|
*of course, one realizes there are Champions of Evil as well... &-/
Well, there's no Blackguard in the Core,.....but....
Brightside is, a theoretical blackguard with all this stuff becomes a heinous threat to a paladin, who at least can't double up on the blackguard unless he's an outsider/undead/dragon.Fluff note.....maybe that's why evil people are always trying to tempt good/neutral people: so they can be used as cannonfodder against paladins.
Firstly, because your 'multiple fights per day' is 3 fights at most, and that's at 16th level. It's 1 fight at 4th, and 2 fights at 10th. Secondly, it only grants the ability to allies within 10 feet, necessitating the party to bunch up to recieve the bonus. Thirdly, all affected targets must then use the ability by the start of the paladin's next turn, or lose it. If they do use it, it lasts for 1 minute. And finally, the smite only applies against one target. Once that target is dead, you're done.
These drawbacks wilt in the face of the sheer numbers we're talking about. You don't seem to realize just how much a +1/level boost to melee damage actually is, nor that the paladin gets enough uses to gain this bonus on virtually every attack he makes (assuming he's not utilizing aura of justice, which let's him pour out several of his smite uses in one fight for stacking benefits. And no, nova effects aren't balanced. In this case "novaing" is even MORE efficient, point-for-point, than saving his resources).
So the pally gets to party like a rockstar against one or two enemies during the course of a gaming session...
One enemy per two levels per day, actually.
And if he must, the paladin is quite free to "nova" and use this ability multiple times per fight (once against each enemy) then go home for the night; see above.
It will also add kind of a fun element to gameplay (where perhaps the goal of evil outsiders won't always be to hamstring the spellcasters).
The paladin now outclasses the spellcaster in damage against all single foes now, not just undead and outsiders.
If you think that that's okay and that the Beta didn't go far enough in boosting melee classes, that's fine, but why just the paladin? Why isn't the barbarian adding his barbarian level to his strength score during rage (sound crazy? It still wouldn't be as powerful as 3.P smite)? Why can't the fighter take recursive Weapon Specialization 10 times for another +20 damage?
Firstly, because your 'multiple fights per day' is 3 fights at most, and that's at 16th level. It's 1 fight at 4th, and 2 fights at 10th. Secondly, it only grants the ability to allies within 10 feet, necessitating the party to bunch up to recieve the bonus. Thirdly, all affected targets must then use the ability by the start of the paladin's next turn, or lose it. If they do use it, it lasts for 1 minute. And finally, the smite only applies against one target. Once that target is dead, you're done.
And if you want to balance it, you could always alter the wording to 'a paladin can expend two uses of smite evil to grant the benefits of her smite evil to all allies within 10 ft.' That way, it'd only apply against one target in totality, which you could all go and massively overkill.
I agree forcing all allies to "share" the same smite target as you would be more balanced...
But given it only works on allies within 10' (that's alot more of a limit than the 30' I mentioned which I typed without looking it up), the affected allies are likely to be attacking the same target as you ANYWAYS*.The current wording of the "Aura" granting your Smite Ability on allies <=10' seems to mean they can subsequently step AWAY from this range (which goes against the de facto (though unwritten) explanation of how Auras work). This reading is supported by the fact the Aura itself does not have a duration of 1 minute, but in fact is only a 1 round duration ability, after which allies' granted Smites seem to persist 'independently'.
Instead of "granting" the ability, having it work like a normal Aura and be a bonus that doesn't persist out of it's area-of-effect would help alot too (this may be the intention, but the wording doesn't actually support this). It would also(presumably) make it so incapacitating the Paladin would end the Aura bonus for the Allies... If facing a Demonic Black-guard and his minions, I would want it to work this way. :-)
* of course, Smite also works with Ranged Weapons now...8-|
On the # of usages needed to do this: activating Aura of Justice uses *2* Smite usages, meaning if you also want to Smite the sucker yourself, you will be using 3 Smites. You *max out* at 7 Smites/day at 19th level. So this is basically a "BBEG only" ability for the most part. Also notice: There is *NO* Feat giving any way to increase your Smites/day (only Channel Energy).
I still think the 'normal' (non-doubled) Smite is quite good enough for fighting Outsiders, Undead & Dragons, especially given that Smites bypass *all* DR, not to mention the Paladins' 14th level Aura grants her own and all allies (<=10') attacks Good alignment ALL THE TIME, not just on Smites.
So the pally gets to party like a rockstar against one or two enemies during the course of a gaming session...One enemy per two levels per day, actually.
Hydro, Smite maxes out at 7/day and no Feats exist to increase that,
so using Aura of Justice and Smiting himself allows for only *2* Smites for all allies <=10' and 1 more additional for Paladin herself only. Your position (which I'm sympathetic with) is weaked by not adhering to the actual facts.Honestly, I think even classing this bonus as an Enhancement bonus would do much to balance it, since it tend to be 'over-writing' pre-existing bonuses, and thus the net difference would not be as much as a full "CHA->att, LVL->dmg" bonus.
I look forward to Jason's take on this. I think the wording on the Aura of Justice (which doesn't work like an Aura as written) could in fact be an error, which would go some distance to balancing the ability.
|
One enemy per two levels per day, actually.
You mean one enemy per 3 levels per day. 1, 4, 7, etc.
Apart from that, carry on.
Also notice: There is *NO* Feat giving any way to increase your Smites/day (only Channel Energy).
Yep, I saw that too. A very deliberate design choice, I suspect.
I also agree that I'd prefer it that the smiting ability granted by the aura was contingent on the paladin staying in the fight and conscious. I like the idea of the paladin having to be a figurehead to have the ability work, with the granted smite ending if the paladin was knocked unconscious, killed, or forced to quit the battlefield in some way. It's for the same reason I'd prefer that the shared smite was all against the same target; that way you get the 'Everybody, with me! Ataaaaaack!' thing happening, which seems to me to be cool and in-character for paladins.
One enemy per two levels per day, actually.You mean one enemy per 3 levels per day. 1, 4, 7, etc.
Apart from that, carry on.
You're correct, I was thinking of lay on hands.
Instead of "granting" the ability, having it work like a normal Aura and be a bonus that doesn't persist out of it's area-of-effect would help alot too
This would be a good change,
On the # of usages needed to do this: activating Aura of Justice uses *2* Smite usages, meaning if you also want to Smite the sucker yourself, you will be using 3 Smites. You *max out* at 7 Smites/day at 19th level. So this is basically a "BBEG only" ability for the most part.
Also notice: There is *NO* Feat giving any way to increase your Smites/day (only Channel Energy).
..and this is correct.
It's still a game-breaking power (which I use as a term above and beyond "broken", which is in turn above and beyond merely "overpowered").
The problem is taking an instantaneous per-attack power and making it a persistent every-attack-you-make power. There is an exponential difference in power between the two even before we start talking about aura of justice.
|
|
One enemy per two levels per day, actually.You mean one enemy per 3 levels per day. 1, 4, 7, etc.
Apart from that, carry on.
Also notice: There is *NO* Feat giving any way to increase your Smites/day (only Channel Energy).Yep, I saw that too. A very deliberate design choice, I suspect.
I also agree that I'd prefer it that the smiting ability granted by the aura was contingent on the paladin staying in the fight and conscious. I like the idea of the paladin having to be a figurehead to have the ability work, with the granted smite ending if the paladin was knocked unconscious, killed, or forced to quit the battlefield in some way. It's for the same reason I'd prefer that the shared smite was all against the same target; that way you get the 'Everybody, with me! Ataaaaaack!' thing happening, which seems to me to be cool and in-character for paladins.
I'm thinking about it and I dig what you're saying, but IRL they did prop El Cid up there for one last postmortem cavalry charge.
Unless that foe happens to not be evil.
The paladin now outclasses the spellcaster in damage against all single foes now, not just undead and outsiders.
Also true. Elementals are still a pain in the ass, as are all those Chaos/Law-aligned outsiders (fomorians and slaadi and such) who manage to be murderous jerks without being "evil".
I'm thinking about it and I dig what you're saying, but IRL they did prop El Cid up there for one last postmortem cavalry charge.
Yeah, but are you AGAINST an rule-mechanic justification for enthusiastic but less-than-pure followers re-animating their Paladin leader as Undead (against his will) solely to get access to the Aura of Smitin' Justice goodies? :-)
|
|
I'm thinking about it and I dig what you're saying, but IRL they did prop El Cid up there for one last postmortem cavalry charge.Yeah, but are you AGAINST an rule-mechanic justification for enthusiastic but less-than-pure followers re-animating their Paladin leader as Undead (against his will) solely to get access to the Aura of Smitin' Justice goodies? :-)
I'm Ninjaiguana, and I approve this rotting, funny-smelling message. :D
|
I'm thinking about it and I dig what you're saying, but IRL they did prop El Cid up there for one last postmortem cavalry charge.Yeah, but are you AGAINST an rule-mechanic justification for enthusiastic but less-than-pure followers re-animating their Paladin leader as Undead (against his will) solely to get access to the Aura of Smitin' Justice goodies? :-)
Errrr for great justice?
|
|
I'm thinking about it and I dig what you're saying, but IRL they did prop El Cid up there for one last postmortem cavalry charge.Yeah, but are you AGAINST an rule-mechanic justification for enthusiastic but less-than-pure followers re-animating their Paladin leader as Undead (against his will) solely to get access to the Aura of Smitin' Justice goodies? :-)
HELL NO!!!
Woh abow th' templar ghost in Indiana Jones?Don't tell me he couldn't wup ass for th' lord just coz he was a holygram!
|
|
I'm Ninjaiguana, and I approve this rotting, funny-smelling message. :DI'm thinking about it and I dig what you're saying, but IRL they did prop El Cid up there for one last postmortem cavalry charge.Yeah, but are you AGAINST an rule-mechanic justification for enthusiastic but less-than-pure followers re-animating their Paladin leader as Undead (against his will) solely to get access to the Aura of Smitin' Justice goodies? :-)
I'm sure they had some frankinsence or myrrh and whatnot.
|
|
Yeah but the alternative is unthinkable.
You got this dead guy jostled around by a galloping horse, floating corpsebiscuits hither and thither....
and it's the damn middle ages, so they don't have gasmasks yet.
Pocket full o' posies ain't gonna do a damn thing for that.
You need myrrh.
Oh, yes.
Myrrh.
Back on the original subject of Paladins, I do have a question that I would like some feed back on.
I'm kinda on the boat of Smite Evil being overpowered, being that the only restricting factor is the number of times per day that it can be used.
I'm running a Pathfinder game right now (Rise of the Runelords) using the Pathfinder Beta. I'm planing on switching over, but one of my players is playing a Paladin. She has the Extra Smiting feat. See where I'm going with this...
My question is whether or not an extra two smites per day would push things into the ludicrous zone?
Your feedback would be greatly appreciated.
|
Back on the original subject of Paladins, I do have a question that I would like some feed back on.
I'm kinda on the boat of Smite Evil being overpowered, being that the only restricting factor is the number of times per day that it can be used.
I'm running a Pathfinder game right now (Rise of the Runelords) using the Pathfinder Beta. I'm planing on switching over, but one of my players is playing a Paladin. She has the Extra Smiting feat. See where I'm going with this...
My question is whether or not an extra two smites per day would push things into the ludicrous zone?
Your feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Personally I believe the smite feature is very powerful, although pretty balanced (especially considering it's only a few enemies per day). That being said, I'd tell the paladin he or she needs to choose a new feat. While it doesn't do much with smite, they could choose extra mercy, extra lay on hands, or extra channeling. Just my two cents on the issue.
P.S. staying out of the thread until I play / DM a character with the new smite and get a good feel of it. It is powerful, but the old smite simply was not good enough.
|
|
Back on the original subject of Paladins, I do have a question that I would like some feed back on.
I'm kinda on the boat of Smite Evil being overpowered, being that the only restricting factor is the number of times per day that it can be used.
I'm running a Pathfinder game right now (Rise of the Runelords) using the Pathfinder Beta. I'm planing on switching over, but one of my players is playing a Paladin. She has the Extra Smiting feat. See where I'm going with this...
My question is whether or not an extra two smites per day would push things into the ludicrous zone?
Your feedback would be greatly appreciated.
(lol)
my cleric has a divine feat (edit: "divine ward") that allows heal spells at range; channel energy makes this look like a whisper on a scream so....
@Valcrist: Well, Paizo obviously felt Extra Smiting wasn't appropriate to include in the Core Game, even though they were obviously familiar with the concept.
I would just talk to your player about it, show them how powerful the new Smite is, and see if they'd accept taking another Feat instead when they convert. Extra Channeling allows them extra *Channeling* usages separate from their Smites, so that could be a good way to go if they like the idea of Channeling. (With the Channeling Smite Feat, these Channel-only usages can still be used offensively parallel with normal melee attacks, basically "Smite Lite" that would probably do the same or MORE damage, but for one attack only.) Extra *Smites* just seem way too over-powering for the Aura of Justice thing people were discussing, while taking Extra Channel/Channeled Smite doesn't have that problem.
Sharing your experience about the doubling vs. certain enemies and the peristence of the Smite ability outside of the 10' range (or the effect of house-ruling those as people have suggested here) would be interesting to read.
How about the fact that in 3.5 after 4-5th level, you got nothing in the paladin class? That you were better off going fighter for the bonus feats?
You got more healing, you got more smites, your smites got better, and your horse got better. And those were your main schticks.
Paladin was in fact one of the classes that strongly encouraged you to stick with it rather than going off to the first PrC you fulfilled the prerequisites for.
I would let them keep Extra Smite. However, I would also houserule Smite Evil back to one attack per use.
Again, I would love to hear some designer feedback that changed my mind on this, but I am currently of the opinion that allowing it to work as written would be bat-shit-wacko insane on its own. Whether or not you then allow them to take a feat for an extra two smites per day hardly seems relevant; obliterating four encounters per day really isn't that much more disruptive than obliterating two encounters per day.
Yes, paladins didn't lose anything. You know why? Because the 3.5 paladin SUCKED. It was, at best, a 4-level dip class that you took on your way to something better. Pathfinder paladin is actually worth playing.
I never heard this complaint prior to the Pathfinder RPG coming out.
I've heard plenty about the fighter, bard, monk, ranger... but not the paladin.
Can anyone suggest some older threads, whether here or EN World or elsewhere, where people expressed this apparently commonly accepted opinion that the 3.5 paladin sucked?
Yeah...but...paladins aren't what I would consider a knight. They are holy in nature....so I can see the undead...and the demons...but when were religions anti-dragon?
Well, there was this guy called St. George...
And you weren't comparing the classes. You were stating that two of them got shafted and the paladin got shiny new toys. That's an opinion, not a comparison.
How about this: the 3.5 paladin was more powerful than the 3.5 fighter.
The Pathfinder paladin got shinier toys than the Pathfinder fighter (comparing each to their original 3.5 incarnation as the baseline).
Where does that leave the Pathfinder fighter, compared to the Pathfinder paladin?
I'm not sure if the fighter's +4 to attacks and damage winds up being that much better than the barbarian's ten rage powers.
I think it's probably better, but not HUGELY better (which is good because the fighter was weaker than the barb to start with).
@Valcrist: Well, Paizo obviously felt Extra Smiting wasn't appropriate to include in the Core Game, even though they were obviously familiar with the concept.
I would just talk to your player about it, show them how powerful the new Smite is, and see if they'd accept taking another Feat instead when they convert. Extra Channeling allows them extra *Channeling* usages separate from their Smites, so that could be a good way to go if they like the idea of Channeling. (With the Channeling Smite Feat, these Channel-only usages can still be used offensively parallel with normal melee attacks, basically "Smite Lite" that would probably do the same or MORE damage, but for one attack only.) Extra *Smites* just seem way too over-powering for the Aura of Justice thing people were discussing, while taking Extra Channel/Channeled Smite doesn't have that problem.
Sharing your experience about the doubling vs. certain enemies and the peristence of the Smite ability outside of the 10' range (or the effect of house-ruling those as people have suggested here) would be interesting to read.
Thank you, and all the other contributors, for your well thought out advice. I to plan on reserving judgment on the new Smite Evil until I see it in action, which should be Monday. Perhaps we're all just blowing things out of proportion.
If you think about it a 13th level Fighter gets +5 to hit and +7 to damage against every enemy from Weapon Training, and the Weapon Focus feat tree. An average Paladin (CHA 22) gets +6 to hit and +13 to damage against one enemy. I'd still go for the Fighter. Although at higher levels things start to lean towards the Paladin.
Well...Smite does seem to get abusive at high levels...having looked over it, mulled it over and spoken with one of my groups GM's I think we've come up with an equitable solution that may work for our group.
Instead of level x2 damage vs Evil Outsiders/Undead/Dragons were gonna try x2 Cha Bonus to hit for the same groups o nasties...
Only time will tell if its more or less balancing but it certainly seems good on paper
Dragons are an iconic villain in D&D, so it makes sense on some out-of-game level for the paladin to rock against them.
I don't know how much sense it makes in terms of the metaphysics of the world, however. Undead and evil outsiders aren't just evil-aligned, they are INNATELY evil, by their very nature.
Dragons may have an "always" alignment, but this is also true of lots of other creatures like werewolves, driders, or evil fairies.
This especially doesn't make sense in settings with non-standard takes on dragons, such as Eberron.
|
Can anyone suggest some older threads, whether here or EN World or elsewhere, where people expressed this apparently commonly accepted opinion that the 3.5 paladin sucked?
If all your class can do is cure disease once per week, summon a warpony in the middle of dungeon and cast cure light wounds at lvl 10, then it's a good sign that you suck goat's privates.
|
|
The Aura of Justice becomes even more fun if the party also includes a bard and a ranger.
And yes, barbarians are weak. A 17th level barbarian gets a +3 bonus to hit and a +4 bonus to damage (while using a two handed weapon). A level 17 bard can give a +4 bonus to attack and damage to anyone who can hear or see him. Although Barbarians are quite strong on the first few levels before the fighter starts to get his damage bonuses.
Barbarian rage powers.. are a joke.
Ahh crap, you're right.
I'm rereading the list now (not just skimming it), and seeing that all the good powers either take your move action (which makes them useless) or can only be used once per fight (in ADDITION to consuming your swift action).
A once-per-rage effect is cool and fun, but can't be counted as a real increase in class power. Not when compared to abilities that function every attack, every round.
Mighty Swing and Clear Mind only work once per encounter but will see regular use in spite of this; they're both really good. Knockback looks quite useful but it does consume an attack action. And, of course, some of the always-on powers (like Increased Damage Reduction) are nice.
However, the only solid power which remains a no-strings-attached swift action, it appears, is Animal Furry. It's also the only good power that's available at 1st level.
I foresee a lot of hungry barbarians in The Pathfinder RPG's future.
If all your class can do is cure disease once per week, summon a warpony in the middle of dungeon and cast cure light wounds at lvl 10, then it's a good sign that you suck goat's privates.
Can anyone suggest some older threads, whether here or EN World or elsewhere, where people expressed this apparently commonly accepted opinion that the 3.5 paladin sucked?
Merely flippant exaggerations don't count. And saying a 10th-level paladin can cast cure light wounds is a flippant exaggeration; or have you forgotten about lay on hands, for level x Cha hp (so ~40 for a Pal10, comparable to 10 CLWs, with no AoO, parceled out exactly as you need it)? Have you forgotten about smite evil, which has some pretty nice synergy with that warpony, allowing you to deal some 3d8+40 damage or thereabouts in a single lance attack, somewhere between half and a third of a CR 10 monsters' hp? Have you forgotten that some of the most insane damage dealing combos on the different minmaxing forums relied on smite?
|
|
Barbarian rage powers.. are a joke.Ahh crap, you're right.
I'm rereading the list now (not just skimming it), and seeing that all the good powers either take your move action (which makes them useless) or can only be used once per fight (in ADDITION to consuming your swift action).
A once-per-rage effect is cool and fun, but can't be counted as a real increase in class power. Not when compared to abilities that function every attack, every round.
Mighty Swing and Clear Mind only work once per encounter but will see regular use in spite of this; they're both really good. Knockback looks quite useful but it does consume an attack action. And, of course, some of the always-on powers (like Increased Damage Reduction) are nice.
However, the only solid power which remains a no-strings-attached swift action, it appears, is Animal Furry. It's also the only good power that's available at 1st level.
I foresee a lot of hungry barbarians in The Pathfinder RPG's future.
Reading through it, I actually see quite a few powers that I definitely would want as a barbarian. Animal Fury, Clear Mind, Fearless Rage, Improved Damage Reduction, Internal Fortitude, Knockback, Mighty Swing (It really can make the difference in a fight), No Escape, Roused Anger, Superstition, Swift Foot, and Unexpected Strike. That seems pretty close to the 10 total rage powers, and I see all of those as really good powers.
I do however agree that some of the once-per-rage effects, such as Powerful Blow or Surprise Accuracy seem sub-par. That being said the barbarian is going to have alot more utility than the Fighter will, higher hit points, more skills, nifty abilities and immunities while raging.
|
|
I'm rereading the list now (not just skimming it), and seeing that all the good powers either take your move action (which makes them useless) or can only be used once per fight (in ADDITION to consuming your swift action).
A once-per-rage effect is cool and fun, but can't be counted as a real increase in class power. Not when compared to abilities that function every attack, every round.
Mighty Swing and Clear Mind only work once per encounter but will see regular use in spite of this; they're both really good. Knockback looks quite useful but it does consume an attack action. And, of course, some of the always-on powers (like Increased Damage Reduction) are nice.
However, the only solid power which remains a no-strings-attached swift action, it appears, is Animal Furry. It's also the only good power that's available at 1st level.
I foresee a lot of hungry barbarians in The Pathfinder RPG's future.
Surprise Accuracy isn't godawful, though it's not great. And Unexpected Strike isn't too bad. And I could see situations where Strength Surge would come in handy. Fearless Rage isn't bad when you consider Heroes's Feast doesn't block fear effects any more. And Internal Fortitude may see some use. It's kind of annoying that so many of the powers are once per rage, though. If they'd thought using them at will was too good, maybe they should have said that if you used the powers more than once, you had to burn extra rounds of rage, or something.
|
|
If all your class can do is cure disease once per week, summon a warpony in the middle of dungeon and cast cure light wounds at lvl 10, then it's a good sign that you suck goat's privates.Can anyone suggest some older threads, whether here or EN World or elsewhere, where people expressed this apparently commonly accepted opinion that the 3.5 paladin sucked?
Merely flippant exaggerations don't count. And saying a 10th-level paladin can cast cure light wounds is a flippant exaggeration; or have you forgotten about lay on hands, for level x Cha hp (so ~40 for a Pal10, comparable to 10 CLWs, with no AoO, parceled out exactly as you need it)? Have you forgotten about smite evil, which has some pretty nice synergy with that warpony, allowing you to deal some 3d8+40 damage or thereabouts in a single lance attack, somewhere between half and a third of a CR 10 monsters' hp? Have you forgotten that some of the most insane damage dealing combos on the different minmaxing forums relied on smite?
I believe that was the largest problem with the old Paladin. They were a one-hit-wonder. Yes they could charge in and deal alot of damage on that one attack, but after that they really weren't as good as any of the other combatants. Add to it that this was only possible when you could charge, weren't killed by the charge (large reach) or the enemy wasn't evil.
For a good read about why the paladin needed a redo, look for the Rebalanced Paladin threads (I believe there are two of them) on the Wizard's forums. There was a attempt to redo the paladin because he lagged behind the other melee classes. I can look for a link if you would like.
For a good read about why the paladin needed a redo, look for the Rebalanced Paladin threads (I believe there are two of them) on the Wizard's forums. There was a attempt to redo the paladin because he lagged behind the other melee classes. I can look for a link if you would like.
Yes, please. For all my snippiness in the above post, I honestly am interested in the problems people experienced with paladins, because in my experience there honestly wasn't any. (Except perhaps the annoyance as a DM that a big, ostensibly impressive monster could be killed far too quickly if it left itself open to the paladin's charge.)
|
|
Can anyone suggest some older threads, whether here or EN World or elsewhere, where people expressed this apparently commonly accepted opinion that the 3.5 paladin sucked?
Merely flippant exaggerations don't count. And saying a 10th-level paladin can cast cure light wounds is a flippant exaggeration; or have you forgotten about lay on hands, for level x Cha hp (so ~40 for a Pal10, comparable to 10 CLWs, with no AoO, parceled out exactly as you need it)? Have you forgotten about smite evil, which has some pretty nice synergy with that warpony, allowing you to deal some 3d8+40 damage or thereabouts in a single lance attack, somewhere between half and a third of a CR 10 monsters' hp? Have you forgotten that some of the most insane damage dealing combos on the different minmaxing forums relied on smite?
EDIT: This post may sound very snarky, but it's honestly not snark directed at you, or anyone else; it's just a style I seem to get into some times. No offense is intended.
After 4th level, a paladin gets extra uses of smite evil and of remove disease, and that's it for class abilities. Remove disease is an absolute joke; per week abilities are totally worthless when any decent cleric can cast it multiple times per day. As for smite evil, it only works on one attack, and you don't generally have time to spend the rounds detecting evil to make sure what you're hitting it actually a valid target. Plus, getting your level to bonus damage on one hit per round is a joke compared to the bonus to damage a barbarian will have at an equivalent level from rage on all attacks they make. Even a fighter gets a +2 to hit/+4 to damage which is on all the time. You get...+1 to hit with Weapon Focus, and on maybe as many as 5 - that's right, a whole 5 - attacks per day (and this is at 20th level, mind you) you get a decent bonus to damage. Assuming that your target is evil, of course.
Example at 20th level:
Barbarian: +4 to hit, +6 to damage, +80 hit points, +4 Will saves. They can do this for 18+(6xCon mod) rounds per day; a minimum of 42 rounds, assuming a pre-rage Con of 10. Hint: a 20th level barbarian will not have a pre-rage Con of 10.
Fighter: +2 to hit, +4 to damage. Double threat range, since they have feats coming out of their ears and Improved Critical is a given. You suck, debatably as much as the paladin, but probably not.
Paladin: 5 attacks - not rounds - per day, +Cha (say maybe 5, if you're not nerfing your physical stats) to hit, +20 to damage against an evil foe. You get to do a grand total of +100 damage per day - at 20th level - *if* all your smite attacks hit, and *if* you didn't accidentally waste any of your smite attacks. Plus, you need all the same stats as the fighter and the barbarian and Charisma into the bargain. You have greater MAD for a loss in efficiency. You can, at 20th level, lay on hands for maybe 100 hit points per day. But you'll never bother, because the cleric's just better at that sort of thing. You have a decent 4th level spell in holy sword, but it's too bad you had to take 14 levels in paladin to get it. Go be a cleric with the Glory domain instead. You have better saves than the fighter and the barbarian, but nobody cares because you're not a credible threat. (Neither's the fighter, but whatever.)
Oh, and you never, ever get to use your warhorse. You are travelling in dungeons. You do not get to ride down their halls. The number of adventures where using a mount is feasible can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Go take Spirited Charge if you want; you'll never get to use it. Also, your mount is made of paper. It does not use any variation on your hit points; it has at most 12 Hit Dice. Its hit points at level 15+ are 12d8+36. It will have, on average, 90 hit points at level 15, and it never improves after that point. It gets to use your base saves, but doesn't get your paladin mojo, giving it 20th level saves of Fort +15, Ref +7, Will +7. It will fail any and all saving throws that actually matter, and it will die. I suppose you could give it magic items, but that means you're crippling yourself paying to keep your horse alive, and you will help it survive perhaps 2 or 3 rounds longer. And if it dies, you take a penalty for the next month! What a great class ability, eh?
Oh, you can technically turn undead. *snerk* Yeah, go look at how bad turning is for a proper cleric, subtract 3 from the numbers, and never speak of it again.
And yes, you can get a cheesy smite min-max build using half-celestials and the like; but you can get better damage builds with a barbarian, with less trouble. Plus, if your opponents aren't evil, all that min-maxed damage goes down the drain, wheras the barbarian is happy as a clam whether he's beating up on Count Dracula or Sven the Happy Lawful Good Norwegian.
|
|
For a good read about why the paladin needed a redo, look for the Rebalanced Paladin threads (I believe there are two of them) on the Wizard's forums. There was a attempt to redo the paladin because he lagged behind the other melee classes. I can look for a link if you would like.Yes, please. For all my snippiness in the above post, I honestly am interested in the problems people experienced with paladins, because in my experience there honestly wasn't any. (Except perhaps the annoyance as a DM that a big, ostensibly impressive monster could be killed far too quickly if it left itself open to the paladin's charge.)
I was able to easily find the second thread on it here.
I'll keep looking for the original.
Edit: Found it much faster than I thought I would. You should be able to see how this rebalanced version was playtested versus other classes at the time (remember this was in 3.5, not PFRPG), but it also includes reason why to rebalance/remake the paladin.
Here are *17* Rage Powers I would consider taking. (A 20th level Barbarian only gets 10, remember)
The Dodge' Powers are Move Actions but PERSIST, so are used at start of battle
(like Readying an Attack until Enemy closes + your Move Action would be wasted anyways)
Intimidate as a Move Action seems fine, you can still attack once vs. adjacent opponents
Overall, the Rage Powers seem to exemplify a LATERAL THINKING to Feats:
Knockback: Imp/Grt Bullrush, Clear Mind: Grt Iron Will, Animal Fury: Imp/Grt Grapple, Guarded Stance/Rolling Dodge: Combat Expertise ?, No Escape: Step Up, Mighty Swing: Crit Mastery, Terrifying Howl: Dazzling Display.
They are not the EXACT same as the Feats, but can in many ways be BETTER,
and in fact Synergize with certain Feats in ways that Fighters can't exactly match.
There doesn't need to be 2 Fighter Feat classes. Multiclass if you want.
Clear Mind (8th, swift action 1/x rage): great, LATERAL TO FEATS
Fearless(12th): good
Guarded Stance/Rolling Dodge (move action but PERSISTS for <CON> rounds): OK dodge bonus
Intimidating Glare (move action)/ Terrifying Howl (8th, standard action) are good
Knockback (1/x round but can still Full Attack): good, synegizes with Strength Surge, LATERAL TO FEATS
Mighty Swing (12th, immediate action 1/x rage) great, LATERAL TO FEATS
No Escape (1/x rage): good
Powerful Blow (swift action): OK, works with Might Swing (but uses 2 rounds' swift action)
Roused Anger: good, especially because it means all the 1/x rage abilities can be used twice in one encounter
Scent: good bypass to Invis, etc (great flavor too)
Strenth Surge (immediate action): non-Combat STR checks AND CMB/CMD (defensively @ immediate)
Superstition: good/great IF you don't have a bard or other morale-based Saving Throw buffer
Surprise Accuracy (swift action): OK, similar to Powerful Blow in that both only help a SINGLE attack (unfortunately)
Unexpected Strike (8th): GREAT, exemplifies LATERAL THINKING compared to Feats
|
|
Real experiences with Paladin ? Sure.
Back in a day, a mate ran a 3.5 campaign for us. We were kinda new to the system (so was the DM) and as a result, we made really weird class choices. One friend went with the Psychic Warrior, one with the Paladin (and I pulled out a real stunt in stupidity department and went with a Cleric/Wizard, but shhhh.)
At lvl 10 the disparity between PsyWar and Paladin was so bad that it really did hurt.
Smite Evil ? Sure. Fighter/Barb rolls a natural 1 on an attack - well, happens, one attack less. Paladin rolls a 1 ? Oops, there goes one use of your iconic ability !
Mount ? Used once. Died to a cone of cold. Never used again.
Spellcasting ? In D&D you either have full spellcasting progression or a VERY GOOD REASON not to have it. Duskblades and Beguilers have that reason (kinda), Ranger doesn't need magic anyway and Paladin ... *tumbleweed*
Oh, and the LG and code thing. Basically - what's the point of having to bear with Mr. By The Book if he can't really bring anything to the table ? In PFRPG Paladin is so good that you literally WANT to bend over and go nice and legit just to have that guy at your side. And I like it. I like that you can get a real kick out of playing a class so restricted in RP department.
In first edition rangers got to do +1 damage per level against their 'favoured enemy' (giants & all evil huamnoids)(of course most games were 10th level or lower). As the editions roll on I see the Paladin has now stolen that ability and the poor old ranger doesnt even seem to get discussed in a comparison of melee classes.
I am still interested to read Jasons reasoning for this power boost & the lay on hands-
a 12th level 20 cha paladin starting with say 120hp's fighting the BBEG (undead etc) can give himself back on average 21 hp a round for 11 rounds (thats 231hp) while smiting him for +5 to hit +24 damage (and his weapon will at least be holy). So in a straight melee fight he is going to be around for 351hps of damage. Of course the Pallys base fort and Will saves are now +13 (ref doesnt matter so much as that weakness is taken out by the hp's) so he has a good chance of avoiding those magical effects that debilitate him.
How does a 12th level paladin go againts a 12th level evil (not undead or anything) barbarian each with say +2 gear in a straight fight?
(I know this isnt a totally legitimate comparison as PC's fight monsters not each other)
|
|
There's also the interesting point that out of the four currently published and completed adventure paths, when you look at the final bosses, the paladin's smite would get the double damage kicking in on
none out of four! While one is an outsider, they lack the evil subtype, and so are not a valid target for the double damage version of smite evil. The others aren't even that close.
I can't speak to Council of Thieves, since as I'm going to be playing in it in a few months, I'm trying to avoid spoilering myself on it as much as possible.
Dragons are an iconic villain in D&D, so it makes sense on some out-of-game level for the paladin to rock against them.
I don't know how much sense it makes in terms of the metaphysics of the world, however. Undead and evil outsiders aren't just evil-aligned, they are INNATELY evil, by their very nature.
Dragons may have an "always" alignment, but this is also true of lots of other creatures like werewolves, driders, or evil fairies.
This especially doesn't make sense in settings with non-standard takes on dragons, such as Eberron.
In a DragonLance game it might not sure were else though....