|
Also, I don't like the paldin now channel energt better than the cleric, In My Humble Opinion
Um okay what's funny is you had me agreeing with you completely through that whole scpheel, then you said this...
WHAT? channeling isn't stat dependant, it's level dependant. And the cleric has a constant pool, the paladin has his based on his LoH, which is his cha mod +1/2 his level. Which does mean at higher levels if the cleric hasn't pumped his cha, then yes the paladin has more uses, but he had fewer for the majority of the game. And the amount healed is = to what the cleric does, so in what way is the paladin better at channeling?
|
|
stuff
Well no offense, but you made changes on that thread based on your opinion and what you like, that if every suggestion on that thread was implemented would overpower the paladin in my opinion and I've been with you making design suggestion through this entire process so you know I'm as well versed in his problems as you are. Earlier in this thread I reviewed your consolidated list and said where and what changes could be made to make it more balanced while using most of your ideas. Did you see it?
|
|
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.).
Okay then I will restrict myself to core.
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,
Yeah so am I, I have been very conscious of balance with the other 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).
Which is why I switched to supporting HA instead, the cha duration based HA, not the Smite per day increased version.
There are a lot of mechanical reasons to favor the paladin over the barbarian, fighter or ranger
Yeah lets review your list.
-- better AC,
Outright lie. there is only one ability or power in the paladins list that improves his AC and that is only for an increadibly limited # of rounds per day. which means that the fighter has him beat by the sheer expedience of a tower shield. Barb and Ranger have lower armor requirements, but the cleric has him tied dead even on the AC list and the Cleric isn't a full BAB class.
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.
So the paladin having good saves makes him better than any other class? You say those abilities like they're unique, but the Cleric does all of the things that you listed better than the paladin other than saves. Ooooh can I show you how I can use a cleric to get immunities and stats to match the paladin's saves in core oooh can I please? Can I?
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?
Yes because staying power doesn't mean much if after all your allies are overwhelmed cause all you could do was stand there innefectively and last longer the monsters then crushed you after dealing with all your effective allies first. The paladin doesn't have the best class abilities, he has the best saves and immunities. That =/= best suite of abilities, especially when the cleric can match that with a few buffs half of which can be cast before combat because of long durations. You say they have the best abilities in your opinion, but that's not coming from having played them, the people who have played them tell you how far behind he really falls and your response is in essence "no it's not in my opinion."
You're correct that you can't "customize" the paladin as much as the fighter, but you still get more feats than in 3E.
Yeah, so does the ranger, barbarian, and every other class. which means that he has no more comparative customizability than before.
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.
Your absolutely right on the barbarian, except the barbarian isn't limited to 2 rounds at 5th level and your abilities are. So the barbarian actually got several rounds of burning through his rage, you have to smites that you have, but can't use. Your AnCo or Weapon will help, but you aren't out damaging the barb because hey he has that SAD working for him. Then the ranger stuff is outright incorrect, the Ranger has bonus feats that apply even when his quarry/favored enemy bonuses don't. Remember you're opposed to giving the paladin anything more so he doesn't get the rather weak bonus feats that I suggested.
In fact, the paladin doesn't fall very much behind the fighter
HA, BS disputed with numbers and playtesting several times but you aren't willing to accept actual play results or numbers. Hey guess what, a fighter/rogue in my game who is two levels lower than me is outpacing me in damage if my AnCo doesn't hit. If my AnCo hits then I've got him beat by about 7 damage. But once again, that's with him not getting his sneak attack bonus and two levels lower, and he's not very good at min/maxing, if I wanted too, with his character built by me and in core, I could if level is equal make sure I'm dealing equal damage, and you don't want to know how sick I could make him more than my pally if I actually used all the books my pally has access too. But we are keeping this to just a core discussion so moving on.
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.
I'm talking of the powers from feats, feats are a fighters powers.
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 been stating every one of my points based on your DM houseruled out the code and allignment restrictions. But as Robert said, because your players don't take them seriously doesn't mean they aren't checks and balances. Hey the wizard gets a lot more powerful if you ignore the fact that your only supposed to use the spell once per day and loose it, "but we don't like that, if you've prepared it it should stay with you, so we have the spellcaster able to cast his prepared spells as many times as he wants in a day. In my opinion the wizard is the best class in the game." you can't really apply that statement to a discussion.
|
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. :-)
No I meant you - I was indicating that his lack of enthusiasm at finding ways to improve the paladin - due to being worried about the fighter again. Which directly addressed a post you made about wondering why there's so little push for really considering making the paladin better and on par.
This was your comment that I was addressing:
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.
to which Vult responded:
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.
By the way - this thread is over 600 posts - and the longest thread yet of all the classes - so I think that speaks volumes for which class needs the most work - and has the most support for it.
Robert
|
|
HA, BS disputed with numbers and playtesting several times but you aren't willing to accept actual play results or numbers. Hey guess what, a fighter/rogue in my game who is two levels lower than me is outpacing me in damage if my AnCo doesn't hit. If my AnCo hits then I've got him beat by about 7 damage. But once again, that's with him not getting his sneak attack bonus and two levels lower, and he's not very good at min/maxing, if I wanted too, with his character built by me and in core, I could if level is equal make sure I'm dealing equal damage, and you don't want to know how sick I could make him more than my pally if I actually used all the books my pally has access too. But we are keeping this to just a core discussion so moving on.
I'm not sure who BS is; but I know that I personally have made many such posts detailing both the fluff and the specific mechanics behind it that illustrate the gross disparity in overall game mechanics during play.
Since I'm playing a paladin now in our Curse of Crimson Throne Campaign. I'm 1 FTR / 6 PAL right now (took fighter so that I can have Tower Shield and not have to spend a feat on it); and I am constantly reminded how feeble I am in combat when not spending time buffing, or using one of my 2 daily smites. The rogue and cleric both out perform me in combat just about every time.
Its actually sad I have the exact same armor class as the half-ling rogue - I'm wearing full Plate and tower shield, she's got a mithril chain shirt, maxed out dex, size bonus and a two weapon defense feat. Actually with her dodge feat she's actually better usually! LOL
She usually lets me engage, I have +7 BAB, +3 STR, +1 Sword to hit - at +11/+6 (the iterative doesn't usually hit); and my first attack does: 1d6+4 with my +1 Scimitar and 16 Str. She then tumbles in for a flank. She has Weapon Finesse w/a +6 DEX mod, +5 BAB, +1 Weapon, +1 size mod, +2 flank giving: +15 (+13 when not flanking), and does 1d4+1 with her +1 short sword and 4d6 of sneak attack as well. I'm doing about 8 points of damage per hit, she's doing 20! The the next round she attacks with both weapons - has a +13 when fighting with both - still better than me - and does 40 points of damage!.
When using one of my 2 smites, my +11 goes to +14 to hit - still less than her one attack, and I get an extra 6 points of damage - up to 14 vs her 20 with one attack.
I could spend a round casting my Divine Favor - that adds +1 to hit and +1 to damage - that doesn't really make a big difference.
So my best time was when the cleric cast Bull's Str on me, Bless on the party, I used Smite, and I cast Divine Favor the first round.
When I flanked with the rogue, I had a +19/+14 to hit, which was good enough for me to hit both attacks - doing 1d6+2, +5 Str, +6 Smite x 2 and did 37 points of damage. The rogue with the only buff as Bless (which I also had), flanked and had +15/15 - hit both times and did 43 points of damage. Then that was the end of my smite - I went back to +16/+11 and did 6 points of damage less per hit....while she continued to have +15/+15 doing 20+ points of damage per hit.
And that was with me having three different buffing spells on and using the most powerful offensive ability the paladin has at that point - his Smite.
Robert
|
|
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...
This is exactly what I have professed ad nauseum on here. Trust me, you're preaching to the choir!
And that doesn't even take into considerating the number of tricks/feats/talents that a rogue, barbarian and fighter can every time they do hit!
Robert
|
|
HA, BS disputed with numbers and playtesting several times but you aren't willing to accept actual play results or numbers. Hey guess what, a fighter/rogue in my game who is two levels lower than me is outpacing me in damage if my AnCo doesn't hit. If my AnCo hits then I've got him beat by about 7 damage. But once again, that's with him not getting his sneak attack bonus and two levels lower, and he's not very good at min/maxing, if I wanted too, with his character built by me and in core, I could if level is equal make sure I'm dealing equal damage, and you don't want to know how sick I could make him more than my pally if I actually used all the books my pally has access too. But we are keeping this to just a core discussion so moving on.I'm not sure who BS is; but I know that I personally have made many such posts detailing both the fluff and the specific mechanics behind it that illustrate the gross disparity in overall game mechanics during play.
Since I'm playing a paladin now in our Curse of Crimson Throne Campaign. I'm 1 FTR / 6 PAL right now (took fighter so that I can have Tower Shield and not have to spend a feat on it); and I am constantly reminded how feeble I am in combat when not spending time buffing, or using one of my 2 daily smites. The rogue and cleric both out perform me in combat just about every time.
Its actually sad I have the exact same armor class as the half-ling rogue - I'm wearing full Plate and tower shield, she's got a mithril chain shirt, maxed out dex, size bonus and a two weapon defense feat. Actually with her dodge feat she's actually better usually! LOL
She usually lets me engage, I have +7 BAB, +3 STR, +1 Sword to hit - at +11/+6 (the iterative doesn't usually hit); and my first attack does: 1d6+4 with my +1 Scimitar and 16 Str. She then tumbles in for a flank. She has Weapon Finesse w/a +6 DEX mod, +5 BAB, +1 Weapon, +1 size mod, +2 flank giving: +15 (+13 when not flanking), and does 1d4+1 with her +1 short sword and...
Don't you understand your immunity disease and better saves make up for all of that?
Did you take weapon bond? My AnCo has a +6 to attack (yeah she misses a lot but when she hits she deals 2d6+3 for an average of 9 taking my average damage of 9 on a smite to 18 damage, 13 damage when not smiting. The fighter in our group consistently hits for 11-14 damage and he is two levels below me, I don't want to wonder what I could do by adding two feats to his build if I were playing him and remember he gets his with 1 attack roll where mine takes two attack rolls, one of which has a high likelyhood of missing. Now If I crit I kill, but that's the advantage of a x4 crit mod) and I didn't see the effects of divine bond in your entry unless that was what makes your sword +1.
I have law devotion and weapon focus which because I have a very large AC (23 right now and I'm 2 levels behind you) I go with attack bonus and have a +14 when smiting. If my strength (i have to account for this every time I talk now) had been 16 it would have been +16. And because of my code unless they are unintelligent monsters, I can't flank or gang up on people.
and BS isn't a person it's an acronym for cow kaka figure it out ;P
Wow, I have a fan, I haven't had a fan since I was doing theatre (i had this kinda creepy old man who came to see shows and would always tell me how much he loved my performances and how whenever he saw me it just made him smile, he reminded me of the old man from family guy) Wait a minute, you're him aren't you?
*SMITE*
*whiff*
Damn!Seriously though, thanks for the vote of confidence.
Heh! "Come here little boy, with your big shtrong armsh and innoshent little face, I've got a preshent for you..."
I don't get the *whiff* reference though...
Seriously, I know I was a bit over-poetic there, but you do seem to have a really similar viewpoint to me (when I'm feeling consistent).
It's all good. Lawful good... carry on!
|
|
Wow, I have a fan, I haven't had a fan since I was doing theatre (i had this kinda creepy old man who came to see shows and would always tell me how much he loved my performances and how whenever he saw me it just made him smile, he reminded me of the old man from family guy) Wait a minute, you're him aren't you?
*SMITE*
*whiff*
Damn!Seriously though, thanks for the vote of confidence.
Heh! "Come here little boy, with your big shtrong armsh and innoshent little face, I've got a preshent for you..."
I don't get the *whiff* reference though...
Seriously, I know I was a bit over-poetic there, but you do seem to have a really similar viewpoint to me (when I'm feeling consistent).
It's all good. Lawful good... carry on!
*whiff* is the sound a weapon makes as it misses, in otherwords I tried to smite you and missed. which is a refrence to a back and forth joke snorter and I had way long ago in this thread.
|
|
[sarcasm] What tricks does a fighter have, most of his class features are static bonuses? [/sarcasm]
And that doesn't even take into considerating the number of tricks/feats/talents that a rogue, barbarian and fighter can every time they do hit!
Robert
I know you're being sarcastic, but for those who don't catch on:
tricks associated with feats such as: Imp Trip, disarm, bullrush, overrun, etc. Cleave, and Great Cleave, Overhand Chop, Backswing, and of course a clear cut favorite of many: spring attack / whirlwind
And these are just those available by 6th level!!! And most fighters can have almost all of them by that level!
And according to Jason - there's going to be a bunch more good ones to build on fighter feat-based tricks for the 7-16th level fighters - when we discuss feats.
I think the fighter is going to be just fine.....I think concerns that he will be replaces is extremely unfounded.
Robert
stuffWell no offense, but you made changes on that thread based on your opinion and what you like, that if every suggestion on that thread was implemented would overpower the paladin in my opinion and I've been with you making design suggestion through this entire process so you know I'm as well versed in his problems as you are. Earlier in this thread I reviewed your consolidated list and said where and what changes could be made to make it more balanced while using most of your ideas. Did you see it?
Yes LKL, you and I have been working to better the paladin for a long time. Along with quite a few others. I respect your input and I think you have a great grasp of the concepts that I also want. But in my summary I tried to quote other people's input as often as I could, and where I could not I tried to preface with that. There are parts in there that I could not find quotes for so I tried to apply them as much as I could remember. So where is it that I have applied only my opinion?
After reading Robert's post about how the Rogue (THE ROGUE!!!) outdoes him in AC AND DAMAGE!!! How could we say that the summary I listed is possibly over powered?
I am sorry but a rogue should only even come close to the paladin in combat prowess (this mostly means AC and damage, but I understand many other things figure in) when fighting things that are NOT evil. The paladin is SOOOOO far behind the curve that he needs a build like my summary to even keep up. I really want to write up a full version of what I personally think we should see but I would probably get more "thats to much" talk.
Again, yes I very much value your input but I also play in a game where we ONLY use core. So all of the splat book stuff and other things that could be abused are thrown out. The paladin's balance should be there according to the other core classes, we all know that currently it is not.
I simply do not understand limiting Smite evil so much. We have all seen how much a barbarian can rage. We all know how massive the damage a rogue can produce nearly ALL the time is. The fighter with his obvious always constant damage and many feats is a monster. The ranger with his extra feats and favored enemy can be equally impressive, so long as he chooses favored enemies he is likely to face (and why wouldnt he). But when we get to the paladin we always say we must make sure that this ONE ability that is already limited to evil alone (yea yea 80% of the stuff is evil...yea) is limited to just a couple times a day. Because if the paladin gets to much of a boost to many people are upset. I just fail to understand this!
Why not just let the paladin smite on every attack. The limitation of it being evil is already there, just like the rogue backstabbing on every attack. The limitation is if they can flank or not...which we have heard time and time again is nearly NEVER a problem. The Barbarian rages for an extended period of time, the fighter is always on, the ranger has a great chance of gaining his bonuses a majority of the time. Why do we then also limit the paladin to a couple attacks a day.
That turned into much more of a rant than I meant for it to be. LKL that was not directed as being snarky to you...i am sorry if it came off that way. I am just really getting confused why we can not give the paladin his just do and let him smite evil....it just does not make sense!
|
|
Did you take weapon bond? My AnCo has a +6 to attack (yeah she misses a lot but when she hits she deals 2d6+3 for an average of 9 taking my average damage of 9 on a smite to 18 damage, 13 damage when not smiting. The fighter in our group consistently hits for 11-14 damage and he is two levels below me, I don't want to wonder what I could do by adding two feats to his build if I were playing him and remember he gets his with 1 attack roll where mine takes two attack rolls, one of which has a high likelyhood of missing. Now If I crit I kill, but that's the advantage of a x4 crit mod) and I didn't see the effects of divine bond in your entry unless that was what makes your sword +1.
Yes, I have the weapon. In the campaign we're playing, the animal just seems silly, and I wouldn't get a lot of use out of war-horse considering the number of burning buildings, crypts, sewers, underwater, and chase scenes in "The Shingles" section of Korvosa (which is so cool to play out by the way - the Shingles is on the of the coolest ideas I've seen added to a a city in a long time!)
It is a +1 Scimitar that I got last game in fact - and I now usually bond it w/ Keen - with that great threat range, i figure scoring crits is the only way I can do a decent damage output - and when I cast Bless Weapon, it auto confirms, which is nice. I noticed that most of the time I was needing at least a 13 to hit with my first attack - so essentially during the 6 minutes of the day that I can "bond" with the weapon, I was scoring a crit on just about every time I hit. That was only one encounter though - as the bless weapon didn't last very long. Then I was scoring a crit on every third attack.
The threat range is the one advantage to being railroaded to using a scimitar due to worshipping Sarenrae and having to use the god's favored weapon in order to be able to "bond" with it.
Robert
You know, if we all started with a set number of points (separate from our ability points) that we used to build our character I think things would be seen in a different light. Let me explain.
If there were no classes, we all started with a blank slate and had to add things like full BAB, good saves, abilities, spells, proficiencies etc.... AND we all started with the same amount of points, who would have the most?
Well obviously we would have to add extra points to those classes that have restrictions right? Because they are restrictions, weather someone enforces them or not.
So those classes that have an alignment restriction would get a set number of points for being restricted to any not lawful, then more if you were set to must be chaotic. Ohhh and even more if it was must be lawful good.
THEN of course there is yet another restriction, the paladin's code...that would be good for a few extra points.
So if we built characters that way we would have players that wanted "the paladin build" having more points to build their characters on than the others. Which of course...would lead to what some would see as "the most powerful class"
So with the paladin having the most points, why is it so hard for us to believe that the paladin SHOULD look better than the other classes at first glance. We should see Full BAB, all these proficiencies, good fort and will saves, ABILITIES THAT MEAN SOMETHING, spells.... We should see these things and be impressed. Why is it that we are currently NOT impressed. It is because the abilities are so filtered or toned down that they have been rendered nearly useless.
I doubt this post made sense to some, I know it was written poorly but I hope some see what I was trying to say. We put more chains on the paladin than any other class. And then we expect him to just get by because he can smite evil a couple times a day. It is not enough. He does not shine. He does not do what his description says he is supposed to do. He does not stand anywhere except BEHIND the characters that get always on abilities or abilities that are so accessible they are almost always relevant!
All of that would be fine by me IF we were never facing things that were evil. But in those fights where things ARE evil...the paladin should get to say "hey it is my time to stand in the front, I get to be the man now". But the fighter just says, "yea my damage is still the same, I get to use all my abilities the same...just stand back". The barbarian says "ill just rage and still do more than you, I dont care what alignment it is, dont get in my way". The ranger says "That is my favored enemy, of course I picked an evil one! ill take care of this". And EVEN THE ROGUE says "I backstab evil like a champ! go flank that thing so I can destroy it!".
So then the paladin says "but let me get in there to smite evil a couple times...*hangs his head* and says yea...ill just be in the way."
|
|
You know, if we all started with a set number of points (separate from our ability points) that we used to build our character I think things would be seen in a different light. Let me explain.
Despite some of your comments sounding a little hyperbolic, I do see what you're saying.
Mutants and Masterminds creates characters in the fashion you were explaining - all characters just have a point pool, and all features, abilities, statistical combat modifiers, ability stats everything costs points from that pool.
So you're concept is not lost on me.
Robert
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
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.
Maybe someone already addressed this, but your weapon uses YOUR saving throws as long as you are holding it. It only makes its own saves if it is an unattended object.
|
|
Just as a point I believe the re written holy bond no longer railroads you into using the weapon of your god, at least I can't see that limitation in the text at the moment.
As written in the BETA version of the book, it states "Provided the weapon is her deity's favored weapon..."
If you're talking about the suggested upgrades that were recently posted by Jason to add on to the Beta - then I'm not sure - the DM is not adopting the new changes (at this time); which frankly I'm happy with, because my Channeling and Lay on Hands would significantly worsened in regards to the number of lay on hands and channeling I can do - which the latter was something that fashioned to be a major part of my offensive capabilities - as I took Turning Smite, and Turn Outsider - with the proposed changes, I go from being able to do that 5 times a day, to 2!
So I asked that the DM ignore the proposed changes. I dont have the increased will saves, but as I've said many times, I never thought it was necessary to add good will saves in the first place.
Robert
You know, if we all started with a set number of points (separate from our ability points) that we used to build our character I think things would be seen in a different light. Let me explain.
Despite some of your comments sounding a little hyperbolic, I do see what you're saying.
Mutants and Masterminds creates characters in the fashion you were explaining - all characters just have a point pool, and all features, abilities, statistical combat modifiers, ability stats everything costs points from that pool.
So you're concept is not lost on me.
Robert
Thank you Robert. I hope others see the point too. This is how we should think about things when we are working on character design. I think in our current situation the paladin has the LEAST amount of "points" spent on him, with the MOST restrictions....this is backwards.
So when we talk about what we should do with him, of COURSE he should look a little strong.
Maybe someone already addressed this, but your weapon uses YOUR saving throws as long as you are holding it. It only makes its own saves if it is an unattended object.
Yea I read that...but doesnt that still seem a little small when you think about the rarity of some items or even artifacts? They are tooooooo easy to destroy. Which brings me to a rant about saves...
No matter HOW good your save is you will still have at LEATS a 5% chance of failure...even if your save was +5000. This should be addressed and I will probably post a topic about this when we get to the miscellaneous discussion of design.
I think if your + to save is already = to the DC, then you should only fail on a roll of 1 followed by another roll of 1. This makes it still possible but drastically reduces the chance of failure for a situation where you could have succeeded without rolling the dice in the first place.
|
|
No matter HOW good your save is you will still have at LEATS a 5% chance of failure...even if your save was +5000. This should be addressed and I will probably post a topic about this when we get to the miscellaneous discussion of design.
Regardless, there is no save against being 'sundered' by a blackguard. (or any other creature with "improved sunder")
Robert
Yeah I think that this will lead to almost all paladins using adamantine weapons, and while I don't mind that too much, it's a bit sad.
Celestial spirit, "hey hey hey, paladin! I is in ur wepaon upgrading you skillz for smiting evil greatly!"
Paladin, "wonderful!"
Blackguard, "Blarg! I will sunder your sword and then you will suffer!"
Celestial spirit, "oh noes! I'm attacked! Save me save me or I'll not help you for a month and make yous sufar!"
It just doesn't follow for me.
|
|
Yeah I think that this will lead to almost all paladins using adamantine weapons, and while I don't mind that too much, it's a bit sad.
Celestial spirit, "hey hey hey, paladin! I is in ur wepaon upgrading you skillz for smiting evil greatly!"
Paladin, "wonderful!"
Blackguard, "Blarg! I will sunder your sword and then you will suffer!"
Celestial spirit, "oh noes! I'm attacked! Save me save me or I'll not help you for a month and make yous sufar!"It just doesn't follow for me.
well, if for nothing else, your post is amusing! LOL thanks.
Robert
|
|
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 you do use the current design focus rules you are no longer locked into your dieties favored weapon.
If you use the current Beta rules you do.
I think Jason actually listened to some posters like me who were railing against making divine bond a paladin's diety's favored weapon, and made the change
*bows*
Kudos Jason for that, now please listen to us again and split the channeling from Lay on Hands.
If you haven't converted from the beta yeah that still sucks sorry. By the way you should see my playtest thread where I said that in order for smite to be worthwile in its current form you have to be playing a crit build. Thanks Robert for confirming that.
What if instead of splitting LoH and Channeling again, why not up the uses/day?
So far I'm very satisfied with the changes to the paladin. I do feel that some of the suggestions made on this thread are far from reasonable.
If any further buffing is in order, why not consider the following modest proposal:
Since paladins have the option to obtain a bonded weapon, and fighters now have the impressive weapon training class feature, why not remove the "Fighter-only" requirement from the Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, and Greater Weapon Specialization feats?
With Weapon Training, a fighter can gain up to a +4 to hit and damage with a single category of weapons, with an additional +3/+2/+1 to another three groups respectively. Assuming the fighter takes the aforementioned feats, this translates to a staggering +7 to hit and +10 to damage rolls with a single weapon (not to mention the Weapon Mastery capstone)
Is a +3 to hit and +6 damage unreasonable for non-fighters to have?
Yes, this has been suggested and yes many of us agree with it.
Though I think your math is off a little. The weapon focus/spec tree maxes at +2 to hit and +4 to damage as I read it from the Beta.
|
|
What if instead of splitting LoH and Channeling again, why not up the uses/day?
So far I'm very satisfied with the changes to the paladin. I do feel that some of the suggestions made on this thread are far from reasonable.
If any further buffing is in order, why not consider the following modest proposal:
Since paladins have the option to obtain a bonded weapon, and fighters now have the impressive weapon training class feature, why not remove the "Fighter-only" requirement from the Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, and Greater Weapon Specialization feats?
With Weapon Training, a fighter can gain up to a +4 to hit and damage with a single category of weapons, with an additional +3/+2/+1 to another three groups respectively. Assuming the fighter takes the aforementioned feats, this translates to a staggering +7 to hit and +10 to damage rolls with a single weapon (not to mention the Weapon Mastery capstone)
Is a +3 to hit and +6 damage unreasonable for non-fighters to have?
You can up the # of uses, the problem with it is if you get someone like me who then will never use the channel, they have a ton of extra LoH, also you'll make all the people who think clerics need to be the best cry because then you'll be able to channel as many times per day as a cleric, and that's not fair to CoDzilla, you can't step on his toes.
|
feedback on proposed Oaths
Thanks for the feedback. I remember the Justicar article. Whereas some people have a tendency to view bounty hunters as mercenaries, a criminal seeking paladin does so out of a sense of duty to his/her church, community or a rightful ruler. (Think U.S. Marshal service). In fact, the “real entity” sending the paladin to capture someone might be the paladin’s church. (Perhaps going after a fallen paladin or former paladin turned blackguard). As for the name, I went with the “Sinner” term because it has a religious connotation, and “Subjugate” is both synonymous with capture, and it sings with the Sinner term. Upon further reflection, I would modify the restriction to the Straight-Line requirement, and the preclusion of any lethal damage, to include smiting. (That's right, no smiting someone you’re trying to capture). Any infliction of lethal damage by the paladin ends the Oath right there. Of course, a high-level paladin endeavoring to bring back a bad guy might want to combine this Oath along with “Defend You With My Life” Oath.
When it comes to the proposed “Inspire the Masses” Oath, I’d like to think of it more than just winning converts to one’s church. It could also serve to thwart evil not by force of arms, but by force of divine will channeled through the paladin. (Two deities that come to mind would be Rao from Greyhawk and possibly Majere from Dragonlance). It could come in handy for quelling a riot of desperate citizens or dissuade an enemy from preying on others. (Think of Luke Skywalker in Return of the Jedi, insisting that he could turn his father back to the good side of the Force). Upon further consideration, I’d also say that the number of alignment shifts from law and good should modify the DC to resist such effects. (Thus, chaotic evil foes would be somewhat resistant, but not immune). I’d also limit the use of this Oath to intelligent humanoids, and definitely not unintelligent undead, outsiders or elementals.
Now, here is another Oath…
Blood of the Martyr
The paladin seeks to champion the greater cause of good through his/her own pain and suffering. For every round the paladin takes every ten points of hit point or ability damage, the bonuses from his/her auras (with the exception of the Aura of Justice) are increased by the paladin’s Charisma modifier. This bonus takes effect on the round following the damage inflicted. The paladin gets a +2 bonus on any saving throw based on pain (i.e. resisting a symbol of pain spell). If the paladin is reduced to zero or negative hit points, all auras, with the exception of the Aura of Justice, remain active for one more round. Restriction: the paladin cannot attempt any self-healing during the combat encounter and for one full turn afterward. Failure to abide by this restriction will void the Oath.
This is one of the best posts I have read by you.
Thanx :-)
That said I have 2 issues.
First, MOST of the suggestions that have been listed earlier HAVE been play tested.
Jason Bulmahn (Lead Designer) posted the new Paladin Fri, Oct 10, 2008, 11:06 PM .
Have it been playtested from level 1 to 20 or even from level 1 to 12?
Well I don't think so.Have your / our paldin been playtested? Have it been playtested from level 1 to 20 or even from level one to 12? I don't think so. But it's still good people are enthusiastic.
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.
Perhaps you are right, perhaps not. I just thought it might be helpful just to look at the big picture too.
It would take years for the type of playtest you are talking about. We have play tested many different variants. I know that Robert Brambley, Lastknightleft and I have ALL posted play test reports here and in other areas. Admittedly Robert and LKL's play tests are more thorough than mine but I did it none the less to test some of the theories that I had been discussing.
I am happy that you are not taking part in this discussion, but i must tell you I think we HAVE been looking at the big picture. you are right, there is a LOT to look at. But that is also why this is the biggest design focus thread there is.
|
|
Also, I don't like the paldin now channel energt better than the cleric, In My Humble Opinion
Um okay what's funny is you had me agreeing with you completely through that whole scpheel, then you said this...
WHAT? channeling isn't stat dependant, it's level dependant. And the cleric has a constant pool, the paladin has his based on his LoH, which is his cha mod +1/2 his level. Which does mean at higher levels if the cleric hasn't pumped his cha, then yes the paladin has more uses, but he had fewer for the majority of the game. And the amount healed is = to what the cleric does, so in what way is the paladin better at channeling?
Sorry, I'm a bit vague again. My poor English and all :-)
I mean, the Paladin don't outshines the cleric. Nor does he outshine the clerc when we talk healing. Nor is the Paldins channel energy overpowered.
Want I ment is, when it comes to hurt undead by channeling the Paladin is mightier than the cleric, starting av level 4. Don't like it.
OK if he get a boost and outshines the cleric at level 20 I don't care. At level 20 a cleric can cast 4, 5 or 6 mass heal per day.
I'm just saying a level 4 Paldin shouldn't beat a cleric when it comes to hurt undead by channeling energy.
So the proble is not that the Paldin is to good - he/she isn't.
So the proble is not that a level 4 Paldin is better tha a level 4 cleric - because he/she isn't.
The problem is, the DC is based on charisma. And the Paldin will always beat the cleic.So I hope I don't seam to crazy
I still don't get it, he has fewer times per day, and it's the same strength for the cleric and the paladin, at any level. How is he better? because it's save is based off of charisma generally? Nothing forces a cleric to not pump his cha, just because it's based on a stat that a class favors doesn't mean that they are better, just that they are lucky. So if it's just because they might have a better save, I just say so clerics do it more, paladins have a better save, why does the cleric get to be best at everything?
|
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.
Maybe you misunderstood me? I didn't say they have the most powerful abilities -- I referred to their (relatively) high AC, HPs, best saving throws, ability to heal, ability to cast spells, high BAB, relatively high damage bonus (usually), and so on. In overall "combat efficiency", they're (in my opinion) the most versatile and well-rounded of the core classes in most situations. The cleric is, by far, “the best” in this regard, nut only if he has time to cast those spells on himself – if the PCs are “surprised”, often the encounter is over before the cleric enters the battlefield (especially at higher levels).
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.
I don't know about you, but to me the paladin is the epitome of the shining knight who stands over his fallen companions, shielding them from further harm and even sacrificing himself, if need be. To me, he is the closest equivalent to 4E's "defender" role -- not a guy who charges into melee and smites around like crazy.
The thing is, he isn’t simply standing like a puppet and taking a beating like you’re implying – his BAB and damage are usually more than enough to seriously hurt his enemies. Add in stuff like ‘Divine Might’, and he’s truly in “business” (see below).
I’ll always remember one particular challenging encounter with spellcasting monsters (Phaerimm from FR). My (then) 14th level fighter won the initiative, and managed to take out 8 of the creatures when I critted with my *every* attack (and naturally employed Great Cleave) during the first round… and… then I died, due to failing a couple of saving throws just after my turn. The other fighter followed suit next round, and then the cleric. The only PCs who survived that encounter were the wizard (who had the best AC in the group, and a lot of resistances and immunities, and kept to the rear) and the heroic paladin, who stood over our fallen bodies and slew the creatures one by one, surviving their spells due to his high saving throws. He did not have the best attack or damage bonus, but whenever he planted his feet and raised his shield, he did not back down, but methodically slew his foes – even though it might have taken a bit longer than for the fighters.
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.
Actually, that depends. The barbarian also needs CON (more than the paladin), so the difference between their STR scores may not be that much. In my own playtest group, the barbarian initially had 17 STR, the paladin and fighter both had 16. Also, the ranger and the barbarian would both need to invest in DEX, too, unless they want their ACs to “suck”. And even though the barbarian could rage in every combat, there’s still a difference between the benefits from the “upgraded” Smite (especially if combined with some paladin spells) and the benefits from individual Rage Powers, and therefore, IMO, the paladin should be able to smite less or have the benefits “downplayed”.
Maybe you dont play by the same rules everyone else does.....
And you know how everyone else is playing? That's a pretty silly claim to make. But, seriously, our playing styles seem to differ a lot, but that's just fine -- neither of us is playing the "right" or "wrong" way. However, I've played several paladins in 3E, and my impression has been that often they’ve “outlasted” the fighter in a longer encounter, *and* managed to inflict nearly as much damage (sometimes even more, and without Smite). Of course, we’ve used splat books (and, as I’ve said, won’t be using them once PF RPG is out) extensively, and certain paladin spells and feats are a huge boost to his combat abilities. All in all, ‘Align Weapon’, ‘Bless Weapon’, ‘Divine Favor’ and ‘Divine Sacrifice’ have been spells that paladins in my group used extensively – combined with Divine Shield and Divine Might -feats. Divine Might alone lets you “burn” a Turn Undead attempt to add your CHA bonus to damage for one round.
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.
In my opinion ‘Divine Favor’ and ‘Align Weapon’ are enough (in a hurry you only need the latter) – then just use Divine Might to add your CHA to damage as a Swift action. That’s something like +2D6+ 8 extra damage on all your attacks, which I consider to be a lot more than the fighter’s Greater Weapon Specialization and Weapon Training bonus – and the paladin has access to these bonuses at mid levels. Also note that paladins using two-handed weapons are also pretty good “heavy-hitters” – the paladin (such as the one in my own playtest campaign) who uses a great sword with Overhand Chop and Backswing can dish out serious damage even without smiting.
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
Your argument and examples here are a bit weak, and you probably know it. First of all, most groups I’ve played in have had a multitude of houserules and “tweaks” to rules, such as ignoring material components altogether, even though they’re an integral part of the magic system (I didn’t agree with that, but it was the DM’s decision, so I didn’t argue about it – especially as this wasn’t my own “regular” group). So don’t assume anything, because it really is all about what *you* and your fellow gamers in your group want out of the game and which rules you see being relevant to your experience and which you do not. Usually you want to ignore or “tweak” a rule if you think it’s not fair, fun or think it’s broken – and unlike you claim, most people probably “blame” the designers for such “broken” or “unfun” rules (and I don’t think it’s fair to say that DMs who ignore alignment restrictions are, by default, “poor DMs”, if the whole group wants to play that way).
It’s one thing to “disallow” rogues or barbarians, and completely another to interpret and portray alignments in certain ways. Your examples refer to cases in which a DM ignores a specific elements of the rules because he doesn’t like it or understand how it works – which happens a lot. Here’s the thing: in the end, the alignment is really just a guideline, which is only “hardcoded” into the system in the way certain magical items and spells affect certain alignments. The rest is up to you and your group to adjudicate, i.e. in which cases a PC (paladin or no paladin) “violates” his alignment, if ever. Therefore, since it’s quite open to interpretation and DM’s judgement calls, the alignment system is not really enforcing anything. As for the other “balacing factors”, I’m not sure which ones you’re referring to?
I’m not arguing for the sake of it – I’m trying to say that I don’t think it’s actually a “valid” statement to say that the alignment system and paladin’s code of honour is -- from a *mechanical* POV -- enough to “enforce” balance, *if* the “boosts” to the class make it significantly stronger than the rest of the core classes (which might easily happen if some of the changes posted on this thread end up in the rules).
|
|
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!
First of all, please drop the condescending tone – it only serves to be a discredit to yourself, and if you keep it up, shows immaturity and inability to discuss things in a civil manner. Also, using caps a lot in your posts is also considered to be equivalent to shouting – please don’t do it. It does not “highlight” or “underline” any points you wish to make – at least not in a positive tone.
Secondly, for the record, I’ve been playing paladins ever since the class was published in its first incarnation over 20 years ago, so I should know something about how the class “feels” and mechanically works in play. I honestly think that my favourite version of the class is the PF Beta paladin – even with the small “tweaks” I think it still requires. It’s not “perfect”, but I feel it’s mechanically and thematically the most exciting portrayal of my own image of the paladin.
Thirdly, I wish to address your description of the paladin’s “role” or “expertise” – I already noted in my reply to Robert how I think see the paladin as a versatile and capable melee combatant, a holy warrior, who is both a “defender” and a “backup” healer and who gets to “shine” against the most “vile” opponents (i.e. evil undead and outsiders). I personally don’t see him as a LG warrior whose only “job” is to “smash in evil skulls”, and therefore he should have a permanent bonus (and also the highest bonuses among the PCs) against *all* evil opponents – even less so, as *most* NPCs and monsters the PCs fight against in a typical campaign are evil (which would mean that he “outshines” the other PCs in most encounters).
You mentioned the rogue and the cleric… I don’t think the rogue has “staying power” (i.e. AC, saving throws and HPs high enough) to last very long in melee, *and* he needs to be able to flank his opponents to get those Sneak Attack dice (I’ve played in campaigns in which rogues only rarely got an opportunity to use Sneak Attack due to fiendishly cunning DM tactics and also because half of the NPCs and monsters seemed to have Evasion… *Grrrr*). BTW, if you’re looking for a class that can outshine the rest in melee, it’s our friend, whom you dubbed the “stoic healer” and “buffer” – the cleric. *If* the cleric is aware of an encounter happening soon, he can use several “buffs” which make him the ultimate melee combatant with ridiculously high attack and damage bonuses. However, in encounters in which nobody is able to use any “buffs” on themselves, I’m still arguing that most often the paladin comes out as the “last man standing”.
Fourthly, let me ask you a couple of questions:
1) Have you playtested the PF Beta paladin in your group?
2) Have you playtested the changes posted by Jason B. on this thread?
3) Are you arguing this from the player’s or DM’s point of view?
If you answered ‘no’ to both of the first two questions, you probably realize that your arguments are then based on simple “hunch”, experiences from 3E and also opinions posted by others. If you’ve playtested the paladin and the “upgraded” abilities posted by Jason, then I’m willing to admit that your arguments are based on first-hand observations, and therefore “valid”.
Also, it sounds like you’re not the DM in your group, but a player who loves to play paladins (and no, I’m not implying that DMs are “better” or more “knowledgeable” than players), but I may be wrong. Personally, from one DM’s point of view, I think the balance and “appeal” among the core classes is one of the most important things to consider in PF RPG.
Now, there are a lot of ways to “boost” the paladin’s abilities without giving him bigger bonuses or an X number of extra smites per day or longer duration of bonuses – for example, the “rider” effects (Intimidating/Dazing/Staggering/Blinding/etc. Smite) is one way to do it (not necessarily the "best", but IMO a far better way than giving extra +X/+Y to attacks and damage).
Finally, the way I see it, the purpose of this playtest and design forum is to offer constructive feedback and ideas based on playtesting the classes – not complete write-ups written in a frenzied zeal “because the class still SUXX and me and my buddies have made a BETTER version which we expect you guys to LOVE!” (sorry for the sarcasm and insulting tone in this sentence). Again, it’s one thing to post ideas and “tweaks” and discussing what is good and bad about your suggestions in a productive manner, and completely another to either dismiss another poster’s concerns or even attack them if they don’t fall in love or agree with your suggestions or opinions.
|
|
I still don't get it, he has fewer times per day, and it's the same strength for the cleric and the paladin, at any level. How is he better? because it's save is based off of charisma generally? Nothing forces a cleric to not pump his cha, just because it's based on a stat that a class favors doesn't mean that they are better, just that they are lucky. So if it's just because they might have a better save, I just say...Also, I don't like the paldin now channel energt better than the cleric, In My Humble Opinion
Um okay what's funny is you had me agreeing with you completely through that whole scpheel, then you said this...
WHAT? channeling isn't stat dependant, it's level dependant. And the cleric has a constant pool, the paladin has his based on his LoH, which is his cha mod +1/2 his level. Which does mean at higher levels if the cleric hasn't pumped his cha, then yes the paladin has more uses, but he had fewer for the majority of the game. And the amount healed is = to what the cleric does, so in what way is the paladin better at channeling?
Sorry, I'm a bit vague again. My poor English and all :-)
I mean, the Paladin don't outshines the cleric. Nor does he outshine the clerc when we talk healing. Nor is the Paldins channel energy overpowered.
Want I ment is, when it comes to hurt undead by channeling the Paladin is mightier than the cleric, starting av level 4. Don't like it.
OK if he get a boost and outshines the cleric at level 20 I don't care. At level 20 a cleric can cast 4, 5 or 6 mass heal per day.
I'm just saying a level 4 Paldin shouldn't beat a cleric when it comes to hurt undead by channeling energy.
So the proble is not that the Paldin is to good - he/she isn't.
So the proble is not that a level 4 Paldin is better tha a level 4 cleric - because he/she isn't.
The problem is, the DC is based on charisma. And the Paldin will always beat the cleic.So I hope I don't seam to crazy
I think I understand his dilema; the typical paladin will have a 16 CHA vs the typical cleric with a 12; thus at 4th level, the paladin will have the same number of channels as the cleric, and the DC to save will be two higher.
That being said - prior to the proposed upgrades, the paladin still channeled at -3 levels of a cleric; which i'm okay with. I think that improvement was unnecessary and did not specifically address the issues where the paladin was behind.
I say move the channeling and Lay on hands back to seperate abilities - to allow them both to be used often enough. Simply increasing the pool would allow min/maxers to ignore one of those abilities and have way too many of the other; not to mention how do we regulate "extra channeling" and/or "extra lay on hands" feats.....
Furthermore, after seperating them out - return the channeling to cleric level -3, and improve the spellcasting to be the same (cleric level -3).
This will ultimately give the paladin about the same number of channeling at a bit higher DC - but less overall oomph.
EDIT: Regardless, most paladins that I've seen use the channelling more for divine feats and bonuses based off of that mechanic. Personally my current paladin is using it for "Turning Smite" and taken Turn Outsider to use them in conjunction. My previous paladin in the forgotten realms game I finished this past March, used it mostly for Divine Shield. Currently we're using ONLY the Beta book - no splat books - otherwise, I would have that feat again as well.
Robert
|
|
Fourthly, let me ask you a couple of questions:
1) Have you playtested the PF Beta paladin in your group?
2) Have you playtested the changes posted by Jason B. on this thread?
3) Are you arguing this from the player’s or DM’s point of view?If you answered ‘no’ to both of the first two questions, you probably realize that your arguments are then based on simple “hunch”, experiences from 3E and also opinions posted by others. If you’ve playtested the paladin and the “upgraded” abilities posted by Jason, then I’m willing to admit that your arguments are based on first-hand observations, and therefore “valid”.
Also, it sounds like you’re not the DM in your group, but a player who loves to play paladins (and no, I’m not implying that DMs are “better” or more “knowledgeable” than players), but I may be wrong. Personally, from one DM’s point of view, I think the balance and “appeal” among the core classes is one of the most important things to consider in PF RPG.
Now, there are a lot of ways to “boost” the paladin’s abilities without giving him bigger bonuses or an X number of extra smites per day or longer duration of bonuses – for example, the “rider” effects (Intimidating/Dazing/Staggering/Blinding/etc. Smite) is one way to do it (not necessarily the "best", but IMO a far better way than giving extra +X/+Y to attacks and damage).
A) please don't apologize for getting sarcastic, you have as much right to sarcastic responses as we do, as long as you're willing to change things to accomodate reasonable viewpoints sarcasm is fine and I actually enjoy sarcasm more than I do most normal conversation. Feel free to be sarcastic, sarcasm is fine, rigid inflexibility is the only thing I hate :)
Now to your questions I know they weren't directed to me, but I want you to know where we are all coming from.
1) yes I have
2) yes I am currently
3) I have both DMed for paladins in the past and am playing one now so I approach this from both sides of the table, the paladin is the only class I have ever seen someone drop the class because he wasn't having any fun. that was with a houserule to make detect evil workable in combat (funnily enough very similar to jason's, only mine was a move action to detect as normal if you studied the 3 rounds instead of the targeted one he made) and made smite evil a once per encounter power.
He dropped at level 4 and switched to a ranger and had a lot more fun. So I think of that when I talk paladin design, and I think of my own experiences, and I think after anoter paladin play for a one shot at first level and a paladin for two levels. I can say this, the paladin needs help.
Now I would also prefer rider effects for smite to smite/HA, but they were up for a while before design focus and Jason didn't take it, so at this point we have to throw out other ideas to see what he takes from, even if he doesn't take it at least we can say we tried.
As for Vult's enthusiasm, he's young, we all get over it, we all get caught up in it once in a while, I know I've used a few caps sentences. Not as many as he uses, but every once in a while it just feels right to hold that shift ITS VERY SATISFYING YOU SHOULD TRY IT SOMETIME, ITS GOOD TO VENT. ;)
|
|
Maybe you misunderstood me? I didn't say they have the most powerful abilities -- I referred to their (relatively) high AC, HPs, best saving throws, ability to heal, ability to cast spells, high BAB, relatively high damage bonus (usually), and so on. In overall "combat efficiency", they're (in my opinion) the most versatile and well-rounded of the core classes in most situations. The cleric is, by far, “the best” in this regard, nut only if he has time to cast those spells on himself – if the PCs are “surprised”, often the encounter is over before the cleric enters the battlefield (especially at higher levels).
Maybe you misunderstood me? I didn't say they have the most powerful abilities -- I referred to their (relatively) high AC, HPs, best saving throws, ability to heal, ability to cast spells, high BAB, relatively high damage bonus (usually), and so on. In overall "combat efficiency", they're (in my opinion) the most versatile and well-rounded of the core classes in most situations. The cleric is, by far, “the best” in this regard, nut only if he has time to cast those spells on himself – if the PCs are “surprised”, often the encounter is over before the cleric enters the battlefield (especially at higher levels).I may have indeed. Relative is what I'm trying to improve. They're the king of relative; I would like to see them truly shine at something other than 'waiting to make a saving throw'. their relatively high ACs are outdone by rogues, fighters with armor training, clerics and druids, and even monks. Their HPs are outdone by fighters and barbarians who can afford to put emphasis on CON. Their BAB is in the upper eschelon, but they lack means of getting a lot of stagnant bonuses to that; as I said rage lasts far longer than smite. Relatively high damage - most of time, the cleric and druid are on par there - the rogue, ranger, fighter, and barbarian outclasses him -and the biggest challenge is that BECAUSE of his 'relative' bonuses to his attack rolls (except for those 4 attack rolls a day w/ smite) he does alot less damage since his counterparts are hitting those BBEG far more often. I agree with the cleric - and his spells are far more powerful than the paladins - especially since the paladins' caster level is half that a cleric - meaning he doesn't even get +2 from Divine Favor until 12th level! Even the when the cleric is suprised: Greater Magic Weapon and Magical Vestment lasts 1 hr / level - so they're usually good to go. The paladin has no such long-lasting buffs. And to be on par with anyone, they would have to spend the first 2-3 rounds making themselves so.
I don't know about you, but to me the paladin is the epitome of the shining knight who stands over his fallen companions, shielding them from further harm and even sacrificing himself, if need be. To me, he is the closest equivalent to 4E's "defender" role -- not a guy who charges into melee and smites around like crazy.
Ironically, with Armor Training now a fighter ability, and his less dependency on MAD, along with tower shield, the fighter has potentially about 6 points of AC better by 10th level. They're far more suited to be the 'defender' - unless the paladin is the 'relative defender.'
The thing is, he isn’t simply standing like a puppet and taking a beating like you’re implying – his BAB and damage are usually more than enough to seriously hurt his enemies. Add in stuff like ‘Divine Might’, and he’s truly in “business” (see below).
this is where you and I completely disagree. He can with a few buffs, and using his few smite attacks. Otherwise, he's quite ordinary - not much better than a "warrior NPC" in regards to hitting enemies.
Actually, that depends. The barbarian also needs CON (more than the paladin), so the difference between their STR scores may not be that much. In my own playtest group, the barbarian initially had 17 STR, the paladin and fighter both had 16. Also, the ranger and the barbarian would both need to invest in DEX, too, unless they want their ACs to “suck”. And even though the barbarian could rage in every combat, there’s still a difference between the benefits from the “upgraded” Smite (especially if combined with some paladin spells) and the benefits from individual Rage Powers, and therefore, IMO, the paladin should be able to smite less or have the benefits “downplayed”.
But both the barb and especially the fighter will be more apt to increase str vs the paladin - who will want to increase CHA more often than not - both with the every 4 level stat increase, and via magical items.
Of course, we’ve used splat books (and, as I’ve said, won’t be using them once PF RPG is out) extensively, and certain paladin spells and feats are a huge boost to his combat abilities. All in all, ‘Align Weapon’, ‘Bless Weapon’, ‘Divine Favor’ and ‘Divine Sacrifice’ have been spells that paladins in my group used extensively – combined with Divine Shield and Divine Might -feats. Divine Might alone lets you “burn” a Turn Undead attempt to add your CHA bonus to damage for one round.
[/quote}Some of these options take rounds to prepare for. That is the crux of many of our lamentations. The fighters and barbarians and monks, rogues, and rangers all have their bonuses readily and immediately avaialable to them - all the time.
In my opinion ‘Divine Favor’ and ‘Align Weapon’ are enough (in a hurry you only need the latter) – then just use Divine Might to add your CHA to damage as a Swift action. That’s something like +2D6+ 8 extra damage on all your attacks, which I consider to be a lot more than the fighter’s Greater Weapon Specialization and Weapon Training bonus – and the paladin has access to these bonuses at mid levels. Also note that paladins using two-handed weapons are also pretty good “heavy-hitters” – the paladin (such as the one in my own playtest campaign) who uses a great sword with Overhand Chop and Backswing can dish out serious damage even without smiting.
Divine Favor: only a +1 until 12th level.
Align Weapon: only really makes a difference against something with damage reduction / alignment.
I don't know what Divine Might is; however Greater Weapn Spec etc, works against all alignment, all the time, no need to prepar, and doesn't run out after 5 channels a day. 2handed weapon paladins....there goes the 'defender' moniker out the window.
(and I don’t think it’s fair to say that DMs who ignore alignment restrictions are, by default, “poor DMs”, if the whole group wants to play that way).
Here I will apologize and say that I completely misunderstood your comments; I thought you were saying that they mistakenly because they didn't have a clear grasp of the rules and/or the emphasis on alignment's role or the ability to role-play or a DM to KNOW to enforce it. That is different than simply cognitively choosing to ignore a certain aspect/rule/mechanic. The latter does not mean one is a poor DM - the former is. If it is the latter, the I apologize and didn't mean disrespect.
That being said - as I said - all systems have a check and balance - by design. To ignore one that has a fundamental purpose to the game is only going to complicate or throw something else into imbalance: such as ignoring the memorization rules and casting of spells as you pointed out - that uberly makes wizards more powerful to simply be allowed to continuously cast spells over and over again after memorizing it - this would throw off the balance in a lot of places - far more than ignoring alignement for sure.
It’s one thing to “disallow” rogues or barbarians, and completely another to interpret and portray alignments in certain ways. Your examples refer to cases in which a DM ignores a specific elements of the rules because he doesn’t like it or understand how it works – which happens a lot. Here’s the thing: in the end, the alignment is really just a guideline, which is only “hardcoded” into the system in the way certain magical items and spells affect certain alignments. The rest is up to you and your group to adjudicate, i.e. in which cases a PC (paladin or no paladin) “violates” his alignment, if ever.
And that makes my previous point for me - alignment is not just an abstract ideal in the game - it has a central foundation to the core of the game - and many aspects are presumed to be hinged by it.
Smite Evil/Good, protection from good/evil, many spells with good/evil descriptors, evil/good descriptors on monsters, classes such as barbarian, druid, paladin and monk all have an alignment description, plus some prestige classes like Assassin, Radiant Servant of Pelor, etc. Holy/unholy damage on weapons etc.
My point is that there is ALOT of specific intrinsic rules and mechanics in the game made to centrally revolve around the alignment. To ignore it - is potentially disruptive.
To ignore alignment would indeed make paladins more powerful in that all their vs evil abilities would affect all, and they are no longer mandated by their code that keeps them in check. This is just one example - but there are many others as I described above that would similarly gain something by not having to adhere to the alignment structure.
Regardless, it is apparent that although we both enjoy paladins for much of the same reason, your assessment of their strengths greatly differs from mine. I will admit that you have many valid points, and when the stars do align, the paladin can buff himself, has others buffing him, has all his smites/channels, his three spells and everything ready to go - he is bad-ass. I just see that as smoke and mirrors - because eventually - and it happens too quickly in every game - the clock strikes midnight, and his coach and chariot become a pumpkin and zuchini again and the paladin is left watching everyone else kick ass while he stands there waiting to stand over them and be the last one standing - and of course die himself because he's completely ineffective - and wait to make yet another saving throw.
Robert
First of all, please drop the condescending tone – it only serves to be a discredit to yourself, and if you keep it up, shows immaturity and inability to discuss things in a civil manner. Also, using caps a lot in your posts is also considered to be equivalent to shouting – please don’t do it. It does not “highlight” or “underline” any points you wish to make – at least not in a positive tone.
Secondly, for the record, I’ve been playing paladins ever since the class was published in its first incarnation over 20 years ago, so I should know something about how the class “feels” and mechanically works in play. I honestly think that my favourite version of the class is the PF Beta paladin – even with the small “tweaks” I think it still requires. It’s not “perfect”, but I feel it’s mechanically and thematically the most exciting portrayal of my own image of the paladin.
Thirdly, I wish to address your description of the paladin’s “role” or “expertise” – I already noted in my reply to Robert how I think see the paladin as a versatile and capable melee combatant, a holy warrior, who is both a “defender” and a “backup” healer and who gets to “shine” against the most “vile” opponents (i.e. evil undead and outsiders). I personally don’t see him as a LG warrior whose only “job” is to “smash in evil skulls”, and therefore he should have a permanent bonus (and also the highest bonuses among the PCs) against *all* evil opponents – even less so, as *most* NPCs and monsters the PCs fight against in a typical campaign are evil (which would mean that he “outshines” the other PCs in most encounters).
You mentioned the rogue and the cleric… I don’t think the rogue has “staying power” (i.e. AC, saving throws and HPs high enough) to last very long in melee, *and* he needs to be able to flank his opponents to get those Sneak Attack dice (I’ve played in campaigns in which rogues only rarely got an opportunity to use Sneak Attack due to fiendishly cunning DM tactics and also because half of the NPCs and monsters seemed to have Evasion… *Grrrr*). BTW, if you’re looking for a class that can outshine the rest in melee, it’s our friend, whom you dubbed the “stoic healer” and “buffer” – the cleric. *If* the cleric is aware of an encounter happening soon, he can use several “buffs” which make him the ultimate melee combatant with ridiculously high attack and damage bonuses. However, in encounters in which nobody is able to use any “buffs” on themselves, I’m still arguing that most often the paladin comes out as the “last man standing”.Fourthly, let me ask you a couple of questions:
1) Have you playtested the PF Beta paladin in your group?
2) Have you playtested the changes posted by Jason B. on this thread?
3) Are you arguing this from the player’s or DM’s point of view?
Right from the start I want to come back at you with rhetoric and condescension. But sense you ask so nicely I will do my best to avoid those tactics.
It is as simple as this. You and I disagree about many aspects of what is both our favorite class. You see something that works fine the way it is, I do not. You provide many examples that you think prove your case, I dont agree. We do not have to agree, that is our right.
As for your questions.
I have not playtested th PF beta in a full game setting. But I have sat and rolled dice with a friend using the rules...the beta, the proposed AND some of the new rules that we here have suggested.
I am not a DM...I have always preferred to play. Though I do value the look of the game through the DM's eyes....as you could see if you did a quick search of these boards where you found a post by me over that very topic weeks ago.
How about a few questions for you?
1. Have you read ALL of the posts in this thread? Have you taken the time to go through each of them and read the full discussion for and against each suggestion? I say this with no sarcasm, I hope that you have. Because there is a (ill not use caps here for you) *lot* of good debate that many people have simply disregarded because they wanted to state their opinion without reading through things first.
2. Have you play tested any of the suggestions here? The same goes for the reverse, how can you make many of the claims you have without it?
Thats enough of that. Truth is there is simply not enough time to *truly* test this thing *all* the way through. There is simply to much material and to many possibilities to cover them all. That is why when someone like Robert Brambley or Lastknightleft says that they have play tested something I have not yet thought of or had the time to do, I believe what they say. They have proven through diligent effort here on these boards that they care about the paladin and understand what we are working for.
Yes I am sure that i can come off as being (to use LKL's word) "snarky". Sometimes I mean to be and sometimes I dont. I simply hate it when someone chimes in halfway through without fully understanding the whole conversation.
You obviously have a good grasp of the game. I can not argue your experience as mine is limited. But in a case like this you do not have to be a 20 year veteran to understand that the things being said are true. What you have described of the paladin would be great in a perfect world. If all of the things you said happened for the paladin every time, then yes he would be fine. But these things seldom happen and even if they do many other classes are still just as good, where the paladin is supposed to shine, is this fair?
Like you, the game I am playing will not be using any splat books. But unlike you I am unhappy with the current state of the paladin. Is the PF paladin better than the 3.5 one? Of course it is. But is the PF paladin balanced compared to all the other PF classes? I dont think so. Does the PF paladin have a true place to stand? to shine? No, because so many other classes do it better.
I can make these statements: 1. because they are obvious and 2. because I have followed all of these posts and these guys who have been dedicated to giving this class the respect it deserves have confirmed this.
I do not know what else to say....I wish we could all work together to create a paladin that is fun, capable and balanced with the rest of the classes. But I start to think we are getting close to something that Jason will also agree with, someone chimes in to claim that in some extravagant situation the paladin is not underpowered or out shined and this is somehow supposed to be a reasonable argument. But no matter if it makes sense or not, what it does do is makes us take a couple dozen posts to bicker at each other without putting any positive effort towards fixing the paladin.
Regardless, it is apparent that although we both enjoy paladins for much of the same reason, your assessment of their strengths greatly differs from mine. I will admit that you have many valid points, and when the stars do align, the paladin can buff himself, has others buffing him, has all his smites/channels, his three spells and everything ready to go - he is bad-ass. I just see that as smoke and mirrors - because eventually - and it happens too quickly in every game - the clock strikes midnight, and his coach and chariot become a pumpkin and zuchini again and the paladin is left watching everyone else kick ass while he stands there waiting to stand over them and be the last one standing - and of course die himself because he's completely ineffective - and wait to make yet another saving throw.
This paragraph was pure genius, I commend you my friend!
As for Vult's enthusiasm, he's young, we all get over it, we all get caught up in it once in a while, I know I've used a few caps sentences. Not as many as he uses, but every once in a while it just feels right to hold that shift ITS VERY SATISFYING YOU SHOULD TRY IT SOMETIME, ITS GOOD TO VENT. ;)
I think this was an effort to defend my attitude and if so I appreciate it. Though I am not "young" depending on how old you are...I am young to the game. Though youth does not mean ignorance or stupidity.
When I can not explain myself I tend to get very frustrated. That frustration is worse when you know that what you are saying makes sense but someone simply changes the argument to make them look like they have done nothing wrong and they were smarter than you from the beginning.
I dont want to spend anymore time on this bickering back and forth. I am here to talk about how we can improve the paladin. I am going to get one more real chance to play this class for what it should be. In this last chance I am limited to the core books and what is in them. We house rule very little so if it is not in there it will not be an option. So if people do not understand why I fight to get this right so hard, now you know.
Can we please resume discussion of how we can make the paladin the class we ALL (yes caps on purpose) want to play?
|
|
As for Vult's enthusiasm, he's young, we all get over it, we all get caught up in it once in a while, I know I've used a few caps sentences. Not as many as he uses, but every once in a while it just feels right to hold that shift ITS VERY SATISFYING YOU SHOULD TRY IT SOMETIME, ITS GOOD TO VENT. ;)I think this was an effort to defend my attitude and if so I appreciate it.
It was, but it was also poking fun at you at the same time, is it strange that I can't defend a person without also taking a pot shot at them? I don't know, it makes me happy to make fun of the people who's side I'm on. So I think you'll just have to put up with it whippersnapper. (I'm 26 so for all I know you could be almost twice my age, I know a couple 45 year olds who play)
Though I am not "young" depending on how old you are...I am young to the game. Though youth does not mean ignorance or stupidity.
If you'd stop playing that hippety hop and open your ears you'll see I never once put down your intelligence, I just said that we all get caught up in enthusiasm some time AND HAVE TO LET IT OUT VOCIFEROUSLY. Maybe if you weren't so distracte by holding your pants at knee level and singing about the "booty butt, booty butt, booty butt cheeks" and "that thugga luv" you mighta caught my drift, are you jiggy with it nah nah nah nah nah nah nah?
Yeesh you act like all I wanna do is zooma zoom zoom zoom in you boom boom.
|
|
If you'd stop playing that hippety hop and open your ears you'll see I never once put down your intelligence, I just said that we all get caught up in enthusiasm some time AND HAVE TO LET IT OUT VOCIFEROUSLY. Maybe if you weren't so distracte by holding your pants at knee level and singing about the "booty butt, booty butt, booty butt cheeks" and "that thugga luv" you mighta caught my drift, are you jiggy with it nah nah nah nah nah nah nah?
Yeesh you act like all I wanna do is zooma zoom zoom zoom in you boom boom.
.....right now....I have no idea what you're talking about.... ;-/
LOL
Robert
|
|
Regardless, it is apparent that although we both enjoy paladins for much of the same reason, your assessment of their strengths greatly differs from mine. I will admit that you have many valid points, and when the stars do align, the paladin can buff himself, has others buffing him, has all his smites/channels, his three spells and everything ready to go - he is bad-ass. I just see that as smoke and mirrors - because eventually - and it happens too quickly in every game - the clock strikes midnight, and his coach and chariot become a pumpkin and zuchini again and the paladin is left watching everyone else kick ass while he stands there waiting to stand over them and be the last one standing - and of course die himself because he's completely ineffective - and wait to make yet another saving throw.This paragraph was pure genius, I commend you my friend!
Thank you, Vult. And it is true! The paladin has the potential and the make-up of kicking ass! But it's like a bottle-rocket - WHOOOOSH! it's up.....it gone......well, that was fun....now what do we do for the next 6 hours of the day....?
I do see the fact that they have tools; combine their spells, their channeling, their smite, their saves - etc.....and yes, they can kick ass.
But the problem simply comes back to the same old thing....too long to get it all going, and not long enough lasting (like an old geezer at a brothel).
Where as the majority of the other classes can just keep going, or have enough to last through the day, the paladins greatness is situation at best, and rarely allows for the uber-star that many nay-sayer are prone to spout off about when they mention all that the paladin has going for him.
Regardless, I'm not deterred, and i still firmly stand my ground, that the paladin needs some healty doses of not just 'staying power' but power power to level the field.
Robert
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
In my opinion ‘Divine Favor’ and ‘Align Weapon’ are enough (in a hurry you only need the latter) – then just use Divine Might to add your CHA to damage as a Swift action. That’s something like +2D6+ 8 extra damage on all your attacks, which I consider to be a lot more than the fighter’s Greater Weapon Specialization and Weapon Training bonus – and the paladin has access to these bonuses at mid levels.
No combination of divine favor, align weapon, and divine might will add 2d6+8 extra damage. Maybe we have found the root of the comparison problem going on here.
Align weapon doesn't make your weapon holy (giving +2d6 damage vs. evil). It just makes it good (or evil/lawful/chaotic) for the purpose of overcoming DR. Perhaps this is one of the reasons you have thought so highly of the paladin's damage-dealing abilities, because you have been using a radically overpowered misinterpretation of a 2nd level spell.
Divine Might is great as a splat feat. But it's not in PF because it can't be, so it makes kind of a hard thing to take into account when trying to balance the PF Paladin as a core class with other PF core classes.
So you spend 2 rounds and a turn attempt on the above buffs, for a paladin who is, say, 8th level (and so gets a 2nd level spell), with an 18 CHR and you get:
+1 to hit and damage for 1 minute (DF)
+4 to damage for 1 round (DM)
weapon beats DR/good for 1 minute/2 paladin levels (AW)
That's rather a different thing from +2d6+8 bonus damage. In fact, on average it's a only a third (5 points, instead of an average of 15).
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I’ve played in campaigns in which rogues only rarely got an opportunity to use Sneak Attack due to fiendishly cunning DM tactics and also because half of the NPCs and monsters seemed to have Evasion… *Grrrr*).
Ummm... evasion doesn't have anything to do with sneak attack.
Now if you're saying half the NPCs and monsters had Improved Uncanny Dodge (meaning they were all 5th+ level barbarians or 8th+ level rogues, since unlike with evasion there are NO monsters which innately possess IpvUnDodge as a special quality), that seems vanishingly unlikely.
I would agree that the rogue flank is not as automatic as some seem to think, but it is usually a pretty easy tactic to set up and one which is mostly within the control of the PC party to cause to occur, unlike many other class abilities (e.g., the ranger's favored enemy) that require DM cooperation to come into play.
|
|
Divine Might is great as a splat feat. But it's not in PF because it can't be, so it makes kind of a hard thing to take into account when trying to balance the PF Paladin as a core class with other PF core classes.
So you spend 2 rounds and a turn attempt on the above buffs, for a paladin who is, say, 8th level (and so gets a 2nd level spell), with an 18 CHR and you get:
+1 to hit and damage for 1 minute (DF)
+4 to damage for 1 round (DM)
weapon beats DR/good for 1 minute/2 paladin levels (AW)That's rather a different thing from +2d6+8 bonus damage. In fact, on average it's a only a third (5 points, instead of an average of 15).
Hey Jason - stay put - you're proving awfully handy to have around.... ;-)
For what it's worth - the benefits you listed down seem worth 3 rounds of prep if you ask me.
For no prep time, there's the fighter of the same level over there with Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, Greater Weapon focus, and 2 x Weapon Training, and at least a +2 better Strength: so he's got +5 to hit and +6 to damage with a two-handed weapon - every round all the time.....no prep, no dispel, and he was using it those three rounds the paladin was trying to make himself ready.
Sure the fighter won't be able to overcome the damage reduction good automatically - but that +5 he automatically has easily makes him a candidate to swap it out for a power attack that does +10 damage or so easily overcoming the damage reduction anyways. And MOST enemies don't have damage reduction/alignment (many, yes, but not even close to half do!)
Robert
|
|
I’ve played in campaigns in which rogues only rarely got an opportunity to use Sneak Attack due to fiendishly cunning DM tactics and also because half of the NPCs and monsters seemed to have Evasion… *Grrrr*).Ummm... evasion doesn't have anything to do with sneak attack.
Align weapon doesn't make your weapon holy (giving +2d6 damage vs. evil). It just makes it good (or evil/lawful/chaotic) for the purpose of overcoming DR. Perhaps this is one of the reasons you have thought so highly of the paladin's damage-dealing abilities, because you have been using a radically overpowered misinterpretation of a 2nd level spell.
Like i said - maybe he isn't playing by the same rules we do..... :-/ I'm just saying.....
It could just be a mistake, or even a mistype - but it was a notion that did cross my mind, and I did comment about it....
Robert