Paladin balance comments for a poll please...


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 102 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

selios wrote:
Yes, you're right, for statistics in the MM. But what about statistics in an adventure ? What about an adventure fighting drows ? Or demons ? It will be a lot different.

Actually that +30-40% number I mentioned was for opponents like demons. Against opponents that are just evil, and don't fall into one of the categories the paladin gets to double their damage bonus on, Smite evil only just barely lets them beat out a fighter for raw damage.

selios wrote:
But still, that's not my problem. How can I make a big climax end campaign fighting, without the paladin killing my BBEG too quickly? How can this ability can be useful without actually disrupting the climax battle?

That's the thing though, the Paladin won't actually be killing most BBEGs all that much quicker than a Fighter would be. Throw anything but a Demon, evil Dragon, or undead BBEG at the paladin and they're almost dead even, and even when the Paladin can deal his full damage, he's only shaving off about 1 round in every 3. So if the fight would have taken 5 rounds, it might take 4, 14, and it might take 11. It's a bit quicker, yeah, but not so much faster that it's impossible to compensate for.


selios wrote:
Smite Evil doesn't give you a penalty to hit

Neither does Power Attack with the right feats.

Anyway, here's an easy answer for you:
Miss chance. A single displacement effect will ruin the paladin's day.

Here's another easy answer for you:
Keep away from the paladin. Solid fog, reverse gravity, fly, slow, wall of force, stun him, daze him, nauseate him.

Here's another easy answer for you:
Make yourself immune to his attacks in ways other than DR. Ironguard, for example.

Here's another easy answer for you:
Take away his weapon (disarm, sunder). He can still smite with his fist, but he's going to miss a lot more often and provoke an AOO every time he attacks.

Here's another easy answer:
Keep him busy with minions.

I could go on and on. Paladins aren't Superman. You don't need kryptonite to counter them. You don't even need to do anything you don't already do to counter other strong melee attackers (every single one of the things I listed above work just as well against any melee attacker, and about 80% of them work against ranged attackers as well).

Dark Archive

selios wrote:
Zurai wrote:
Smite Evil is actually less powerful than 3.5 Power Attack. I find it amusing that people cry "oh how can my NPCs handle one character hitting for +20 to +40 damage per hit?" when they had to deal with every single melee character hitting for +20 to +80 damage per hit in 3.5.

Smite Evil doesn't give you a penalty to hit, (it gives you even a bonus).

If a fighter wants to make a +20 or +40 damage on attacks, he will hit considerably less often than a paladin using smite evil (unless the BBEG has a very low AC).
And nothing stop the paladin from using power attack on top of smite evil.
Also, I think that Power Attack is still too powerful, in 3.5 or PRPG, but that's another point.

You see, the problem is you are assuming every badguy is evil...

This falls under the "Hey guess what, not all villains are evil. Some are just obnoxious pricks who love to get free money."

That doesn't mean that you can't have evil guys, just that you can change it up.

Also, cross posting from the other thread mentioned...

The most handsome man on this board...ME! wrote:

Things to remember about smite evil:

1) It has the inherent flaw of being a martial attack. The stuff that gave the Paladin a problem before (Prismatic Sphere, Prismatic Wall, Ect. Ect.) still give them problems.

2) Its only useful in certain situations. Obviously Evil is the most encountered type of creature, but there are ways of creating just as horrible a campaign, but with Chaotic Neutral or neutral creatures. You can build encounters that give the other classes a chance to shine.

3) Yes, double damage is good, but its not everything. I had a player use his smite on dretches, rather than on the boss monster, figuring the dretches were the bigger threat. Granted, he didn't know better, but its the same thing. If you use smite on who you THINK is the biggest threat, you might be wrong when another target presents itself. Clever encounter design used once in awhile, will defeat a smite happy paladin. Obviously over use will be seen as DM dickery, but once in awhile is okay.

These are points that are quite valid. I find it funny when people say "I have to rewrite my entire encounter for smite." At most you just have to max out the BBEG's hit points to give him a round or two once the paladin actually gets in there. If a paladin went up to a boss in Rise of the Runelords (and you KNOW who I'm talking about) he'd be meat in full plate within a round or two. Smite or not.


Zurai wrote:
I could go on and on. Paladins aren't Superman. You don't need kryptonite to counter them. You don't even need to do anything you don't already do to counter other strong melee attackers (every single one of the things I listed above work just as well against any melee attacker).

Or hey, go way outside the box and hit a Paladin's real weakness, their Code of Honor!

Step 1: Kidnap a low level, good aligned caster, and force them to cast Shield Other upon you (or buy Rings of Friend Shield, and invest in small innocent children with low will saves).

Step 2: Inform the Paladin of this fact.

Step 3: For added hilarity, point out to the Paladin that allowing his friends to harm you will, without a doubt, result in the death of whoever is on the other end of that ring/spell.

Step 4: Popcorn and a show.

(And no, I wouldn't actually advise you do this to your players. Unless the BBEG is a hyper intelligent Demon/Dragon/Lich, and then really, you're just staying in character, so who can blame you.)


Zurai wrote:

Neither does Power Attack with the right feats.

Anyway, here's an easy answer for you:
Miss chance. A single displacement effect will ruin the paladin's day.

Here's another easy answer for you:
Keep away from the paladin. Solid fog, reverse gravity, fly, slow, wall of force, stun him, daze him, nauseate him.

Here's another easy answer for you:
Make yourself immune to his attacks in ways other than DR. Ironguard, for example.

Here's another easy answer for you:
Take away his weapon (disarm, sunder). He can still smite with his fist, but he's going to miss a lot more often and provoke an AOO every time he attacks.

Here's another easy answer:
Keep him busy with minions.

I could go on and on. Paladins aren't Superman. You don't need kryptonite to counter them. You don't even need to do anything you don't already do to counter other strong melee attackers (every single one of the things I listed above work just as well against any melee attacker, and about 80% of them work against ranged attackers as well).

Where are the feats which can compensate a 20-point penalty of Power Attack ? If it's not in the PRD or 3.5 OGL, I'm just not interested.

Also the options you're talking about are equally useful against any fighter-type character.

Anyway, I don't think you understand my problem. I want the paladin to be able to use its smite evil against the BBEG, without killing him too quickly and easily.
I don't want to make him not able to use his ability. He should be able to use it. It's a moment where he could and should shine, not being rendered useless while his companions kill the boss.


Dissinger wrote:

You see, the problem is you are assuming every badguy is evil...

This falls under the "Hey guess what, not all villains are evil. Some are just obnoxious pricks who love to get free money."

That doesn't mean that you can't have evil guys, just that you can change it up.

Also, cross posting from the other thread mentioned...

I do not assume that all vilains are evil. I just want to be ablee to use a demon or evil dragon as an ending boss, without the paladin killing him too quickly. Also like I already said, I don't want to steal the paladin of his abilities. I will not design adventures for a group with a paladin, where there is no evil guy, just because if I use evil, he will kill them too easily. He must battle evil, he must use smite evil, if not, what's the point of playing a paladin ?

Dark Archive

selios wrote:
Dissinger wrote:

You see, the problem is you are assuming every badguy is evil...

This falls under the "Hey guess what, not all villains are evil. Some are just obnoxious pricks who love to get free money."

That doesn't mean that you can't have evil guys, just that you can change it up.

Also, cross posting from the other thread mentioned...

I do not assume that all vilains are evil. I just want to be ablee to use a demon or evil dragon as an ending boss, without the paladin killing him too quickly. Also like I already said, I don't want to steal the paladin of his abilities. I will not design adventures for a group with a paladin, where there is no evil guy, just because if I use evil, he will kill them too easily. He must battle evil, he must use smite evil, if not, what's the point of playing a paladin ?

Tell you what, the day that paladin gets into the dragon's face, without taking a huge amount of damage in the process, I'll believe you about how horrible it is to be a paladin.

And if you think that dragon's not going to exchange a full attack for the single attack the paladin got off with his smite, you're crazy. Especially if the Paladin hits and the dragon realizes he's a threat.

But that paladin can't be teleported there by the party wizard/sorceror/cleric/druid. He has to make it there on his own.

And if you argue otherwise, then its a case of good party tactics and in that case its okay for the Paladin to shine, because they players PUSHED him into that position. It was a team effort and they did it.

Dark Archive

selios wrote:

Where are the feats which can compensate a 20-point penalty of Power Attack ? If it's not in the PRD or 3.5 OGL, I'm just not interested.

Also the options you're talking about are equally useful against any fighter-type character.

That's the point. The standard tactics apply, the paladin just gets more satisfaction when he finally gets it off. It should be difficult to ply your trade because if it wasn't, adventurers wouldn't be needed.

Also, as its backwards compatible with 3.5 you have to accept that the existence of feats like Shocktroopers charge mean your argument holds less and less water. (which lets you lower AC instead of your to hit on the power attack, amazingly balanced as you have to PA for at least 5 on the turn you use it, and it must be part of a charge.)

Quote:

Anyway, I don't think you understand my problem. I want the paladin to be able to use its smite evil against the BBEG, without killing him too quickly and easily.

I don't want to make him not able to use his ability. He should be able to use it. It's a moment where he could and should shine, not being rendered useless while his companions kill the boss.

What we're saying, is I'm sorry you have to use intelligence encounter design once again. The fact that you suddenly have a paladin to deal with, means that they did something right.

Because a paladin is considered as heavily as a wizard now.

That smells of success.


selios wrote:
I do not assume that all vilains are evil. I just want to be ablee to use a demon or evil dragon as an ending boss, without the paladin killing him too quickly. Also like I already said, I don't want to steal the paladin of his abilities. I will not design adventures for a group with a paladin, where there is no evil guy, just because if I use evil, he will kill them too easily. He must battle evil, he must use smite evil, if not, what's the point of playing a paladin ?

Forget all the stuff about special tactics and how those particular types of foes tend to be smart enough to avoid the Paladin, yada yada.

Those are all good points, but as I pointed out above even if the foe just chooses to stand and fight the paladin mano e mano, it's only a 30-40% bump in damage for the paladin (over what a fighter would deal), shaving off at most a round or two from even a relatively long fight.

It seems like a huuuuuge bump compared to the paladins normal damage, but the paladin's normal damage starts out lower than a fighter of the same level.

EDIT: I found a small typo in the line calculating the Average, so I made a revised version of the chart. It's not a big difference, just a slight bump up at higher levels.

New Table (http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/2320/paladinvsfighter2.png)


Dissinger wrote:

Tell you what, the day that paladin gets into the dragon's face, without taking a huge amount of damage in the process, I'll believe you about how horrible it is to be a paladin.

And if you think that dragon's not going to exchange a full attack for the single attack the paladin got off with his smite, you're crazy. Especially if the Paladin hits and the dragon realizes he's a threat.

But that paladin can't be teleported there by the party wizard/sorceror/cleric/druid. He has to make it there on his own.

And if you argue otherwise, then its a case of good party tactics and in that case its okay for the Paladin to shine, because they players PUSHED him into that position. It was a team effort and they did it.

It will not be as horrible as being a fighter, or barbarian.

As for the paladin adding +40 damage on all attacks every round and ignoring any DR, plus the boost to AC and to hit, it's not something to be viewed as a standard fighter threat.

What single attack of the paladin ? Smite evil works with all attacks of the paladin.

PRD wrote:

Smite Evil (Su): Once per day, a paladin can call out to the powers of good to aid her in her struggle against evil. As a swift action, the paladin chooses one target within sight to smite. If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite. If the target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature, the bonus to damage increases to 2 points of damage per level the paladin possesses. Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess.

In addition, while smite evil is in effect, the paladin gains a deflection bonus equal to her Charisma modifier (if any) to her AC against attacks made by the target of the smite. If the paladin targets a creature that is not evil, the smite is wasted with no effect.

The smite evil effect remains until the target of the smite is dead or the next time the paladin rests and regains her uses of this ability. At 4th level, and at every three levels thereafter, the paladin may smite evil one additional time per day, as indicated on Table: Paladin, to a maximum of seven times per day at 19th level.

Am I reading the smite evil wrong ?

The paladin has to make on his own ? Yes, like other melee fighter type characters.

Dark Archive

selios wrote:

It will not be as horrible as being a fighter, or barbarian.

As for the paladin adding +40 damage on all attacks every round and ignoring any DR, plus the boost to AC and to hit, it's not something to be viewed as a standard fighter threat.

What single attack of the paladin ? Smite evil works with all attacks of the paladin.

Nice straw man.

I never said you'd be single attacking all the time.

Merely that in the time it took the Paladin to get to the front line, he's taken 8 times the attacks he's given out.

Who did more damage in that time?

Here's a hint, it wasn't the paladin.


Simple question - how would players of good characters feel facing off against NPCs that contain evil paladins that can smite good?

Has anybody tried this? Personally I think they are now overpowered and wonder if those that don't would feel the same way if they were their characters were vunerable to the paladin's attacks.

Dark Archive

Skullking wrote:

Simple question - how would players of good characters feel facing off against NPCs that contain evil paladins that can smite good?

Has anybody tried this? Personally I think they are now overpowered and wonder if those that don't would feel the same way if they were their characters were vunerable to the paladin's attacks.

I wouldn't mind at all.

Fair for fair.

That's a bit of a loaded bullet but it comes down to, Paladins should be feared for a reason.

All the base classes should be. The fact they were NOT is the problem.


Dissinger wrote:
Also, as its backwards compatible with 3.5 you have to accept that the existence of feats like Shocktroopers charge mean your argument holds less and less water. (which lets you lower AC instead of your to hit on the power attack, amazingly balanced as you have to PA for at least 5 on the turn you use it, and it must be part of a charge.)

Nope that's not the point. I use feats from 3.5 supplements that I want to use. I don't want to use all D&D and D20 books everywhere just because they're broken, even if they're balanced.

I don't know this shocktrooper feat. Before I want to balance it against other feats from PRPG, I want my PRPG feats and abilities to be balanced first.

Dissinger wrote:

What we're saying, is I'm sorry you have to use intelligence encounter design once again. The fact that you suddenly have a paladin to deal with, means that they did something right.

Because a paladin is considered as heavily as a wizard now.

That smells of success.

That smells of overpowered ability. Not saying that's the only overpowered ability.

I just ask again: "how can I balance a BBEvilG with the amount of damage a paladin can make ?" By raising artificially his HP ? Denying the use of smite by systematically disarming the paladin ? By making a BBneutralG ? Or whatever else ? The paladin's player will quicly become bored to not be able to use it, and go back playing a fighter.

Dark Archive

selios wrote:

That smells of overpowered ability. Not saying that's the only overpowered ability.

I just ask again: "how can I balance a BBEvilG with the amount of damage a paladin can make ?" By raising artificially his HP ? Denying the use of smite by systematically disarming the paladin ? By making a BBneutralG ? Or whatever else ? The paladin's player will quicly become bored to not be able to use it, and go back playing a fighter.

That's actually a good point.

But since you have to write encounters around what wizards are capable of, I suggest they are horrendously overpowered.

Ditto for Clerics and druids.

Best to ban all classes for that sake.

I mean how DARE the melee classes start to do damage on par with spells.


Dissinger wrote:

Nice straw man.

I never said you'd be single attacking all the time.

Merely that in the time it took the Paladin to get to the front line, he's taken 8 times the attacks he's given out.

Who did more damage in that time?

Here's a hint, it wasn't the paladin.

Still not more than any melee-type characters.

And he will make one attack on the first round only most of the time. The rest will be mostly full attacks.

Oh yeah ? Who ? The wizard ? With SR, saves, energy immunity and the rest ?
There is no way I know about to protect against smite evil, while you can protect against spells.


Dissinger wrote:


That's actually a good point.

But since you have to write encounters around what wizards are capable of, I suggest they are horrendously overpowered.

Ditto for Clerics and druids.

Best to ban all classes for that sake.

I mean how DARE the melee classes start to do damage on par with spells.

Because spells allow saving throws, or SR, or immunities. Because they run off in anti magic areas. Because a spellcaster without his most powerful spells is useless.

Melee classes already did damage on par with spells.

Dark Archive

selios wrote:
Dissinger wrote:

Nice straw man.

I never said you'd be single attacking all the time.

Merely that in the time it took the Paladin to get to the front line, he's taken 8 times the attacks he's given out.

Who did more damage in that time?

Here's a hint, it wasn't the paladin.

Still not more than any melee-type characters.

And he will make one attack on the first round only most of the time. The rest will be mostly full attacks.

Oh yeah ? Who ? The wizard ? With SR, saves, energy immunity and the rest ?
There is no way I know about to protect against smite evil, while you can protect against spells.

Right, so if you have to include SR immunities and various other things, you OBVIOUSLY wrote for the wizard. You could have just as easily NOT written for the wizard.

That's the point.

You're just angry you need to think outside your box and take into account that all the classes are a threat, NOT just the casters.

Writing it off with listing abilities that counter them is you being a hypocrite, as you were saying that doesn't work to balance the paladin's smite argument. Especially when we listed ways to balance the smite and you said flat out ""how can I balance a BBEvilG with the amount of damage a paladin can make ?" By raising artificially his HP ? Denying the use of smite by systematically disarming the paladin ? By making a BBneutralG ? Or whatever else ? The paladin's player will quicly become bored to not be able to use it, and go back playing a fighter."

Let that pickle in your head before you realize how big a hypocrite you've been.

Its not okay for melee to do ridiculous damage, especially when the abilities used to countermand it nullify it almost completely, yet its okay to do so with spells?

Hypocrisy of the utmost.


Brodiggan Gale wrote:
Forget all the stuff about special tactics and how those particular types of foes tend to be smart enough to avoid the Paladin, yada yada.

Well that's just deying the paladin's ability, which is my problem.

Brodiggan Gale wrote:

EDIT: I found a small typo in the line calculating the Average, so I made a revised version of the chart. It's not a big difference, just a slight bump up at higher levels.

New Table (http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/2320/paladinvsfighter2.png)

Question, what's the difference between avg paladin and paladin in the chart ?

Your chart convinces me even more that smite is too powerful. Paladins have other abilities to use, immunities, better saves and so on, contrary to fighters, and shouldn't be able to make as much damage as fighters, maybe equal damage with smite. Which as seen on your chart is not the case.

Dark Archive

selios wrote:
Brodiggan Gale wrote:
Forget all the stuff about special tactics and how those particular types of foes tend to be smart enough to avoid the Paladin, yada yada.

Well that's just deying the paladin's ability, which is my problem.

Brodiggan Gale wrote:

EDIT: I found a small typo in the line calculating the Average, so I made a revised version of the chart. It's not a big difference, just a slight bump up at higher levels.

New Table (http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/2320/paladinvsfighter2.png)

Question, what's the difference between avg paladin and paladin in the chart ?

Your chart convinces me even more that smite is too powerful. Paladins have other abilities to use, immunities, better saves and so on, contrary to fighters, and shouldn't be able to make as much damage as fighters, maybe equal damage with smite. Which as seen on your chart is not the case.

Average is when smite damage is averaged with non smite damage.

Normal is just that, a paladin attacking without the ability to smite.

Doesn't look so bad now does it?


Dissinger wrote:
Right, so if you have to include SR immunities and various other things, you OBVIOUSLY wrote for the wizard. You could have just as easily NOT written for the wizard.

I didn't wrote anything for the wizard. It's just that saving throws, immunities, and SR are part of the game. I mostly play Paizo's adventure paths. So I play what they have written.

Dissinger wrote:

That's the point.

You're just angry you need to think outside your box and take into account that all the classes are a threat, NOT just the casters.

I'm not angry at all, and I do want that all classes be threat. I don't want overpowered threat, that's all.

Quote:

Writing it off with listing abilities that counter them is you being a hypocrite, as you were saying that doesn't work to balance the paladin's smite argument. Especially when we listed ways to balance the smite and you said flat out ""how can I balance a BBEvilG with the amount of damage a paladin can make ?" By raising artificially his HP ? Denying the use of smite by systematically disarming the paladin ? By making a BBneutralG ? Or whatever else ? The paladin's player will quicly become bored to not be able to use it, and go back playing a fighter."

Let that pickle in your head before you realize how big a hypocrite you've been.

That doesn't work because if he can't smite, what's the point of having the ability ? SR can counter a spell, not all, if the SR is set right for the spellcasters. Is it to be a big hyppocrite to ask for this kind of balance for smite ?

Dissinger wrote:
Its not okay for melee to do ridiculous damage, especially when the abilities used to countermand it nullify it almost completely, yet its okay to do so with spells?

No it's not okay to do ridiculously amount of damage, but I never found that fighters were doing ridiculously amount of damage in the first place.

Spells are powerfull, and they're balanced with SR and saves. What balances this smite evil ?

Dissinger wrote:
Hypocrisy of the utmost.

That's the only thing you can tell me and repeat to help my adventure choices ?

Thanks a lot for your help.


selios wrote:
Question, what's the difference between avg paladin and paladin in the chart?

Dissinger was correct, Paladin is just regular old swinging away without Smite, and Pal. Average is the average damage over time against an even sampling of all the monsters in the MM (smiting those that can be smitten).

selios wrote:
Your chart convinces me even more that smite is too powerful. Paladins have other abilities to use, immunities, better saves and so on, contrary to fighters, and shouldn't be able to make as much damage as fighters, maybe equal damage with smite. Which as seen on your chart is not the case.

I tend to disagree, what you can't see from the chart is how absolutely devoted to damage the Paladin had to be in his feat selection to get the average up to where the fighter was. The fighter had all the damage abilities he needed, and had enough left over for perks like Improved Init, Disruptive, the Vital Strike feat group, etc.

Plus fighters get some of their own perks, compared to the Paladin, Critical Mastery for instance. That fighter would be blinding and staggering an average of 2 opponents a round. That's a pretty big perk. And then there's the DR bonus and full movement from armor training, spellbreaker, etc.


Brodiggan Gale wrote:

I tend to disagree, what you can't see from the chart is how absolutely devoted to damage the Paladin had to be in his feat selection to get the average up to where the fighter was. The fighter had all the damage abilities he needed, and had enough left over for perks like Improved Init, Disruptive, the Vital Strike feat group, etc.

Plus fighters get some of their own perks, compared to the Paladin, Critical Mastery for instance. That fighter would be blinding and staggering an average of 2 opponents a round. That's a pretty big perk. And then there's the DR bonus and full movement from armor training, spellbreaker, etc.

That's still a problem for me. Smite is doing to much damage on some opponents, the differences in extremes is problematic for me. As extremes are often problematic in the first place.

That can make some battles anticlimatic (and other too difficult maybe, if there is no evil).

Dark Archive

selios wrote:
Brodiggan Gale wrote:

I tend to disagree, what you can't see from the chart is how absolutely devoted to damage the Paladin had to be in his feat selection to get the average up to where the fighter was. The fighter had all the damage abilities he needed, and had enough left over for perks like Improved Init, Disruptive, the Vital Strike feat group, etc.

Plus fighters get some of their own perks, compared to the Paladin, Critical Mastery for instance. That fighter would be blinding and staggering an average of 2 opponents a round. That's a pretty big perk. And then there's the DR bonus and full movement from armor training, spellbreaker, etc.

That's still a problem for me. Smite is doing to much damage on some opponents, the differences in extremes is problematic for me. As extremes are often problematic in the first place.

That can make some battles anticlimatic (and other too difficult maybe, if there is no evil).

Right, I get that you think thats a problem.

But is that at all different form the wizard who pumps their DC and spell penetration as high as possible and slays said dragon with a single SoD effect?

Also you honestly don't know the power of assay spell resistance, which turns a might be stopped into full on destroy, as a swift action no less...


Dissinger wrote:

Right, I get that you think thats a problem.

But is that at all different form the wizard who pumps their DC and spell penetration as high as possible and slays said dragon with a single SoD effect?

Also you honestly don't know the power of assay spell resistance, which turns a might be stopped into full on destroy, as a swift action no less...

SoD effect will probably happen 1 on 20 times, witout SR. And the caster will not have enough SoD spells. Smite will work until the opponent is dead.

But I agree that there must be limit to the bump or DC. I was glad to see the spell focus and greater spell focus in 3.5 nerfed actually, and the spell power from archmage vanished.
I also limit the high abilities score to limit high DC in my campaigns.

I know of assay spell resistance. A spell from Spell Compendium and other complete books that gives an insane +10 bonus to overcome SR for a whole combat with a swif action. That's funny, in another thread I was just saying that some spells from these books were overpowered.
That's a good reason to not allow it for me.
See ? I don't want the spellcasters to be all powerful either.


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

So you are saying setup a bunch of situations where the paladin can not use his best ability?

Why not have all fights in anti-magic shells to balance spell casters next?


dulsin wrote:

So you are saying setup a bunch of situations where the paladin can not use his best ability?

Why not have all fights in anti-magic shells to balance spell casters next?

Yep, we could do that, so nobody will be playing spellcasters, and they would not be overpowered anymore since they won't be existing !!We do have the solution !!!


dulsin wrote:
So you are saying setup a bunch of situations where the paladin can not use his best ability?

What I'm saying is set up the fights so that the opponents aren't raging morons. They know about the party; they know that the party includes at least one strong melee combatant. Even if they don't know about the party, what likely enemy doesn't include at least one melee combatant? There are quite a number of very simple and very effective things they can do to counteract any strong melee combatant, whether that be a paladin or a barbarian. Why would they choose not to do so? Make the paladin (and every other character) work for the victory.

Scarab Sages

selios wrote:
Because spells allow saving throws, or SR, or immunities. Because they run off in anti magic areas. Because a spellcaster without his most powerful spells is useless.

Just to clarify, Antimagic Field suppresses Smite, along with all other supernatural effects.


Zurai wrote:


Neither does Power Attack with the right feats.

Which a paladin can still use.

Zurai wrote:
List of abilitie to prevent attacks

Yes, they'll put a dent in a smiting paladin, but they'll put a dent in any martial character. If you have to hurt a whole catagory to pin down one class, somethings wrong.

Zurai wrote:
Make the paladin (and every other character) work for the victory.

If you're going to do that then theres no need to use the Paizo paladin, since any version of the rules can work with the right amount of effort, unbalanced or no.

Snorter wrote:
just to clarify, Antimagic Field suppresses Smite, along with all other supernatural effects.

It's also arguble one of the worst features that exists. To put simply, it's a feild were 3/4 classes just plain cannot use class features and the other 1/4 are still screwed, since their magic items (something very much needed by the time Anti-Magic feilds become a factor) don't work either.

It might screw over a paladin a little more than a fighter, but it still screws over both.

Scarab Sages

Snorter wrote:
just to clarify, Antimagic Field suppresses Smite, along with all other supernatural effects.
Nero24200 wrote:

It's also arguble one of the worst features that exists. To put simply, it's a feild were 3/4 classes just plain cannot use class features and the other 1/4 are still screwed, since their magic items (something very much needed by the time Anti-Magic feilds become a factor) don't work either.

It might screw over a paladin a little more than a fighter, but it still screws over both.

Maybe; I just thought the way the conversation was going, some may not be aware.


Nero24200 wrote:
Zurai wrote:
Make the paladin (and every other character) work for the victory.
If you're going to do that then theres no need to use the Paizo paladin, since any version of the rules can work with the right amount of effort, unbalanced or no.

Wow, really? You're objecting to having every character in the party have to work for a win against a BBEG? Really? It should just be handed to the party on a silver platter?


Zurai wrote:


Wow, really? You're objecting to having every character in the party have to work for a win against a BBEG? Really? It should just be handed to the party on a silver platter?

No, I'm saying that "Make the party work for it" isn't always a suitiable response to "something is overpowering". If it was then nothing would ever be overpowering, since situations can count for alot in D'n'D.

I'm not saying the paladin should get anything on a silver platter, and I never have, have you looked at anything I've said about the PF paladin?

You want to argue my point or disagree, fair enough, don't twist what I say to mean something it doesn't though.

Dark Archive

Nero24200 wrote:
Zurai wrote:


Wow, really? You're objecting to having every character in the party have to work for a win against a BBEG? Really? It should just be handed to the party on a silver platter?

No, I'm saying that "Make the party work for it" isn't always a suitiable response to "something is overpowering". If it was then nothing would ever be overpowering, since situations can count for alot in D'n'D.

I'm not saying the paladin should get anything on a silver platter, and I never have, have you looked at anything I've said about the PF paladin?

You want to argue my point or disagree, fair enough, don't twist what I say to mean something it doesn't though.

Look Nero, I get you don't like new smite, and I'mma let you finish, but that new smite is one of the BEST things to happen to Paladins.

The old way was far too eggs in one basket. When a paladin declared a smite creatures could yawn at the futility. One miss and its a wasted class ability. Also over the course of the paladin's career, his damage will not ever get so out of proportion with the fighter that it becomes a problem. The chart shows this.

This is no different than a ranger's favored enemy coming up, or a rogue sneak attacking every turn, while the Paladin gets to single out ONE enemy.

That is why we don't think this is overpowering. The situations that occur, more often than not are going to give the paladin one attack a turn, unless the party does something to make that BBEG sit in one place.

While the paladin could take feats to make the most of that one attack, its still a case where one attack for all the eggs. Just now, the paladin has a bit more survivability against his smite target, and when he does hit it makes up for the rounds he misses. The paladin still has all the flaws he had when he was fighting before, he just hits harder when he can hit.

I do not honestly see the problem Nero, point it out. And to say he's doing more damage, I would argue that's no different than a wizard or sorcerer with a rod of maximize nuking something. Even with SR its JUST LIKE HITTING AN AC.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Kor the Lost Orc wrote:

Please don't use this thread for debating the balance of the paladin.

** Please don't use this thread for debating the balance of the paladin. **


Kevin Mack wrote:
Kor the Lost Orc wrote:

Please don't use this thread for debating the balance of the paladin.

** Please don't use this thread for debating the balance of the paladin. **

I know I am guilty, but there is a thread for this already. Actually the other thread is just for debating the smite ability, which shows several ways to handle it using tactics instead of nerfing. Feel free to read it while it is still a decent size. Since I can't sleep I might even make Smite is Overpowered is a myth thingy like someone did for psionics a while back, but no promises.

Smite Evil is Evil is the name of the thread. The search bar is your friend for whoever wished to debate it over there.


I don't care for this thread... having said this, I thought you might find this fun, it's paladin and balance related:

Ctr+Alt+Del - Bringing the Deeps

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Kevin Mack wrote:
Kor the Lost Orc wrote:

Please don't use this thread for debating the balance of the paladin.

** Please let this thread die already. **

That's what you're really asking. I said the same thing about the cleric with heavy armor issue, but had to recant when it was pointed out that the issue wasn't finished. People still wanted to discuss it.

So rather than start a new thread, people can use this thread. Especially since the OP already moved on with another thread himself. If he hadn't, and was still using this one, derailing would be impolite. However, this is an appropriate time for derailing.


Zurai wrote:
...There are quite a number of very simple and very effective things they can do to counteract any strong melee combatant...

Smart enemies, blur, incorporeal and things like that is already part of our RPGs, it's been there before paladins became this strong and I don't think it should matter when you talk about balance between classes.

PS: I think it would fell cheesy if every evil outsider, dragon or undead BBEG had an anti-paladin special ability, and if I end up having to do it, in my way to see it, its a clear evidence that the class is not balanced.

Also, we already know melee attacks can't hit flying monsters or that displace self gives a 50% concealment, this post is already a flame war, so please lets try to focus more on less obvious points of view (no harm intended).

Dark Archive

pontoark wrote:
Zurai wrote:
...There are quite a number of very simple and very effective things they can do to counteract any strong melee combatant...

Smart enemies, blur, incorporeal and things like that is already part of our RPGs, it's been there before paladins became this strong and I don't think it should matter when you talk about balance between classes.

PS: I think it would fell cheesy if every evil outsider, dragon or undead BBEG had an anti-paladin special ability, and if I end up having to do it, in my way to see it, its a clear evidence that the class is not balanced.

Also, we already know melee attacks can't hit flying monsters or that displace self gives a 50% concealment, this post is already a flame war, so please lets try to focus more on less obvious points of view (no harm intended).

But you see, by arguing that you are not acknowledging the argument.

That smite evil is a martial ability, and has all the inherent flaws of being a martial ability. The fact you say you are just NOW introducing martial countermeasures into the game, implies that you were writing for wizards at later levels, rather than martial characters.

...and that is YOUR problem, not smite evils.


Nero24200 wrote:

It might screw over a paladin a little more than a fighter, but it still screws over both.

Would you care to explain how that screws over a fighter? The fighter is in his element in an antimagic field; regardless of level, there's nothing capable of out-damaging a fighter, other than a rogue with sneak attack, within such a field. So he loses his magic weapon and armour bonuses at worst. At high levels, he ignores up to 10 points of DR anyway, and gets high enough attack bonuses +21 with his weapon of choice at level 17; +24 and automatically confirmed crits with an increased damage multiplier at level 20, not to mention damage resistance that nothing can break through but a feat or non-magical/non-supernatural ability that states it ignores all DR. An antimagic field benefits a fighter more than it screws him over because it brings everything down to his level, and on a battlefield without magical or supernatural abilities, the Fighter is king.


selios wrote:
Brodiggan Gale wrote:

I tend to disagree, what you can't see from the chart is how absolutely devoted to damage the Paladin had to be in his feat selection to get the average up to where the fighter was. The fighter had all the damage abilities he needed, and had enough left over for perks like Improved Init, Disruptive, the Vital Strike feat group, etc.

Plus fighters get some of their own perks, compared to the Paladin, Critical Mastery for instance. That fighter would be blinding and staggering an average of 2 opponents a round. That's a pretty big perk. And then there's the DR bonus and full movement from armor training, spellbreaker, etc.

That's still a problem for me. Smite is doing to much damage on some opponents, the differences in extremes is problematic for me. As extremes are often problematic in the first place.

That can make some battles anticlimatic (and other too difficult maybe, if there is no evil).

First, the chart by Brodiggan is brilliant. Obviously someone *already* *did* *this* *math*.

Second, I do not understand after reading post after post after post after post from selios what he is talking about. I'm so lost as to his point I just felt the need to clairfy what I'm seeing.

Fighter: "Hi. I'm a fighter, I get lots of combat tricks and do awesome damage on a regular basis to all opponents."

Paladin: "Hi. I'm a Paladin, I get some class features and kind of do crappy damage, but I'm a holy warrior and evil things fall to the purity of my blade"

The math shows that they do the *same* *average* *damage*.

What could possibly be the problem here? The thing you complain about in this very message *is* *the* *point* *of* *the* *paladin*.

And all that so, what? he could finish a fight in 5 rounds instead of 7 against the enemy he could specialize in fighting? Are people just not reading what is being written?
-Campbell


selios wrote:

It will not be as horrible as being a fighter, or barbarian.

As for the paladin adding +40 damage on all attacks every round and ignoring any DR, plus the boost to AC and to hit, it's not something to be viewed as a standard fighter threat.

What if you make the BBEG something that's *not* an evil outsider, dragon, or undead?

Oh crap, suddenly the fighter is doing 30-40% more damage then the paladin! That must be totally unbalanced!

Oh snap, you say the *majority* of creatures available in the published materials are not evil? That the fighter will the *majority* of the time be doing 30% more damage than the paladin? Who would want to play one of those?!
-Campbell

As an aside, I want to point out, the difference we are talking about here.

In a five round combat, we are talking about it going down one round quicker.

In a ten round combat, we are talking about it dying on round 8 or 9.

In the extremely unlikely event of a 20 round combat, the added damage will help the paladin finish it on round 14 or 15.

*That's* what smite will do. Not too radical for a class who's whole point is to destroy evil


Chris Parker wrote:


Would you care to explain how that screws over a fighter?

Alright, put a mid-to-high level fighter in an antimagic feild with a CR appropraite creature that can exist in such a field. The fighter no longer has magic weapons, armour, potions etc. The creature still has it's natural attacks, natural abilities such as poison etc, extraordinary abilities and others, the only thing it hurts is spell-like abilities. Monsters aren't designed with magic items in mind, PC classes are.

Let's throw a 10th level fighter against a CR appropraite creature. A 10th level fighter...what'll he have? +10 BAB, Strength 16, +2 Weapon training, that's +15 to attack and +5 to damage, +6 in the case of a two-handed weapon. Now lets add typical fighter feats such as weapon focus, specilization and power attack. This makes the fighter capable of +16/+10 attacks, dealing 2D6+8 damage, or +13/+7 for 2D6+17 damage. Assuming again, full-plate and decent Dex, we're talking AC 22.

Now let's pick some CR 10 monsters for the fighter to go against. Now, if what you say is true the fighter should be fine despite them acting as normal encounters for parties, since the monsters will be more hindered and the parties won't be able to do anything anyway since most other classes rely on magic.

Against a Collosal Animated Object. Assuming made of wood (though something made of stone of metal would be more suiting) that provides hardness 5, so right away the fighter is dealing 5 less points per hit. Not much when power attack, but quite a hit for normal damage. Also, that +16 to hit is nice, but the object has a +24 slam attack, which is hitting on anything bar a 1, dealing 4D6+13 for an average of 27 damage. This isn't so bad compared to the fighter's average (assuming power attack) for 19 per hit, for a possible 38 per round (assuming both attacks hit, though not unreasonable given the objects AC), however, a fighter, assuming Con 16 again, would have, at most, 130 hit points at this level before feats like Toughness, however, this assumes maximum rolls, compared to this creature which has, on average, 256 hit points. I think it's clear whos going to win this fight in an antimagic field.

What about a hydra? Now the hydra is a screwy one I'll admit, but your logic, if true, should still stand, but we'll use one two CR's lower, so CR 8. And we'll give the fighter improved sunder, since it should give a bit of an edge and it's not unreasonable to assume he has it.
It still has quite a few more hit points than what the fighter can gain if increadibly lucky, at 97 (average). It deals less damage than the fighter, an average of only 10.5 per hit and only has +9 to hit, meaning it will only hit 40% of the time. It does, however, gain 9 attacks per round, and an additional 9 if the fighter provokes (which he will if he charges), not to mention negating 19 points of damage from the fighter every round. Monster wins again.

What about a Clay Golum? Well first off, it's got damage reduction 10, so right away the fighter's damage output has taken quite a hit, lowreing his average damage (assuming power attacking) to 14, possibly 28 per round with two attacks. The clay golum however, gaining two attacks (both with +14 to hit) deals an average of 13 per hit, for a possible total of 26 per round. Also, it should be noted that the Golum has a half decent AC, so the fighter stands a reasonable chance of missing one or two attacks whilst power attack. He may put up a bit more of a fight, but the Golum is still going to win, yet another vicotry for the monsters.

This is a few random CR 10 monsters, it only gets worse at higher levels since the fighter is more dependent on magical items. Comparing a 20th level fighter to a Tarrasque, or a 15th level one to a Marut, or even the Mummy Lord with caster levels and it doesn't look good for the fighter.

As said, it'll screw over a fighter less, but it'll still screw him over.


I'd like to slam my head against the wall arguing about most monsters not being evil and that intelligent evil monsters will focus fire the Paladin every time.

I'd like to.

But I'm not going to.

Oh wait...


Dissinger wrote:


But you see, by arguing that you are not acknowledging the argument.

That smite evil is a martial ability, and has all the inherent flaws of being a martial ability. The fact you say you are just NOW introducing martial countermeasures into the game, implies that you were writing for wizards at later levels, rather than martial characters.

...and that is YOUR problem, not smite evils.

Sorry Dissinger, I'm not sure what you mean... and, as a side note, where in my post was I implying the "NOW I'm introducing martial countermeasures" or "and I was writing for wizards at later levels"?


The concept behind the paladin class is that she is a warrior for the forces of law and good who has devoted her entire life to training and prayer which will give her the strength to destroy the BBEG when she finally meets it.

If she can get herself into a face-to-face encounter, she SHOULD blast that demon back to the abyss, and it ought to be an impressive sight when it happens.

From my own perspective, I don't even care if it's a balanced ability or not.


Balanced. And I have played one, and played in a party with one. Understand that I am not just theorycrafting.

The most important thing in Pathfinder combat is getting full attacks. If you get full attacks off on enemies, they are going down, and fast.

The most powerful strategies in Pathfinder involve classes that deny the enemy full attacks (Spellcasters, people on horses), and builds that are guaranteed to get full attacks (Archers). If your PCs are constantly getting full attacks on a BBEG, he's going down, fast. If your PCs aren't, he'll stay up. The bonus from a paladin smite is significant, but not game-breakingly so.

In practice, the Paladin ends up being okay in normal combats, and one of the stars of BBEG combats. The same could be said of any spellcaster. Archers and fighters tend to be the stars of normal combats.

Note that my claims are for a 4-5 person party. A Paladin's Share Smite ability is probably overpowered in a 7-8 person party.

In a 4-5 person party, all you're really doing is giving 1-2 other people your power (odds are at least 2 of the people in your party aren't "attackers", per say). In a 7-8 person party, you're giving those big bonuses to 5-6 people, which is sort of unreasonable.

-Cross

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kor the Lost Orc wrote:

Please don't use this thread for debating the balance of the paladin.

** Please don't use this thread for debating the balance of the paladin. **

Edit: (This thread is not a poll, I will be posting the actual poll in 1-2 days)

Then what exactly was your intention, trolling to start another flame war? If it's not a poll or a debate, then what is it?


LazarX wrote:
Kor the Lost Orc wrote:

Please don't use this thread for debating the balance of the paladin.

** Please don't use this thread for debating the balance of the paladin. **

Edit: (This thread is not a poll, I will be posting the actual poll in 1-2 days)

Then what exactly was your intention, trolling to start another flame war? If it's not a poll or a debate, then what is it?

Wishful thinking. :)

51 to 100 of 102 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Paladin balance comments for a poll please... All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.