Hi All,
we had an encounter recently in my campaign featuring a young green dragon. My party consists of 3 level 7 characters. One of them is a Half-Orc paladin. He and the others managed to kill the dragon in 2 rounds. But without the others he would have killed it in 3 rounds. No big magic equipment just using class skills.
He has str 18 and chr 16. He used a nonmagical great axe. He had 2 rounds to prepare and used magic weapon and bull strength. And he also used smite evil.
So at level 7 he attacked the dragon:
+17/+12
He dealt
d12+24 damage
With each hit. No damage reduction.
He hit the dragon 4 times in 2 rounds for approx 120 points of damage. The dragon had 133. The dragon did approx 40 points of damage in these 2 rounds (breath weapon 1st round, 7 attacks the second).
My problem is that this should have been a CR9 encounter for a level7 party. I don't think it is ok for a level 7 character to defeat a CR9 encounter without effort. And he can do it 3 times a day easily, using lay on hands to heal himself in betwean battles.
I agree that the Paladin is the champion of good, but this is way too powerful. None of the other classes can do this. A fighter or a barbarian may be able to defeat the dragon alone, with luck and serious injuries. A spellcaster can maybe defeat the dragon with a lucky spell, but they have to overcome spell resistance too.
I know that nerfing classes are not a popular thing. I would recommend reducing the duration of the smite for a single round. He can still kill the dragon in 3 rounds but he is using all 3 smite attempts to do so.
What do you think?
Brain
I assume there is some reason the dragon chose to go toe-to-toe with a PC who did that much damage in the first round instead of taking flight and recharging it's breath weapon?
I assume there is some reason the dragon chose to go toe-to-toe with a PC who did that much damage in the first round instead of taking flight and recharging it's breath weapon?
Yeah, sounds to me like the dragon was under-played.
Smite evil is very good, however the paladin is the only class that has to follow a moral code to get his class abilities. If the paladin doesn’t follow that moral code he becomes an NPC class. With that in mind it’s understandable that his abilities would be slightly better than other classes.
There’s also the fact that the ability is useless against a foe that isn’t evil. Throw a purple worm or land shark at him and watch his smite ability count for squat.
Don’t nerf the ability, Paizo knows what they’re doing.
Thats one encounter against the BBG thats what Paladins shine at taking out their one evil enemy. What would happen against say a couple of CR6 constructs then the Paladin is not nearly as effective it all has to do with the encounter
I assume there is some reason the dragon chose to go toe-to-toe with a PC who did that much damage in the first round instead of taking flight and recharging it's breath weapon?
The only problem there is you can still use a bow with smite evil. I have to say, I too am a little worried about smite evil being a little too powerful, but in my games I'm not going to do anything but watch it right now. I also feel dragons got nerfed some compared to 3.5
|
I'm gonna go ahead and say...
That's what the Paladin is supposed to do. If you throw an evil outsider/dragon at a group with a paladin, he's just gonna get that "evil" grin on his face and go to town.
I won't say you underplayed the dragon, because you were probably either shocked that the Paladin could do that, or... just playing the game.
Even so, Evil Dragon/Outsiders make Pathfinder Paladins giddy. I would recommend (if you want future dragon encounters) changing its alignment to LN or CN, and just have the dragon act so selfish or self-righteous that the group wants to kill it, though it isn't necessarily evil.
Also, non-dragon/outsider encounters will work just fine.
I assume there is some reason the dragon chose to go toe-to-toe with a PC who did that much damage in the first round instead of taking flight and recharging it's breath weapon?The only problem there is you can still use a bow with smite evil. I have to say, I too am a little worried about smite evil being a little too powerful, but in my games I'm not going to do anything but watch it right now. I also feel dragons got nerfed some compared to 3.5
In my experience most paladins don't carry bows, certainly not bows enchanted to the extent of their trusty sword or axe and their ranged hit will be considerably lower than their melee. But, all that said, if he did good for him being a well prepared character. Regardless, that still doesn't explain why the dragon wouldn't at least attempt to gain the advantage of flight.
I assume there is some reason the dragon chose to go toe-to-toe with a PC who did that much damage in the first round instead of taking flight and recharging it's breath weapon?
I have DM'd two paladins, and never had an issue with them. I don't think the paladin is the problem.
Wolfy I was just using your post as a springboard. I think we are in agreement on this one.
I also feel dragons got nerfed some compared to 3.5
How so?
In my experience most paladins don't carry bows, certainly not bows enchanted to the extent of their trusty sword or axe and their ranged hit will be considerably lower than their melee. But, all that said, if he did good for him being a well prepared character. Regardless, that still doesn't explain why the dragon wouldn't at least attempt to gain the advantage of flight.I assume there is some reason the dragon chose to go toe-to-toe with a PC who did that much damage in the first round instead of taking flight and recharging it's breath weapon?The only problem there is you can still use a bow with smite evil. I have to say, I too am a little worried about smite evil being a little too powerful, but in my games I'm not going to do anything but watch it right now. I also feel dragons got nerfed some compared to 3.5
Paladins and bows are a good idea. One of my players(paladin) tried the non-bow idea in a game before. I just kept breathing on him until he ran out of lay on hands and mercies.
PS: I am still waiting eagerly for the OP's reply.
One of the many things I liked about Eberron was that The Order of the Silver Flame made Paladins with Longbows cool.
First, a young green dragon is CR 8.
The Paladin's average damage, spelled up, in two rounds is indeed about 88, enough to kill it. He probably can't do that bull's strength 2 more times. That would drop his average to 69, still lots of course. Against something he is built to kill, that's appropriate. It's like sending an enchanter against a giant, a rogue against a blinded creature, or a cleric against a group of undead.
Indeed, the dragon probably shouldn't have brought the fight right to him, but that's alright. Given those two rounds of prep, the dragon probably should have used Entangle if possible.
Other than that - things went as they should. If the paladin had been alone, with no archers or spellcasters around, the dragon might have chosen to keep its distance. As it was, it engaged to shred the paladin. With 40 of an average of 60 or so hp, it did a good job.
I concur with other comments above... Your key skill to avoid paladins becoming ultra-powerful is to mix your encounters, and include non-evil monsters (golems are a good choice for weakening your paladin). If you do that, it's ok that the paladin has a few choice adversaries to shine a bit.
Our party's paladin had Boots of Levitation, that gave her advantage against flies (but not as much as true flight). Otherwise, encounters with fliers, swimmers, etc are pretty balancing.
And remember, big bad monsters are usually good at grappling. A grappled paladin is in a hard spot, Smite or not.
I also feel dragons got nerfed some compared to 3.5How so?
Not to speak for Blackwing, and I don't exactly agree, but here's a possibility:
In 3.0/3.5, CRs for dragons were low vs. power, to make them more memorable, etc. Paizo wanted them to have accurate CRs instead. But to keep backwards compatibility with published modules, it's better to keep the same creature near the same CR. So a young green dragon in 3.5 and a young green dragon in Pathfinder may have the same CR (not true in this case), but the Pathfinder version would be weaker, because of being rated accurately.
Honestly though, when I was running 3.5, unless you used a particularly strong dragon (vs. party level) they ended up being fairly easy usually.
Another useful tactic which I advocate using sparingly so the player can have fun is to disarm him of his weapon. Larger monsters usually have reach so they dont have to worry about the attack of opportunity, whether they have the correct feats or not.
I also feel dragons got nerfed some compared to 3.5How so?Not to speak for Blackwing, and I don't exactly agree, but here's a possibility:
In 3.0/3.5, CRs for dragons were low vs. power, to make them more memorable, etc. Paizo wanted them to have accurate CRs instead. But to keep backwards compatibility with published modules, it's better to keep the same creature near the same CR. So a young green dragon in 3.5 and a young green dragon in Pathfinder may have the same CR (not true in this case), but the Pathfinder version would be weaker, because of being rated accurately.
Honestly though, when I was running 3.5, unless you used a particularly strong dragon (vs. party level) they ended up being fairly easy
usually.
I updated a Pathfinder dragon to the same CR as one in an adventure path and they had about the same stats.
Illthane in AoW gave my party a run for their money, and once I updated a Pathfinder Black dragon to the same CR they had about the same stats. Illthane was an adult though, I beleive, and I am sure that was a factor. I never use anything less than young adult. They tend to be pushovers when they are below the young adult age. I also choose my spells carefully. Blood Wind(SPC)is a nice spell to have. It lets you get full attacks without ever coming into melee range. Mage Armor is also nice to have.
Flight doesn't save the dragon from a paladin that's smart enough to bring a bow. A bow wielding paladin is in fact probably the scariest thing an undead creature, demon or evil dragon can face.
I also feel dragons got nerfed some compared to 3.5How so?
They took a big hit in hit dice reduction per CR for one. A lot of them had access to some divine spells in addition to there arcane spells. That got taken away from them as well. I haven't gotten to make a lot of dragons in pathfinder, but the ones I've converted to use don't feel up to there former CR. While it's true the weaker dragons don't feel as week as they did, the stronger dragons don't feel as strong either.
I admit though it could just be a dislike of the new method they have you use to make a dragon in pathfinder. All dragons getting the same stat bonuses, size bonuses and extra HD at X age just doesn't sit well with me.
Also, sorry for the slow reply. I tend to type slow at times. Really, really slow, especially when trying to avoid typos.
Dragons often have followers, usually kobolds or lizardfolk (caves vs swamps). These can be non-evil as well. And they keep people busy.
Every time I've run a dragon by himself he got toasted quickly, add in a few followers and he lasts much longer and does more damage.
I also feel dragons got nerfed some compared to 3.5How so?They took a big hit in hit dice reduction per CR for one. A lot of them had access to some divine spells in addition to there arcane spells. That got taken away from them as well. I haven't gotten to make a lot of dragons in pathfinder, but the ones I've converted to use don't feel up to there former CR. While it's true the weaker dragons don't feel as week as they did, the stronger dragons don't feel as strong either.
I admit though it could just be a dislike of the new method they have you use to make a dragon in pathfinder. All dragons getting the same stat bonuses, size bonuses and extra HD at X age just doesn't sit well with me.
True the hit point loss hurt. Somehow I forgot about that. The top dragons are weaker, or so it seems. I am running AoW so I will get a chance to find out.
In general single monster encounters dragon or no dont work in 3.x. Its a simple truth, 1 monster against 4 PC's has 2 possible outcomes, monster is overwhelmed through economy of action, or monster is too powerful and is likely to kill one or more PCs without any error on their part or unlucky dice rolls.
Now, as for the paladin in your group. He had 2 rounds to buff, he made good choices, and he was facing what he is best at. This is what paladins do. They smite single big bads that happen to be dragons undead or outsiders. You just cant park a dragon in front of a paladin and call it done anymore. Every class has what they are good at. Its like saying an enchanter is overpowered vs an enemy with an abysmal will save. Or a Bard is overpowered in social situations. You put the paladin in his moment to shine, and he did, brilliantly.
Just my opinion, but I think the paladin shines too brightly against the three types of opponents where they get double damage. My solution is to not give them double level damage against these types. They keep their regular level damage. I'm also altering the ability to bypass all damage reduction. Rather, all attacks made when smiting evil are considered holy, lawful, and good.
I haven't tried this out yet, but it's how I intend to run it when next I run.
Just my opinion, but I think the paladin shines too brightly against the three types of opponents where they get double damage. My solution is to not give them double level damage against these types. They keep their regular level damage. I'm also altering the ability to bypass all damage reduction. Rather, all attacks made when smiting evil are considered holy, lawful, and good.
I haven't tried this out yet, but it's how I intend to run it when next I run.
They are not as tough as they look on paper. Of course I have not had to deal with the archerdin yet either, which is what I am waiting for.
Just my opinion, but I think the paladin shines too brightly against the three types of opponents where they get double damage. My solution is to not give them double level damage against these types. They keep their regular level damage. I'm also altering the ability to bypass all damage reduction. Rather, all attacks made when smiting evil are considered holy, lawful, and good.
I haven't tried this out yet, but it's how I intend to run it when next I run.
Well, to each their own, just keep in mind that Paladins sacrifice quite a bit in comparison to the other melee classes in exchange for that enhanced damage vs. specific opponents.
When I ran the numbers during the final beta, paladins were doing roughly 60-65% of the damage of Fighters and Barbarians against non-evil foes, just barely matching them vs. evil foes, and only exceeding the damage of the other melee classes against Demons, Devils, and Dragons.
Just my opinion, but I think the paladin shines too brightly against the three types of opponents where they get double damage. My solution is to not give them double level damage against these types. They keep their regular level damage. I'm also altering the ability to bypass all damage reduction. Rather, all attacks made when smiting evil are considered holy, lawful, and good.
I haven't tried this out yet, but it's how I intend to run it when next I run.
Well, to each their own, just keep in mind that Paladins sacrifice quite a bit in comparison to the other melee classes in exchange for that enhanced damage vs. specific opponents.
When I ran the numbers during the final beta, paladins were doing roughly 60-65% of the damage of Fighters and Barbarians against non-evil foes, just barely matching them vs. evil foes, and only exceeding the damage of the other melee classes against Demons, Devils, and Dragons.
I remember that thread. It supported my conclusions. I was just way to lazy to fun any numbers.
A Paladin can also only use this "uber attack" 3 times a day at 7th level.
PS: Looking through other classes, I am reminded how gimped the PF Barbarian is...
PS: Looking through other classes, I am reminded how gimped the PF Barbarian is...
I hate to reminded of that. I will have to houserule it when I get some free time.
|
I agree with this. I am currently running a paladin in Second Darkness (currently 9th level). In normal combat I am there to back up the fighter and help keep the minions off the spell casters. The fighter and mages do the big damage and generally clean up the board.
About once every game session we do face an opponent that is open to my smite ability. When this happens the fighter and I tend to switch roles with him keeping minions away from me while I go after the main target.
I do not think that the smite is overpowered, especially in a series of encounters where I am forced to choose whether to use a smite or save it for a potentially appropriate opponent later. It most combats my paladin cannot come close to the damage the party fighter can dish out - which, I think, is the point; I get to be great once or twice a game session while then falling back and allowing other people to shine doing their stuff.
To go back to the green dragon at the start of this: I would certainly have a big smile on my face if I got to melee an evil dragon. My question here would be, I guess, was that the only encounter or were there a series of other fights and puzzles that involved the other characters? The GM who is running the SD campaign also tends to max out hitpoints for most creatures to help keep them up for multiple rounds.
|
I have to concur with the people that say it's balanced. I DM for a party that includes a Paladin, and they are regularly facing demons and undead (actually, they are fighting demons and undead almost exclusively). The real solution here is to fight smarter, not harder. If there are multiple foes that are all of the same general scariness, the Paladin won't want to smite more than one of them due to limited uses per day and the possibility of there being even scarier things around the corner. There's a ranged Fighter in the party that can regularly punch out 90+ damage a round, but the Paladin really shines against things that have DR (most notably so far, were some demons when the party had no cold iron).
My findings are: More enemies, regardless of their strength, are harder to fight than a single enemy.
I have to concur with the people that say it's balanced. I DM for a party that includes a Paladin, and they are regularly facing demons and undead (actually, they are fighting demons and undead almost exclusively). The real solution here is to fight smarter, not harder. If there are multiple foes that are all of the same general scariness, the Paladin won't want to smite more than one of them due to limited uses per day and the possibility of there being even scarier things around the corner. There's a ranged Fighter in the party that can regularly punch out 90+ damage a round, but the Paladin really shines against things that have DR (most notably so far, were some demons when the party had no cold iron).
My findings are: More enemies, regardless of their strength, are harder to fight than a single enemy.
This is always be the case, and it also makes for a more insteresting fight as well. Instead of just surround the one guy and whack him till he's dead. The problem is alot of dms seem to think it is somehow a good idea to have single enemy 'boss fights' which has never been a good idea in 3.x.
I hate to reminded of that. I will have to houserule it when I get some free time.PS: Looking through other classes, I am reminded how gimped the PF Barbarian is...
May I suggest the following.
The changes are subtle, to avoid swinging things too far in the opposite direction, but I think it does a nice job of bringing the barbarian up to par.
I hate to reminded of that. I will have to houserule it when I get some free time.PS: Looking through other classes, I am reminded how gimped the PF Barbarian is...
May I suggest the following.
The changes are subtle, to avoid swinging things too far in the opposite direction, but I think it does a nice job of bringing the barbarian up to par.
Thanks, I will combine your ideas with ones I was thinking about. One was combining the two raged powers that give a bonus to ranged and melee attacks. The other was to combine the two rage powers that increase accuracy and damage, along with a few other things. I can just download your class and add my ideas to it, since it will save me all of the typing or at least 90% of it.
|
|
I'm also altering the ability to bypass all damage reduction. Rather, all attacks made when smiting evil are considered holy, lawful, and good.
I haven't tried this out yet, but it's how I intend to run it when next I run.
I had the same thoughts, when I first saw that aspect, too.
It's a good idea that the divine boost should help them punch through supernatural, aligned forms of DR. But I still think there are some forms of DR that should still apply, since they refer to the efficiency of the weapon's shape vs where a creature keeps its vital bits. (Eg: I believe a paladin smiting with a bow should still suffer the DR/bludgeoning, when shooting his arrows through a skeleton's ribs, and barely touching the sides.)I also think the target should be able to benefit from some DR, if it gains it from a source that's nothing to do with its 'evil heritage' (Eg: you can bypass the devil's regular DR, since you can ignore his 'devilness', but his stoneskin spell still applies.).
The problem with a lot of DR, especially for higher CR opponents, is that it's all or nothing. It's DRX/A&B&C. If you've got A and B and C, then the DR may as well not exist. If you're missing even one of the elements, you're subject to the whole DR, and you're whole attack ability suffers.
It's not like you have 'a bit of this to get through, followed by a bit of that, followed by a bit of the other'. Meet two of the criteria, you suffer DR5, instead of DR15. If this were the case, it would be less of a burden to have a smite that ignored a few less types of DR.
Man total side rant I had never noticed how they changed the Dragons Man that makes me sad there are some solid ideas but I think in general that the Dragons are much weeker as a whole
With all their differnt powers the dragons become much more of eash being a differnt creature then just having a differnt breath weapon
And I hate that they lost Cleric Spells thats going to be housed back in
Hi All,
He has str 18 and chr 16. He used a nonmagical great axe. He had 2 rounds to prepare and used magic weapon and bull strength. And he also used smite evil.
Brain
I think part of the problem is that he's got really powerful stats, on a 15 point points buy (PFRPG 'standard' array) he would have at most 16 Str and 14 Chr (unless he put points in no other abilities and even then couldn't reach an 18 and a 16).
Do all the party have similar stats? If so i would recommend bumbing the dragons physicals up by a similar margin.
Also as others have said paladins are the guys designed to fight a big singe powerful target and comparatively they are less good when fighting either multiples or non-evil targets.
Something you might try is rather than 1 big dragon try 2 slightly smaller dragons (ie a mated pair) forcing him to smite only one of the two. As intelligent foes the dragons can see him doing his paladin thing and the non-smited dragon can bull rush him away , offer cover vs the archerdins or simply eat him.
Or just do what I did and houserule that paladins don't do double damage against certain types. That'll fix the OPs problem while still letting the Pally do kickass damage.
Except not really, Paladins don't do much better than straight fighters in damage, even against evil targets; they only really shine when they're dealing with evil outsiders and dragons.
Of course the OP's problem is a tad histrionic. They just happened to go up against 1 of the 3 types of monsters Smite does double damage against. Smite being only usable 3/day at that level anyway. So great, the Paladin outshines everyone in a fight against an evil dragon/undead/evil outsider. Isn't that the point?
|
|
Or just do what I did and houserule that paladins don't do double damage against certain types. That'll fix the OPs problem while still letting the Pally do kickass damage.Except not really, Paladins don't do much better than straight fighters in damage, even against evil targets; they only really shine when they're dealing with evil outsiders and dragons.
Except you know when it's not about damage, paladins have lots of opportunities to shine outside of damage, and they are still plenty capable warriors. If your game is about nothing but who deals the most damage, then yeah, this is probably not a good fix.
Just my opinion, but I think the paladin shines too brightly against the three types of opponents where they get double damage. My solution is to not give them double level damage against these types. They keep their regular level damage. I'm also altering the ability to bypass all damage reduction. Rather, all attacks made when smiting evil are considered holy, lawful, and good.
Wow! If you do that, may I suggest that you change the ability from "Smite Evil", to "Tickle Evil"? I would be upset if I had already started playing a core class and the DM took away a cool ability, replacing it with something that was rarely usable, and only moderately beneficial.
Thinking about the published adventure path I'm running for my players, I can't think of a single creature in the first 4 books that your proposed change would actually be useful against. After 11 levels, if you haven't used a power ONCE, it's not really a class feature. Also, the player has to know when to use the ability, so even if you throw them a bone and give them something to smite that wasn't in the published adventure, they have to be able to recognize the opportunity for what it is. I, for one, try and keep as much separation at my table as I can, between player knowledge and character knowledge. No metagaming at my table!
From one DM to another, I think your proposed change is WAY too restrictive.
Seriously, I don't see why anyone thinks paladins are too powerful. In my experience, it's the fighter class that far outshines every other melee class. I even made a spreadsheet to prove that you can make a 20th level fighter that is a better UNARMED combatant than a 20th level monk. Fighter's, not paladins, are what you should be worried about. Leave the poor paladin alone.
Smite evil is very good, however the paladin is the only class that has to follow a moral code to get his class abilities. If the paladin doesn’t follow that moral code he becomes an NPC class. With that in mind it’s understandable that his abilities would be slightly better than other classes.
That won't hold up.
The same thing could be said about the 3.5 Cleric, and that class still got slapped down hard.
Wow! If you do that, may I suggest that you change the ability from "Smite Evil", to "Tickle Evil"? I would be upset if I had already started playing a core class and the DM took away a cool ability, replacing it with something that was rarely usable, and only moderately beneficial.Just my opinion, but I think the paladin shines too brightly against the three types of opponents where they get double damage. My solution is to not give them double level damage against these types. They keep their regular level damage. I'm also altering the ability to bypass all damage reduction. Rather, all attacks made when smiting evil are considered holy, lawful, and good.
Unless Dosgamer means Holy, Axiomatic, and Good.
Then the Paladin would get +4 to hit and +4D6 damage. That wouldn't be so bad.
Except you know when it's not about damage, paladins have lots of opportunities to shine outside of damage, and they are still plenty capable warriors. If your game is about nothing but who deals the most damage, then yeah, this is probably not a good fix.Or just do what I did and houserule that paladins don't do double damage against certain types. That'll fix the OPs problem while still letting the Pally do kickass damage.Except not really, Paladins don't do much better than straight fighters in damage, even against evil targets; they only really shine when they're dealing with evil outsiders and dragons.
Your right, they are capable warriors, as in the warrior NPC class. See a problem here? My game isnt about who does the most damage, but my COMBATS are. I mean yea sometimes the caster drops a win spell, but otherwise its damage that ends fights. This thread is in regards to an issue that paladins have in combat. Are your fights often ended with a song and dance routine? Or an appeal to the red dragons sense of honor and humanity?
Where else to paladins shine mechanically besides smiting dragon/undead/outsiders? Clerics out heal them, Fighters/Druids/Clerics and even barbarians out fight them, most classes out skill them. Is it because they get a shiny horse? They often have to sit out of roleplay situations because the party is doing something morally dubious and they have to duck the paladin in the first place to do it(wisdom no being a dump stat this got easier in 3.P). So where are these opportunities to shine you speak of? What can a paladin really do besides throw down on an evil dragon?
Man total side rant I had never noticed how they changed the Dragons Man that makes me sad there are some solid ideas but I think in general that the Dragons are much weeker as a whole
With all their differnt powers the dragons become much more of eash being a differnt creature then just having a differnt breath weapon
And I hate that they lost Cleric Spells thats going to be housed back in
After using a PF dragon that is the *same* CR as a 3.5 version, I really don't think they are weaker - it kicked butt (twice). But in general, if you want a really challenging encounter - choose a challenging CR. 13th level party? CR 15-17 dragon. A CR 13 dragon (alone) will be the speed bump that any normal equal party level encounter would be.
Good dragons still have the cleric spells for the record. Taking them from the blues and reds was a bit odd. Whites/blacks/greens never had them.
Except you know when it's not about damage, paladins have lots of opportunities to shine outside of damage, and they are still plenty capable warriors. If your game is about nothing but who deals the most damage, then yeah, this is probably not a good fix.Or just do what I did and houserule that paladins don't do double damage against certain types. That'll fix the OPs problem while still letting the Pally do kickass damage.Except not really, Paladins don't do much better than straight fighters in damage, even against evil targets; they only really shine when they're dealing with evil outsiders and dragons.
<sarcasm>Hey, thanks for the strawman, I've been collecting those.</sarcasm>
Now then, I did not say that damage is all that matters, I didn't even imply it, except in that I was responding to your statement that removing the double damage from smites vs. certain targets would "Fix the OPs problem while still letting the Pally do kickass damage."
(I highlighted the bit there I was responding to, in case you weren't sure)
Man total side rant I had never noticed how they changed the Dragons Man that makes me sad there are some solid ideas but I think in general that the Dragons are much weeker as a whole
With all their differnt powers the dragons become much more of eash being a differnt creature then just having a differnt breath weapon
And I hate that they lost Cleric Spells thats going to be housed back in
After using a PF dragon that is the *same* CR as a 3.5 version, I really don't think they are weaker - it kicked butt (twice). But in general, if you want a really challenging encounter - choose a challenging CR. 13th level party? CR 15-17 dragon. A CR 13 dragon (alone) will be the speed bump that any normal equal party level encounter would be.
Good dragons still have the cleric spells for the record. Taking them from the blues and reds was a bit odd. Whites/blacks/greens never had them.
I always make sure the dragons are challenging even if I have to bump the CR up a little and i didnt realize that whites/blacks/greens didnt get cleric spells I always played them as they did
I didn't realize that whites/blacks/greens didn't get cleric spells I always played them as they did.
No reason to change that now :) Dragons casting Inflict Critical with their Greater Vital Strike Bite attacks are scary...
Yeah I was really excited when I read the Black Dragons Acid on his bite, I was hoping all Dragons got and energy damage bite but they didn't which kinda sucked