal companions, but the paladin needs a completely separate baseline?
I've never considered the paladins seperate abilities that complicated I guess.
- Can we consider dipping into Domains (Glory, Law, Good, Protection)?
No definitely not, I'm personally fine with the level of "cleric light" the paladin has now, no more cleric stuff please.
- Maybe give them spells sooner and say they can cast self or weapon affecting spells as swift actions? They could “lay on hands” with cure spells and “smite” with buffs.
That would work, but to me its just as complicated as making a paladin a spontaneous caster.
- Give them Favored Enemies: Outsider Evil, Undead?
Absolutely not, how many "Class X light" abilities do we need to ram down the class. I'm sorry, but the elegance you are suggesting to me is boring repetition. I'd rather have unique and interesting abilities that a hodgepodge of a bunch of other classes abilities.
That being said, I love your avatar, it always makes me think of the prodigal sorcerer card in MtG
This probably throws a wrench in backwards compatibility, but the new suggestions – as cool as they are – are piecemeal.
and seriously no offense here, but making a class by throwing it the "appropriate leftovers" from other classes isn't?
I hate to be the voice of dissent (and thank you for the summary) but the only way I could get behind the level 4 change is if the extra bolded part was added. The cost of channeling may be fixed but the cost of burning channels from such a limited pool isn't. If I only have 5 LoH a day, burning 3 for my law devotion takes away 60% of my healing where before it was only 33%. the boost of extra uses means that I can afford to burn channels for feats as before.Level 4: Channel Positive Energy, Smite Evil 2/day. (spells).
Other listed changes here are the paladin’s caster level becomes Paladin level –3 and he gains spontaneous casting from the whole list. I also modified Jason B’s listed change of Channel Positive Energy to only use up one use of Lay on Hands instead of 2, I feel this fixes that problem. With the improved way it works now I am okay with giving up one of my LoH (which is also greatly improved) to heal an area.
Channel Positive Energy (Su): When a paladin reaches 4th level, she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy as a cleric. Using this ability consumes ONE use of her lay on hands ability. A paladin uses her level as her effective cleric level when channeling positive energy. She also gains an additional # of lay of hands equal to her charisma modifier
I guess I dont see the problem. Possibly because I dont know what "law devotion" is or what it does for you. But to me it looks like if the paladin gets a 1 for 1 basis on LoH and CE then that is still a good amount of healing. I dont want to CE like a cleric, so doing it a little less is fine with me (I like how it sits with my summary). LoH was a great fix I think that is fine the way it is.
Can you explain to me what this law devotion does? It must be pretty powerful for you to argue against the LoH, CE changes so vehemently.
|
|
This probably throws a wrench in backwards compatibility, but the new suggestions – as cool as they are – are piecemeal.and seriously no offense here, but making a class by throwing it the "appropriate leftovers" from other classes isn't?
Where you see leftovers I see opportunities to refine. Mechanics don't have to 'belong' to any class if they work well. For example, there's a 'Guy Who Uses Flaming Blades' class, and then we decided to make a 'Guy Who Uses Fiery Bows' class, does it diminish either class if we decide we want fire to work the same way in both?
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I hate to be the voice of dissent (and thank you for the summary) but the only way I could get behind the level 4 change is if the extra bolded part was added. The cost of channeling may be fixed but the cost of burning channels from such a limited pool isn't. If I only have 5 LoH a day, burning 3 for my law devotion takes away 60% of my healing where before it was only 33%. the boost of extra uses means that I can afford to burn channels for feats as before.Level 4: Channel Positive Energy, Smite Evil 2/day. (spells).
Other listed changes here are the paladin’s caster level becomes Paladin level –3 and he gains spontaneous casting from the whole list. I also modified Jason B’s listed change of Channel Positive Energy to only use up one use of Lay on Hands instead of 2, I feel this fixes that problem. With the improved way it works now I am okay with giving up one of my LoH (which is also greatly improved) to heal an area.
Channel Positive Energy (Su): When a paladin reaches 4th level, she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy as a cleric. Using this ability consumes ONE use of her lay on hands ability. A paladin uses her level as her effective cleric level when channeling positive energy. She also gains an additional # of lay of hands equal to her charisma modifier
I guess I dont see the problem. Possibly because I dont know what "law devotion" is or what it does for you. But to me it looks like if the paladin gets a 1 for 1 basis on LoH and CE then that is still a good amount of healing. I dont want to CE like a cleric, so doing it a little less is fine with me (I like how it sits with my summary). LoH was a great fix I think that is fine the way it is.
Can you explain to me what this law devotion does? It must be pretty powerful for you to argue against the LoH, CE changes so vehemently.
I also have no idea what law devotion is.
We have had some great conversation here. I have decided to put a final list together of all that we have agreed on. I think if we could raise our voices behind one unanimous decision that it would be received well. So I give you the paladin as created by the people who really care about him. A paladin you can live (nay SURVIVE!) with!
Great summation, Vult. Thanks for posting that. The bulk of the post if relevant to many of us - there will of course be slight variances of opinions:
mine include:
1)Add Tower Shield to the armor options of the class
2)I dont need high will saves; I wont protest if their added - but if something had to be taken off the list -thats one of the two I would say to dump.
3) Spontanteous casting - that would be the first one to dump; I dont think it's necessary.
4) Divine Bond weapon/shield. I think animated shield is not "paladin" related - I dont see it as relevant as an option. Bane - Dragons on the sword is, however and should be added to your Undead and Evil outsiders options.
5) Neutralize Poison: If the 6th level Remove Disease is changed as per LKL idea - which is wonderful btw, and all stat damage is removed upon a paladin removing the disease - the same mechanic should then be applied to the N.Poison idea. Lets be honest - by 12th level, a cleric will have been removing diseases for nearly half of his career by then. Adding that ability in the exact spell-descripition-form at 12th level is behind the curve and superfluous. Having it have MORE effect is appropriate for a double-digit level ability IMO. Divine Antidote (SU): With a touch of the paladin's hand upon a creature who has been poisoned, he can focus divine healing that not only removes all toxins, but restores the creature's ability damage from that poison back to full health. This is a full-round action.Other than these expressed opinions of mine - your post is quite succinct and concise. Good job.
Robert
How about just adding tower shield to the list of bonus feats the paladin can take? I personally dont care for it and as you feel that a good will save or spontaneous casting could be sacrificed I feel that way about tower shield.
As for the shield, I love animated and I think it could work fine depending on the fluff you give it (a divine hand holding your shield as you wield your blade with two to strike down evil with all of your might). As for adding bane dragons, I could get behind that so long as it is only evil dragons.
The idea behind poison working like the one with remove disease is fine, works for me.
As for the bonus feats, the paladin will only get 5 throughout his character's life span. So if someone wanted a more martial paladin they could take the weapon focus/spec tree (4 of his 5) or they could work into more LoH or CE...maybe even more smites if that became an option (though i doubt it if we get 1+Char mod).
I really like the write up...that is the paladin I am fighting for!
|
|
I guess I dont see the problem. Possibly because I dont know what "law devotion" is or what it does for you. But to me it looks like if the paladin gets a 1 for 1 basis on LoH and CE then that is still a good amount of healing. I dont want to CE like a cleric, so doing it a little less is fine with me (I like how it sits with my summary). LoH was a great fix I think that is fine the way it is.Can you explain to me what this law devotion does? It must be pretty powerful for you to argue against the LoH, CE changes so vehemently.
It's a feat from the Complete Champion, it's not that feat alone. Any of the Domain Devotion feats could work in it's place. The thing is that they were designed around burning turn undead uses to gain additional daily uses of their powers. Specifically with the Domain Devotion feats you had to burn 3 turn undeads to gain an extra use of the feat.
Or you can look at the divine feats from complete divine or complete champion, which operate on the same principle, only each divine feat burns a different # of turn undead uses.
In 3.5 the paladin had 3+cha mod turns a day, for my character this translates to 2 extra daily uses of his Domain Devotion feat (in Heraguv's instance Law Devotion) or as I leveled up I would have taken some divine feats and had a couple of choices for powers.
In Pathfinder alpha, channel came along, and the # per day got cut to 1+cha per day, while the healing wasn't worth using except outside of combat, in combat I would still have 1 extra use of a domain devotion feat, and a use left over for a weak channel or a divine feat, and still have all of my LoH
Then Beta Design focus came. Now channeling is part of lay on hands, so I have a very small pool of LoH or channels. LoH kicks but now, but channel isn't worth doing because it costs too much. Also as it stands I can't get any extra uses of my domain devotion feat. and I'm not going to look into divine feats because my LoH is actually good, even at 1-1 cost (which my DM houseruled in for burning for feats) with only 5 uses of LoH I get one extra use of my law devotion, but at the cost of pretty much 80% of my healing.
It's like you said, every time the paladin is given something, the designer feels the need to take something away in order to balance it. Despite the fact that the class need a non-nerfed boost just to be balanced in the first place.
The change even with a 1-1 cost breaks backwards compatability because it represents a much bigger expenditure of resources to do the things the paladin could do before, therefor making previous options unworkable in their current form.
Unless your game is starting out at level 15+ which is where the paladin didn't need help in the first place.
|
|
I like the idea of bonus feats, but not at level 1. I hate power dipping, (or what it's called).
Well here the argument is well made, a fighter only gets a bonus feat at level one, but the paladin would get that, a good will save, and a smite evil 1 per, that is better than a 1st level fighter who the only difference is he gets tower shield prof.
If you do give a paladin a bonus feat it has to be a feat choice of one or the other, like a monk. That way the fighter gets his full choice while you have either, say power attack or combat expertise. Otherwise people will be dipping into the paladin because it represents a better choice than the fighter.
|
|
This probably throws a wrench in backwards compatibility, but the new suggestions – as cool as they are – are piecemeal.and seriously no offense here, but making a class by throwing it the "appropriate leftovers" from other classes isn't?
Where you see leftovers I see opportunities to refine. Mechanics don't have to 'belong' to any class if they work well. For example, there's a 'Guy Who Uses Flaming Blades' class, and then we decided to make a 'Guy Who Uses Fiery Bows' class, does it diminish either class if we decide we want fire to work the same way in both?
I see your point, at this point then I would just argue against it for the same reason I argue against the current Smite fix.
The paladin isn't a demon/undead hunter and never has been. He could just be your generic evil hater. giving him favored enemy is a shoehorn into a specific type of character, and that doesn't work for me.
I like the idea of bonus feats, but not at level 1. I hate power dipping, (or what it's called).
Well here the argument is well made, a fighter only gets a bonus feat at level one, but the paladin would get that, a good will save, and a smite evil 1 per, that is better than a 1st level fighter who the only difference is he gets tower shield prof.
If you do give a paladin a bonus feat it has to be a feat choice of one or the other, like a monk. That way the fighter gets his full choice while you have either, say power attack or combat expertise. Otherwise people will be dipping into the paladin because it represents a better choice than the fighter.
I respectfully disagree that it is now a better choice to "dip" into than the fighter. Dont forget that to dip for the bonuses of a paladin you also get the restrictions. Which means this person must be lawful good and now has to do everything with that in mind INCLUDING his code of conduct.
Of course the bonus feats would be limited to certain feats...I thought I put that in there. These feats would be the ones that increase powers that the paladin already has, Tower shield prof, or weapon focus/spec tree. These feats and these feats only....it is a small list but it give the paladin a little more oomph and lets him go with a little more martial side if he wants.
law devotion once per day for 1 minute you may gain a +3 sacred bonus to attacks or AC chosen when you activate the ability.
At the begining of your turn you may switch this abilitySpecial: you may use 3 of your daily turn undead uses for the day to gain another use of this feat.
I see your point here but didnt you say that your DM allowed you to use a 1 for 1 ratio? Now this is still a good turn over, and with only spending 1 LoH use for 1 CE you are not burning it up so fast.
I know what you mean about the devs giving something only to take something away. That is why i suggested it was 1 for 1 instead of 2 for 1. This feat you have sounds cool but that is a personal choice, I think it adds to your character and gives YOU the option of what you spend your power points on. In this form isnt it something you could live with?
|
|
I hate to be the voice of dissent (and thank you for the summary) but the only way I could get behind the level 4 change is if the extra bolded part was added. The cost of channeling may be fixed but the cost of burning channels from such a limited pool isn't. If I only have 5 LoH a day, burning 3 for my law devotion takes away 60% of my healing where before it was only 33%. the boost of extra uses means that I can afford to burn channels for feats as before.Level 4: Channel Positive Energy, Smite Evil 2/day. (spells).
Other listed changes here are the paladin’s caster level becomes Paladin level –3 and he gains spontaneous casting from the whole list. I also modified Jason B’s listed change of Channel Positive Energy to only use up one use of Lay on Hands instead of 2, I feel this fixes that problem. With the improved way it works now I am okay with giving up one of my LoH (which is also greatly improved) to heal an area.
Channel Positive Energy (Su): When a paladin reaches 4th level, she gains the supernatural ability to channel positive energy as a cleric. Using this ability consumes ONE use of her lay on hands ability. A paladin uses her level as her effective cleric level when channeling positive energy. She also gains an additional # of lay of hands equal to her charisma modifier
Oh yeah, I guess I didnt see that part of Vult's summation.
I would definitely prefer to have them be a seperate pool of uses; but I am willing to live with as Vult posted it - I'm thinking about 10th level you'd have about 10 uses (considering a 20 CHA - which is a safe assumption with an enhancement item).
Robert
I agree it would be better to separate them but if we do that it will prob drop back down to paladin lvl -3. I went with that version because it was only a very small change from what Jason B originally posted. I just dont feel that the paladin looses to much if it is 1 for 1.
|
|
The idea behind poison working like the one with remove disease seems a bit to powerful, but perhaps I'm wrong.
I'm not convinced that it is too powerful. It's something gained at 12th level!
Compare that to the abilities and new spells etc that the other classes have access to at 12th level. The paladin is currently being given the ability to "Neutralize Poison" that USES TWO of his Lay On Hands. He's not getting this ability as an EXTRA once/day or twice/day ability, or an extra spell slot per say - he's having to now spend his current allotment to now be able to re-enact a 4th level spell - and certainly not even a game breaking spell. He's using 2 daily uses of something he already - he isnt getting additional uses of this mechanic so that he CAN enact it. And it uses TWO!
PLUS my suggestion is not the exact spell - thus it will not carry with it the immunity for 10mins/level to poison. It's simply a complete reversal of the malady should one be exposed.
Its essentially a Restoration spell (another 4th level spell) with the removal of the toxin - so that they don't have to make another save in 10 rounds. Which to me, sounds more paladin-y healing anyways - that wholesome pureness of him that takes away all pain and suffering.
Robert
The idea behind poison working like the one with remove disease seems a bit to powerful, but perhaps I'm wrong.I'm not convinced that it is too powerful. It's something gained at 12th level!
Compare that to the abilities and new spells etc that the other classes have access to at 12th level. The paladin is currently being given the ability to "Neutralize Poison" that USES TWO of his Lay On Hands. He's not getting this ability as an EXTRA once/day or twice/day ability, or an extra spell slot per say - he's having to now spend his current allotment to now be able to re-enact a 4th level spell - and certainly not even a game breaking spell. He's using 2 daily uses of something he already - he isnt getting additional uses of this mechanic so that he CAN enact it. And it uses TWO!
PLUS my suggestion is not the exact spell - thus it will not carry with it the immunity for 10mins/level to poison. It's simply a complete reversal of the malady should one be exposed.
Its essentially a Restoration spell (another 4th level spell) with the removal of the toxin - so that they don't have to make another save in 10 rounds. Which to me, sounds more paladin-y healing anyways - that wholesome pureness of him that takes away all pain and suffering.
Robert
Totally agree, you cant just take into account what the power does. you have to also consider WHEN you get it. At level 14 this ability is not POWER it is convenience.
|
|
The idea behind poison working like the one with remove disease seems a bit to powerful, but perhaps I'm wrong.I'm not convinced that it is too powerful. It's something gained at 12th level!
Compare that to the abilities and new spells etc that the other classes have access to at 12th level. The paladin is currently being given the ability to "Neutralize Poison" that USES TWO of his Lay On Hands. He's not getting this ability as an EXTRA once/day or twice/day ability, or an extra spell slot per say - he's having to now spend his current allotment to now be able to re-enact a 4th level spell - and certainly not even a game breaking spell. He's using 2 daily uses of something he already - he isnt getting additional uses of this mechanic so that he CAN enact it. And it uses TWO!
PLUS my suggestion is not the exact spell - thus it will not carry with it the immunity for 10mins/level to poison. It's simply a complete reversal of the malady should one be exposed.
Its essentially a Restoration spell (another 4th level spell) with the removal of the toxin - so that they don't have to make another save in 10 rounds. Which to me, sounds more paladin-y healing anyways - that wholesome pureness of him that takes away all pain and suffering.
Robert
Thirded, and thank you Robert for taking my idea and running with it, that makes me feel good.
As a side note, no one but tomjohn has talked about my idea of using a +1 from divine bond to make a paladins weapon unbreakable, what were your guys thoughts on that?
As a side note, no one but tomjohn has talked about my idea of using a +1 from divine bond to make a paladins weapon unbreakable, what were your guys thoughts on that?
I see no problem with doing that LKL, but my question is...is it really that big of an issue? Have you had problems with this? and what complications do you see happening? I understand that "if the weapon is destroyed..." But is something like this really that common? I have not played in very HIGH level games so for that part of the conversation I am going to need a little explanation.
|
|
As a side note, no one but tomjohn has talked about my idea of using a +1 from divine bond to make a paladins weapon unbreakable, what were your guys thoughts on that?I see no problem with doing that LKL, but my question is...is it really that big of an issue? Have you had problems with this? and what complications do you see happening? I understand that "if the weapon is destroyed..." But is something like this really that common? I have not played in very HIGH level games so for that part of the conversation I am going to need a little explanation.
We haven't gotten to it because I took animal companion, but my DM pretty much said that any intelligent creature we thought that could figure out i'm a paladin would. But this is the kind of thing we wouldn't see till months from now.
I would like to take this incrementally. Although I am not convinced that this solves all of the paladin's issues, I do not want to overshoot (hence the absence of brand new abilities). Lets take a look at these and see where they lead us. There is still plenty of time to get this right.
I don't think anyone responded to this part of your post. I'm wondering why the barbarian gets an all-new rage mechanic, but when it comes to the paladin, people get all conservative, and few want to consider brand new abilities. I took some time to re-read the 3.5e paladin, and I was struck not only by the stinginess of the class abilities, but also by how boring the class is. It then occurred to me that I've never played a 3e paladin, and had never really thought about why. Pathfinder improves things for the paladin, and your upgrade is another welcome boost, but I wonder why we can't hope for something more ambitious.
I'd really like to see something new and interesting for the paladin, something that makes a player say, "Cool! I want to try that!" I wondered why people are willing to strain the design of existing abilities like smite evil, but are reluctant to discuss anything new. Then I realized that people are trying to solve the problem of the paladin being underpowered. For example
Do these upgrades, especially those made to smite evil, help to level the playing field
The problem has been similarly expressed as "closing the gap" with the fighter. That's a fine goal, and will probably help more people want to play the class, but I think we're missing an opportunity for something better.
Several people liked the idea of oaths (presented here), but I wonder if the expressed lack of interest in new abilities discouraged discussion of the idea. I understand and respect the need to keep the discussion focused. I just wonder if we're focused on the wrong goal. I think the idea of oaths is crazy fun, and I hoped it would serve as an example of what is possible if we focused on the goals of fun and character concept rather than mere power equality. I can't tell how much people really like the oaths idea, but I think it's mechanical flaws are easily ironed out in playtesting, and it's easy to expand with more good ideas. But really, I don't care if it's oaths or something else, I just want to see the gap in power level filled with something new.
I think the paladin is overdue for some serious creative effort, so please throw caution to the wind and show off some of your game designer uber tricks! Don't hold back! I can't wait to see something new that makes the paladin feel cool again.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
I would like to take this incrementally. Although I am not convinced that this solves all of the paladin's issues, I do not want to overshoot (hence the absence of brand new abilities). Lets take a look at these and see where they lead us. There is still plenty of time to get this right.
I don't think anyone responded to this part of your post. I'm wondering why the barbarian gets an all-new rage mechanic, but when it comes to the paladin, people get all conservative, and few want to consider brand new abilities. I took some time to re-read the 3.5e paladin, and I was struck not only by the stinginess of the class abilities, but also by how boring the class is. It then occurred to me that I've never played a 3e paladin, and had never really thought about why. Pathfinder improves things for the paladin, and your upgrade is another welcome boost, but I wonder why we can't hope for something more ambitious.
I'd really like to see something new and interesting for the paladin, something that makes a player say, "Cool! I want to try that!" I wondered why people are willing to strain the design of existing abilities like smite evil, but are reluctant to discuss anything new. Then I realized that people are trying to solve the problem of the paladin being underpowered. For example
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Do these upgrades, especially those made to smite evil, help to level the playing field
The problem has been similarly expressed as "closing the gap" with the fighter. That's a fine goal, and will probably help more people want to play the class, but I think we're missing an opportunity for something better.
Several people liked the idea of oaths (presented here), but I wonder if the expressed lack of interest in new abilities discouraged discussion of the idea. I understand and respect the need to keep the discussion focused. I just wonder if we're focused on the wrong goal. I think the idea of oaths is crazy fun, and I hoped it would serve as an example of what is possible if we focused on the goals of fun and character concept rather than mere power equality. I can't tell how much people really like the oaths idea, but I think it's mechanical flaws are easily ironed out in playtesting, and it's easy to expand with more good ideas. But really, I don't care if it's oaths or something else, I just want to see the gap in power level filled with something new.
I think the paladin is overdue for some serious creative effort, so please throw caution to the wind and show off some of your game designer uber tricks! Don't hold back! I can't wait to see something new that makes the paladin feel cool again.
Good post here Mink. This is something I tried to cover in my "Im not standing on your toes, I deserve a place to stand too" post a while back. I am tired of the "whooo is the fighter" topics. The fighter is pretty damn good now, and with the promise of more fighter specific feats to come he is only going to get better! So you are again right, we need to worry about the paladin for the sake of the paladin! Not for how it effects other classes.
I posted this somewhere else but I personally feel reverting back to the original smite evil and making it an "at will" ability would not be over powered when you look at it (or even dropping it to 1/2 paladin level to damage to sooth the naysayers). By lvl 13 the fighter is (or should be) doing +5 to hit and +7 damage on EVERY attack against EVERYTHING he attacks. That is pretty damn good, and does not even figure in MAD and the fact that fighters will probably be able to afford a higher Str, raising that disparity even further. So I say the fighter has his place to stand, give the paladin his!
As far as Oaths being overlooked. I like it and I think it may have been passed over by many for exactly what your concern was here. It could also be that others are just as shy about implementing something new, before ALL the old problems are addressed. There are still a lot of issues for the paladin. He needs to find his identity and I think that has been the main focus. Which is beside the point that if we came up with something wholly new, this would help the fact. It is really a vicious circle right now....I just hope Jason B. takes all of our feelings into account, this is a perfect chance to make a true paladin....lets get it right.
We haven't gotten to it because I took animal companion, but my DM pretty much said that any intelligent creature we thought that could figure out i'm a paladin would. But this is the kind of thing we wouldn't see till months from now.As a side note, no one but tomjohn has talked about my idea of using a +1 from divine bond to make a paladins weapon unbreakable, what were your guys thoughts on that?I see no problem with doing that LKL, but my question is...is it really that big of an issue? Have you had problems with this? and what complications do you see happening? I understand that "if the weapon is destroyed..." But is something like this really that common? I have not played in very HIGH level games so for that part of the conversation I am going to need a little explanation.
Looking through some things I can see where this could be abused. Though mainly with spells. Isnt there a spell or 2 that could destroy your weapon instantly? (the weapon saves need work! they are POOR!)
Though if a melee'er tried to do it he would almost have to have an adamantine weapon to get anywhere. The mechanic for that is almost a MUST for any form of sunder against anything with hardness of more than a couple points.
Then there are of course a few creatures that can destroy metal almost instantly. Again I say, weapon saves are toooooooo weak. I did the math the other day in 3.5 because we went up against a rust monster. I think a +5 weapon only has like a +13 to it's save! That means it fails against a rust monster on a 3 or less. That is terrible!
So with these things in mind, yes LKL....I see the danger! Something should be added. But also, the saves for magic weapons need a HUGE boost.
|
I really like the Oaths idea proposed by Vult Wrathblades and decided to give it another revision. This is intended as a new class feature for the paladin.
Thanks to Iron Sentinel for contributing the BBEG takedown oath (renamed Slay the Wicked).
Great work, bro. Also, thanks for the thumbs-up. I was thinking of a feat much like the Fight to the End Oath (along the lines of "Hold The Line" or "Thou Shall Not Pass"), but you came up with something simple and workable. It would fit perfectly in a story like the Song of Roland.
Anyhow, here are two other Oaths, one of which is a turn on the "Slay The Wicked" Oath.
Subjugate the Sinner
The paladin vows to apprehend a specific individual creature and bring that person/creature in to stand trial for his/her/its crimes. The paladin does not need to know the individual's name, but must be able to recognize or otherwise know the target creature on sight. While the target creature is visible to the paladin and the paladin is either fighting that creature or fighting to get to that creature, the paladin gains +1 to hit, plus an additional +1 for every four paladin levels above the first. When facing the target creature, all weapon damage is converted to an equal amount of non-lethal damage. Also, the paladin's CMB rating and any Disarm attempt dierolls, when facing the target creature, are increased by the paladin's Charisma modifier. Restriction: Shortest Path to the Enemy (see below), and the paladin cannot use lethal damage to capture the target creature.
Inspire the Masses
Through their understanding and devotion to their deity, the paladin strives to influence others. While this Oath is in effect, the paladin is treated as having a bonus number of ranks in Diplomacy and Intimidate equal to their Charisma bonus. (A paladin without such skills would have a skill level equal to their Charisma bonus). The paladin can also re-roll the outcome of a number of Diplomacy or Imtimidate skill checks equal to the paladin's Charisma modifier. Also, once per day, the paladin can, as a standard action, give an inspired and impassioned speech that is treated as a Hypnotism spell. At 11th level, this effect is equivalent to an Enthrall spell. At 20th level, the effect is intensified into a Mass Suggestion spell. Restriction: if the paladin elects to use such powers in a combat situation, the paladin cannot initiate any attack on the people/creatures he or she is trying to influence.
Nice Summary Vult!
Some things about those abilities I'd like to comment:
HOLY AVENGER: I think the bonuses to AC, hit and dmg should not be CHA bonus but scale by level, otherwise there is too much CHA thing here.
SMITE: I myself would prefer even higher damage...
LoH: 1d6/2lvls is OK but I think I'd do it a little like cure spells (1d8+1/lvl, at 6th 11th and 16th rises another 1d8).
BONUS FEAT: Maybe first bonus feat at 5th level and five lvls thereafter (like wizard) to avoid first level dipping.
LoH and ChannelE: I think separate abilities would be best, Channel at clr lvl -3 but 3+cha per day. Otherwise multiclassing with cleric and all those stuff...
Bonded Weapon: +1 to make it Unbreakable is Coo.
Divine Antidote (SU): I like this and the cure ability damage from disease too.
Holy Champion (Su): Maximize Smite dmg too.
As for the alternate mechanisms minkscooter asked, I'd like to point to my suggestion about Smite and HA working a little like the beta Bbn Rage here. (at the bottom of page)
Oh yeah, and if something needs to go, I'd vote spontaneus casting and good will saves (although I like them).
|
|
Yeah, but considering the suckfest that was 3E paladin to begin with (the only time it was even a decent class was when you splat booked it all to heck, and that meant opening other classes to splatbooking that didn't need it) That is a wholely good thing. Lets face it, although you never compared it to a cleric, the cleric is the standard and the paladin still falls well behind.
So wouldn't it be easier and more logical to "tone down" the cleric, than boost all the rest of the core classes?
It's easy to say that "Yeah, I love the paladin, but he's just too weak... he needs more love, so let's boost his abilities with X and Y and Z which are all really cool and thematically fitting abilities" without actually considering how it will affect the game balance. For example, now that every paladin class feature relies on CHA (even spellcasting), and if you also get additional smites based on your CHA, it pretty much encourages creating human paladins with CHA 20 and Int and Wis 7 (using point-buy). Although this also happened in my own playtest campaign, I'm not saying everyone will do it -- only that the rules as they are now make it the "best" way to go in a typical D&D campaign. So I think it's valid to say that the rules encourage this sort of concept, unless you're playing in less combat-centric campaigns, and know that it doesn't "gimp" your character to spend your points on other stats as well.
heh, honestly that might not be that bad an idea lol
I hope you're kidding...
So what class are you worried will become less attractive if the paladin is boosted then?
Well, all the "melee" classes may end up being secondary to the paladin, if the paladin is boosted by some of the suggestions presented on this thread (including the changes in the original post). If it happens, I don't think the reasonable solution would be to boost the rest of the classes as well. However, mostly I'm concerned about the fighter, whose only "forte" remains their superior number of feats. Here's the thing: all in all, those feats must be mechanically as good as the paladin's class features, or anyone who wants his character to "shine" in combat is likely to favor paladin over the fighter. Of course, you could play a fighter for "role-playing" reasons, or to get some extra feats for a certain build, but I'd dare to claim that an average Joe Player in an average campaign (i.e. which features combat encounters during every session) would think twice about choosing the fighter over the paladin.
|
|
So wouldn't it be easier and more logical to "tone down" the cleric, than boost all the rest of the core classes?
The other classes have already been significantly improved. Have you read the barbarian/fighter threads and seen some of the notions that are being included??? The fighter is already still the cat's meow in combat - and Jason has admitted to looking forward to adding more fighter-only badass feats when we get to the feat chapter.
Other classes have similarly been improved. So it's too late to ask that 'logical' question.
Well, all the "melee" classes may end up being secondary to the paladin, if the paladin is boosted by some of the suggestions presented on this thread (including the changes in the original post). If it happens, I don't think the reasonable solution would be to boost the rest of the classes as well. However, mostly I'm concerned about the fighter,
Hey Mink, this is the very mentality we were talking about that speaks to your proposed questions: why isnt the improvements truly being considered...? because people continue to boohoo over the fighter.
whose only "forte" remains their superior number of feats.
With all due respect, that's a highly myopic comment. What about the all the weapon training and armor training that they get?
Thats a BIG boost throughout the career of the character - and bonuses that will apply ALL THE TIME! They aren't circumstantial like "vs evil" or "when smiting" as most of the suggestion on this thread have indicated.
I agree some of the suggestions have been a bit outlandish (for the paladin) but all of the threads for each of the classes have suggestions that are outlandish.
Those that we vehement about, however, are not IMO.
Furthermore I have faith that the developers are capable of spotting the too outlandish and will appropriately discard them.
Here's the thing: all in all, those feats must be mechanically as good as the paladin's class features, or anyone who wants his character to "shine" in combat is likely to favor paladin over the fighter. Of course, you could play a fighter for "role-playing" reasons, or to get some extra feats for a certain build,
And as Jason indicated in the fighter design threads, he is as I said, fully intending to add some really good fighter-only feats to give him his day! Which would even further seperate the power levels if we don't start addressing the current ineptitude of the paladin.
but I'd dare to claim that an average Joe Player in an average campaign (i.e. which features combat encounters during every session) would think twice about choosing the fighter over the paladin.
Thats not even remotely true - the same people who choose a fighter now over a paladin will be the same ones then....those who hate having to be regimented LG, play by a code, and not have full reign to cause havoc, mayhem, and do whatever the hell he pleases all the time.
The paladin is still THE most restricted character to play when it comes to options/choices set before him in encounters - and all the goody goodness will so easily by stripped away and gone if even the player forgets that.
Robert
|
|
or perhaps a Paladin that really sucks?, The 3E Paladin?
;-)
If the paizo paladin makes players not want to play the 3.5 paladin as far as I'm concerned thats a win. :D
I think his fear though is that if we have the paladin be super awesome no one will want to play the fighter.
Even ignoring the alignment and code restrictions (lets say your DM houseruled them out) I don't see it as an issue.
a) you won't choose the paladin if you were looking for a non-magical character.
b) you won't choose the paladin if you don't want to have healing powers
c) you won't choose the paladin to be a healer because the cleric can do it better
d) a paladin can't compete with a fighters customizability, and will still suck against certain allignments (nuetral)
e) the fighter has way more reliable powers and never burns out of uses.
Once the game is out, we'll be using *only* the PF core rules in my group (so no 3E splat books, classes, feats, prestige classes, etc.).
Having said that, I'm completely fine with PF Paladin being more powerful than his 3E counterpart -- I'm more worried about how well the paladin's abilities are in balance with those of the rest of the classes, and also that there won't be any abilities (e.g. +1 smite per point of CHA modifier) that encourage dipping into the paladin (in the same way that it was lucrative to pick one level of ranger in 3.0 for DEX-based fighters).There are a lot of mechanical reasons to favor the paladin over the barbarian, fighter or ranger -- better AC, better Saves, ability to heal himself, divine spells (especially "buffs") and so on. The paladin has, in my opinion, the best *overall* abilities of the core classes.
I don't think there are a lot of players who don't want to play a warrior who can heal himself, unless you hate "non-martial" characters. And who would play a character with the primary "role" of being a healer? The cleric *is* better at healing, but as I said, the paladin is probably the best class in overall abilities and "staying power". Does he really need a boost?
You're correct that you can't "customize" the paladin as much as the fighter, but you still get more feats than in 3E.
Note that the paladin doesn't "suck" against non-evil enemies any more than a barbarian who runs out of Rage Points/Rounds, or a ranger who doesn't get his Favoured Enemy or Quarry bonuses. In fact, the paladin doesn't fall very much behind the fighter, and in fact may "outshine" the fighter even then by using "buffs" on himself. And which fighter "powers" are you referring to? His bonuses are pretty much static in nature, and his tactical options are still limited to his feats.
As far as the alignment restriction goes, I don't think it really works. In my own group, paladins (and LG characters in general) are considered tough to play, because we really enforce the alignment rules. However, I also occasionally game in two other groups, in which I've had to *fight* LG characters who wanted to abuse/rob/loot/kill pretty much everything that moved ("Dude, this is D&D... it's okay to kill them and take their stuff!"). So, in these groups 'Lawful Good' was just another name for 'Chaotic Neutral/Evil' -- you played LG characters if you wanted to pick some feat/prestige class/magic item that required LG alignment. Shortly put, it's not really viable to say "But we can boost the paladin, because of the harsh Code of Honour and LG alignment" -- that's only true if your group takes alignment "seriously".
I have decided to put a final list together of all that we have agreed on.
Nice work. (List is here). My reactions, FWTW:
Level 1: Aura of Good, Detect Evil, Smite Evil 1/day + Holy Avenger, Bonus Feat (selected from any feat that extends paladin abilities, or the weapon focus/spec tree, previously limited to fighter only). He gains an additional bonus feat at 5th level and then another one every 5 levels after that (10th, 15th, and 20th.).
Not keen on bonus feats for paladins, unless they're paladin-specific for boosting your favorite paladin class features. I think Holy Avenger should be renamed (Pekkias suggested Divine Wrath) and should come with a restriction encouraging conduct and tactics in character for a paladin.
Level 4: Channel Positive Energy, Smite Evil 2/day. (spells).Other listed changes here are the paladin’s caster level becomes Paladin level –3
Like it.
and he gains spontaneous casting from the whole list.
Not sure what I think. I'd like to wait until after the wizard/sorcerer discussion.
Level 5: Divine Bond. Second Bonus Feat.Another change that I love was the addition of being able to divide your weapon bond to bonuses to your shield as well, I think this is an amazing addition. Of course the same rules would apply for the +1 and the additional shield abilities would be drawn from; Bashing, Arrow deflection, Animated (sorry Jason N. I love it! Hehe), blinding. “element” resistance, Fortification (light, moderate or Heavy), Ghost touch, and Reflecting.
I would also add Ghost touch to the list of weapons and Bane with the restriction of undead or evil outsiders.
I agree, this is a great idea.
Level 6: Remove Disease.Remove Disease: A simple fix would be to allow a paladins remove disease to actually restore all ability damage lost to the disease. A cleric would take two spells (remove disease and lesser restoration) to do that. Therefore it doesn't feel like a dead level.
I think this is a nice touch.
Level 11: REMOVE Aura of Justice, ADD Mettle (or whatever OGL name you want.)
Totally agree. Aura of Justice feels wrong to me (turn everyone in the party into a mini-paladin?)
There were other good ideas in this thread, like aura reinforcement, that would interest me more than bonus feats.
|
|
Well, all the "melee" classes may end up being secondary to the paladin, if the paladin is boosted by some of the suggestions presented on this thread (including the changes in the original post). If it happens, I don't think the reasonable solution would be to boost the rest of the classes as well. However, mostly I'm concerned about the fighter, whose only "forte" remains their superior number of feats. Here's the thing: all in all, those feats must be mechanically as good as the paladin's class features, or anyone who wants his character to "shine" in combat is likely to favor paladin over the fighter. Of course, you could play a fighter for "role-playing" reasons, or to get some extra feats for a certain build, but I'd dare to claim that an average Joe Player in an average campaign (i.e. which features combat encounters during every session) would think twice about choosing the fighter over the paladin.
Okay, I understand what you are trying to say asgetrion, but here is the thing. There have been several comparisons between the fighter and the paladin, and every single one of them, every single one, has shown the supperior numbers of the fighter. The only time the paladin comes to equal is when smiting, and the only time he shines is when he is smiting a demon/outsider.
This is including rather twinked out comparisons by a theoretical builder on another thread.
Now my dissention is that a paladin should shine when smiting, especially since he only can 7 times a day at 20th, not when he's smiting a creature type, that was never what the paladin was about. Now if smite was allowed to work in it's current form, against all creatures instead of against demons/outsiders. And he had holy avenger, then that means he could use the holy avenger to match a fighter for a few rounds, or he could shine for one while smiting. I also just noticed that Vult combined giving holy avenger along with having 1+cha smites per day. I disagree with that, if he's given holy avenger he shouldn't get more per day. Now I see what some of you are worried about.
Okay so without increasing the # of smites, which I thought we had moved past since jason said he wasn't going to do. One smite or HA at 1st level. and weapon focus on top of his current suite of abilities isn't going to make people suddenly drop the fighter who still beats the paladin on # except when smiting.
the level 2: doesn't have any suggested changes. Have you playtested the current LoH, I don't think its as powerful in play as you think it is when looking at the #s on the paper, it may be a boost, but in play it really doesn't do that great, at the end of the fight with the knight in my playtest we both ended up around the same HP injured and that was with using all but 1 of my LoH. So I'm telling you, this hasn't become an I outshine the fighter ability, from playing it.
level 3: has no suggested changes
level 4: has the switch to make channel 1-1 or to separate the two but keep it with fewer per day than a cleric. now maybe this will have some huge effect on the game, but I seriously doubt it, Channel isn't that great an ability. It's useful, but it's not something I'd even bother giving the paladin if I didn't need it for all those divine feats in the splatbooks. As it is though, having playtested I know that the current form doesn't work so we need to make it workable.
Level 5: well here vult threw out a couple of extra abilities for divine bond and suggested splitting them, which I've already disagreed with him a dozen times over, question for you, if the paladin could either shield or sword, but not both at once, would that satisfy you? Having the ability to do both is pretty much = in power to the current form since it would have to be one or the other. You aren't getting any boost in power, just utility. Then as the bonus feat I would say he has the choice of extra lay on hands, or weapon specialization. neither of those makes his numbers match the fighter and keep him on par still for a limited # of rounds per day.
Level 6: This ability change doesn't alter the paladin's power at all, it just makes him the desirable character to have in the party if you are going to deal with disease. Even then the cleric can do it too for about equal expence of daily abilities. And the cleric was able to do it earlier. I don't see being able to cure diseases as something that even with the other abilities.
No more changes till level 9: which see level 6 same argument
Level 10 okay, following the theme for the paladin, this level would be greater weapon focus, or extra channeling. So we either have a boost of +2 to attack and +2 to damage from the current paladin, or we have a paladin that can use combat expertise (one of the weakest feats in the current version of pathfinder) and some extra daily uses of two of his healing abilities. Neither of those touches the comparable abilities of either the fighter or the cleric at this level. However, when the paladin smites evil he does outshine the fighter but if you'll notice the smite evil is no longer supposed to last multiple rounds. HE'S SUPPOSED TO OUTSHINE THE FIGHTER WHEN USING SMITE EVIL. or he can match the fighter and be about = for a limited # of rounds per day using HA.
Level 11: I just flat out disagree with Vult here, I think aura of justice should stay but that you get to smite as well and I just don't really give a crap about giving a paladin mettle, yes it thematically fits, I'd rather have aura of justice.
Level 12: see level 6
Level 13: no change
Level 14: okay I hadn't noticed this little nugget, sorry, I don't want him getting holy Vult that steals from his divine bond.
Level 15: allright there is no change to break enchantment, but he gets his 5th bonus feat, here it would be greater weapon specialization or selective channeling, really this late in the game neither of these feats makes one dang difference in the total power of the class, when using HA he might be slightly better than a fighter (pretty big MIGHT) most likely will still be on par.
Level 16: no change
Level 17:actually I think this should be DR/good, the paladin should never be fighting someone good, but if he does, it should hurt that way he has something to help him realize "Hey maybe I shouldn't be fighting this guy"
Level 18: no change
Level 19: no change
Level 20: see level 17
EDIT: I am looking at these mechanics at a whole, thinking of them as a whole, and I am telling you I can still think of a dozen reasons that I would rather have a fighter, a ranger, or a barbarian. Mechanical reasons not flavor ones, but to spell them out this rant would go on to epic lengths. And this still doesn't include the boost that the fighter already is getting according to Jason Bulman himself when we get to the feat section.
|
|
The paladin has, in my opinion, the best *overall* abilities of the core classes.
You're got to be the only person I've ever known actually say that - and the only person to truly believe that if you in fact actually believe that.
They have the POTENTIAL to be the most powerful abilities - but they need work to do so.
probably the best class in overall abilities and "staying power". Does he really need a boost?
staying power....that I'll be willing to agree with. But many including myself have spoken ad naseum about the monotony of simply being not hit and ineffective otherwise.
Note that the paladin doesn't "suck" against non-evil enemies any more than a barbarian who runs out of Rage Points/Rounds, or a ranger who doesn't get his Favoured Enemy or Quarry bonuses.
Not true. the barbarian by his nature is going to have a much better strength - even when not raging. And most playtests i"ve seen with the new rage - a character can rage just about every combat - with a bit of good management.
The ranger gets bonus feats that directly apply to making his fighting style better - regardless of what creature he's fighting.
In fact, the paladin doesn't fall very much behind the fighter, and in fact may "outshine" the fighter
Maybe you dont play by the same rules everyone else does.....
even then by using "buffs" on himself. And which fighter "powers" are you referring to? His bonuses are pretty much static in nature, and his tactical options are still limited to his feats.
And there in lies the rub; the fighters are omnipresent - the paladin may spend several rounds of combat 'preparing' to be as good as the fighter.
As far as the alignment restriction goes, I don't think it really works. In my own group, paladins (and LG characters in general) are considered tough to play, because we really enforce the alignment rules. However, I also occasionally game in two other groups, in which I've had to *fight* LG characters who wanted to abuse/rob/loot/kill pretty much everything that moved ("Dude, this is D&D... it's okay to kill them and take their stuff!"). So, in these groups 'Lawful Good' was just another name for 'Chaotic Neutral/Evil' -- you played LG characters if you wanted to pick some feat/prestige class/magic item that required LG alignment. Shortly put, it's not really viable to say "But we can boost the paladin, because of the harsh Code of Honour and LG alignment" -- that's only true if your group takes alignment "seriously".
The rules as written and developers cannot be held accountable for a poor DM. Should we dissalow spells because some DMs wont enforce concentration checks, or make them spend money on spellbooks and material components. Should we disallow rogues because some DM doesnt understand what "flat-footed" means. Should we dissalow barbarians because some DM might not enforce the fatigue rules.
There are checks and balance in place throughout the game - but we must assume that MOST people playing will abide by them for the purposes of designing and for generic discussion; when they aren't there are a multitude of issues that will crop up - but it's certainly no fault of the designers, and nor should other players suffer because some groups who don't like the rules will simply choose to ignore them.
Robert
Thanks to Iron Sentinel for contributing the BBEG takedown oath (renamed Slay the Wicked).Great work, bro. Also, thanks for the thumbs-up. I was thinking of a feat much like the Fight to the End Oath (along the lines of "Hold The Line" or "Thou Shall Not Pass"), but you came up with something simple and workable. It would fit perfectly in a story like the Song of Roland.
Anyhow, here are two other Oaths, one of which is a turn on the "Slay The Wicked" Oath.
Subjugate the Sinner
The paladin vows to apprehend a specific individual creature and bring that person/creature in to stand trial for his/her/its crimes. The paladin does not need to know the individual's name, but must be able to recognize or otherwise know the target creature on sight. While the target creature is visible to the paladin and the paladin is either fighting that creature or fighting to get to that creature, the paladin gains +1 to hit, plus an additional +1 for every four paladin levels above the first. When facing the target creature, all weapon damage is converted to an equal amount of non-lethal damage. Also, the paladin's CMB rating and any Disarm attempt dierolls, when facing the target creature, are increased by the paladin's Charisma modifier. Restriction: Shortest Path to the Enemy (see below), and the paladin cannot use lethal damage to capture the target creature.
Neat idea. Made me think of the Justicar class in Dragon #290, but without any reliance on stealth. Instead of "sinner" I would use the word "guilty" or "accused" to emphasize that the paladin's actions are guided in this case by the will of a legal entity. Since you used the word "apprehend" in the description, that might also be closer to the mark than "subjugate". Nice job incorporating the Pathfinder CMB rule.
Inspire the Masses
Through their understanding and devotion to their deity, the paladin strives to influence others. While this Oath is in effect, the paladin is treated as having a bonus number of ranks in Diplomacy and Intimidate equal to their Charisma bonus. (A paladin without such skills would have a skill level equal to their Charisma bonus). The paladin can also re-roll the outcome of a number of Diplomacy or Imtimidate skill checks equal to the paladin's Charisma modifier. Also, once per day, the paladin can, as a standard action, give an inspired and impassioned speech that is treated as a Hypnotism spell. At 11th level, this effect is equivalent to an Enthrall spell. At 20th level, the effect is intensified into a Mass Suggestion spell. Restriction: if the paladin elects to use such powers in a combat situation, the paladin cannot initiate any attack on the people/creatures he or she is trying to influence.
Probably this one should only work on people (or creatures) with sympathetic alignment (at least one of lawful or good, and neither diametrically opposed). I assume that ignoring the restriction has the default consequence of losing the benefit of the oath for the remainder of the day (and releasing anyone currently under the paladin's influence).
Thanks for improving the oaths idea with some very interesting options!
Asgetrion wrote:
The paladin has, in my opinion, the best *overall* abilities of the core classes.
You're got to be the only person I've ever known actually say that - and the only person to truly believe that if you in fact actually believe that.
They have the POTENTIAL to be the most powerful abilities - but they need work to do so.
Asgetrion wrote:
probably the best class in overall abilities and "staying power". Does he really need a boost?
staying power....that I'll be willing to agree with. But many including myself have spoken ad naseum about the monotony of simply being not hit and ineffective otherwise.
Asgetrion wrote:
Note that the paladin doesn't "suck" against non-evil enemies any more than a barbarian who runs out of Rage Points/Rounds, or a ranger who doesn't get his Favoured Enemy or Quarry bonuses.
Not true. the barbarian by his nature is going to have a much better strength - even when not raging. And most playtests i"ve seen with the new rage - a character can rage just about every combat - with a bit of good management.
The ranger gets bonus feats that directly apply to making his fighting style better - regardless of what creature he's fighting.
Asgetrion wrote:
In fact, the paladin doesn't fall very much behind the fighter, and in fact may "outshine" the fighter
Maybe you dont play by the same rules everyone else does.....
Asgetrion wrote:
even then by using "buffs" on himself. And which fighter "powers" are you referring to? His bonuses are pretty much static in nature, and his tactical options are still limited to his feats.
And there in lies the rub; the fighters are omnipresent - the paladin may spend several rounds of combat 'preparing' to be as good as the fighter.
Asgetrion wrote:
As far as the alignment restriction goes, I don't think it really works. In my own group, paladins (and LG characters in general) are considered tough to play, because we really enforce the alignment rules. However, I also occasionally game in two other groups, in which I've had to *fight* LG characters who wanted to abuse/rob/loot/kill pretty much everything that moved ("Dude, this is D&D... it's okay to kill them and take their stuff!"). So, in these groups 'Lawful Good' was just another name for 'Chaotic Neutral/Evil' -- you played LG characters if you wanted to pick some feat/prestige class/magic item that required LG alignment. Shortly put, it's not really viable to say "But we can boost the paladin, because of the harsh Code of Honour and LG alignment" -- that's only true if your group takes alignment "seriously".
The rules as written and developers cannot be held accountable for a poor DM. Should we dissalow spells because some DMs wont enforce concentration checks, or make them spend money on spellbooks and material components. Should we disallow rogues because some DM doesnt understand what "flat-footed" means. Should we dissalow barbarians because some DM might not enforce the fatigue rules.
There are checks and balance in place throughout the game - but we must assume that MOST people playing will abide by them for the purposes of designing and for generic discussion; when they aren't there are a multitude of issues that will crop up - but it's certainly no fault of the designers, and nor should other players suffer because some groups who don't like the rules will simply choose to ignore them.
Robert
Robert, thank you for saying what I wanted to, much nicer than I wanted too. I am sorry but that post had me absolutely floored. You are right, it may be true if he is playing a completely different game than we are!
This, "he is good just accept it" argument is old! This is what the play test and design forum is about! We are here to improve the class. If there was NOT a need for it there would not be more posts/threads in this forum than any other (a majority of which are about the PALADIN!).
There is a problem with the class....that problem in it's most basic form is that the paladin is shown up in what he is supposed to be able to do by other classes....BADLY. It is not even a notion of flavor...it is simple mechanics! Time and time again in these forums we have PROVEN this discrepancy! so many playtests and breakdown of numbers can not all be wrong. The paladins "place to shine" should be fighting evil. NO ONE should do that better than him. Currently, nearly EVERYONE does (except for a couple rounds a day IF he hits) and this should not be. If the paladin could pick locks better than the rogue would we not be having this same argument for the other side? If the paladin could inspire others through song would the argument not be for the bard?
No one is going to argue that the fighter is the baseline of melee combat, good in all situations and king of feats. The cleric is the stoic healer and buffer. The barbarian is the king of melee burst damage. The rogue is the sneaky lockpicking backstabber (that coincidentally does TONS of damage...again showing up the paladin because it works even against evil).
All of the classes have well defined areas of expertise. But when we try to argue that the paladin is supposed to be the king of smashing evil skulls....then we have stepped out of line, directly on to the fighter's toes! It is really getting disgusting. JUST LET THE PALADIN DO WHAT HE IS SUPPOSED TO DO! The rules need to reflect it...currently they DONT!
Well, all the "melee" classes may end up being secondary to the paladin, if the paladin is boosted by some of the suggestions presented on this thread (including the changes in the original post). If it happens, I don't think the reasonable solution would be to boost the rest of the classes as well. However, mostly I'm concerned about the fighter,Hey Mink, this is the very mentality we were talking about
I think you meant Asgetrion. :-)
Actually Asgetrion does raise some good points:
It's easy to say that "Yeah, I love the paladin, but he's just too weak... he needs more love, so let's boost his abilities with X and Y and Z which are all really cool and thematically fitting abilities" without actually considering how it will affect the game balance. For example, now that every paladin class feature relies on CHA (even spellcasting), and if you also get additional smites based on your CHA, it pretty much encourages creating human paladins with CHA 20 and Int and Wis 7 (using point-buy).
I wouldn't mind if paladin abilities required several good ability scores, making it harder to be good at all of them, if that meant more cool abilities for the paladin. That would be consistent with the challenging ability requirements of the 1e paladin, and involve tougher decisions for the player.
(Just for the record, Vult's summary leaves the number of smites unchanged.)
As far as the alignment restriction goes, I don't think it really works. In my own group, paladins (and LG characters in general) are considered tough to play, because we really enforce the alignment rules. However, I also occasionally game in two other groups, in which I've had to *fight* LG characters who wanted to abuse/rob/loot/kill pretty much everything that moved ("Dude, this is D&D... it's okay to kill them and take their stuff!"). So, in these groups 'Lawful Good' was just another name for 'Chaotic Neutral/Evil' -- you played LG characters if you wanted to pick some feat/prestige class/magic item that required LG alignment. Shortly put, it's not really viable to say "But we can boost the paladin, because of the harsh Code of Honour and LG alignment" -- that's only true if your group takes alignment "seriously".
Agreed, alignment is nebulous and subject to interpretation. That's a point in favor of the oaths idea presented earlier. Oath restrictions are unambiguous and play out over the table with actual tactical consequences. They're restrictions with teeth, so it's fair to argue that they actually justify the boosts that they accompany. Furthermore, oaths make it possible to add X, Y, and Z cool abilities without overpowering the paladin, because there is a strict limit on the number of oaths that can benefit the paladin at one time.
Hi Jason. Fisrst a question then some thoughts.
Smite evil: At level 6 you have 2 attacks per round. Do I retains the bonuses on attack or damage rolls If a change target on the next attack in the same round? Ethier because the first target is neutral or if the first target dies?I find the debate on this Thread has focused to much on details and the suggestions don't seem to be playtested. Instead I think it might be helful just to look at the big picture. I'm going to focus on the trends in this thread.
And the trend is: The paladin still need a boost. Let me break it down.The suggestions made in this thread indicate the Paldin need:
a) more flexibility - bonus feats; Holy Avenger + Smite; Spontaneous casting from whole list; bonded shield, etc
B) a boost to his /her melee ability. - Holy Avenger; giving the smite a longer duration, bonus feats, etc.
c) a boost to AC - bonded shield; Holy Avenger (sacred bonus to AC), bonus feats
d) a bost to his/her spell casting ability - Caster level of paladin level minus 3; Spontaneous casting from whole listThe changed and improved smite you have suggested is good, but problematic.
It now last one round but until level 6 that usualy mean 1 attack per day.
So at level 5 it's 2 attacks per day. Not much.The Paldin is a MAD character since he/she needs a high charisma and a strength score.
Since neither Fighter or Barbarian need to focus on charisma they can dump it, hence get a decent dex and /or con score.So if you gonna give the Paladin a decent strength score you need to dump some stats.
Paladin only has 2 skill ponts per level - don't want to dump int,(not below 10)
Paladin's AC not as good AC as fighter or barbarian (14 dex to a barbarian is no problem, and the Paladin is not going to get a full plate until later levels) - don't want to dump dex (not below 10)
Paladin's AC not as good AC as fighter and not d12 as barbarian - don't want to dump con (not below 12)
This mean you'll end up with an averege strength score. And Paladin will probably choose to boost his Char at later level (4,8,12, 16) while the fighter and barbarian will focus on strength at level 4,8,12,16.
Averege strength score equals Paladin will have a hard time hitting foes and a hard time hurting foes.Solution? I don't know.
Also, I don't like the paldin now channel energt better than the cleric, In My Humble Opinion
This is one of the best posts I have read by you. That said I have 2 issues.
First, MOST of the suggestions that have been listed earlier HAVE been play tested. Those tests showed that much of the listed suggestions were NOT over powered and simply brought the paladin in line with the fighter/barbarian/ranger/rogue for combat when fighting evil.
Second, the issues that you summarized are mostly correct. The solution? That is what we have been debating for over 600 posts. The solution is in there...it just needs to be implemented. I personally feel that my thread with a summary of this one hit the high points of this debate. I feel that the changes listed there are the necessary steps to the paladin we want.