Is that a problem? Hasn't really been so far for our group, but Rise of the Runelords has two Paladins out of five PCs and Council of Thieves has three out of sixSee, that's exactly what I'd like to avoid.
Interestingly, both of those APs hold some serious problems for Paladins — and not so much for other classes. Both are going to reach points where the party feels almost gimped for having so many.
For the record, the Lv 5 Paladin I play right now, routinely gets out damaged by both the TH Fighter and the blaster Sorc and while I'm still up after the Fighter has dropped and the Sorc has fled, the Bard sill has to drag my unconscious form out of battle while the Druid finishes off the baddies.
But, Paladins are "Over-Powered"
OK, I did blow apart the Skeleton King, but I'm only effective against two foes per day. And my DM favors "Hordes of Mooks" to "One Big Guy" Even with Smite Evil, I still got the snot beat out of me by the 4 class leveled Troglodyte "Bosses" we fought at 3rd Level.
Moreover, generally people consider game breking things that trash encounters, not that make one dude more durable. Myself, I'm just a little bit surprised, I guess that for other people could be the same.
What do you mean by "trash encounters"? Win? That's what the PCs are expected to do anyway. That's not a problem.
A problem is when one PC does most of the heavy lifting, while the others are reduced to supporting cast or, worse, liabilities (v. all the suggestions along the lines of "the paladin might be an indestructible murder machine, but why not have the monsters just crush the rest of the party, he'll be pretty powerless to stop that!")
It seems that many people here assume that a bad guy will just stand there and duke it out with the Paladin becuase, erm, it's so very climatic that the knight in shining armor battles the mighty evil foe while lightining strikes around and Hans Zimmer soundtrack goes off.
Truth is, anybody half intelligent upon seeing a Paladin would make sure to put as much obstacles/mooks/distance between, and go for the squishies behind the Paladin. And mobility isn't Paladins forte, that's where Monks (very), Barbarian (quite) and Fighters (heck, armor training ftw) all run circles around him, literally.
I'm assuming the bad guys will mostly focus on the paladin because I'm assuming the bad guys mostly believe (even if mistakenly) they can win, and that their goal is to win, not merely cause the most damage to the party.
Going after the squishies might mean you'll saddle the party with a resurrection bill, but in the meantime the paladin will swift-heal up to maximum and kill you. If you seriously believe you can win, you're better off killing the paladin; if you can manage that, everyone else is as good as dead. If you can't, you'll lose anyway.
It's just like from the other side of the DM screen: you focus fire on the regenerating enemies.
It seems that many people here assume that a bad guy will just stand there and duke it out with the Paladin becuase, erm, it's so very climatic that the knight in shining armor battles the mighty evil foe while lightining strikes around and Hans Zimmer soundtrack goes off.
Truth is, anybody half intelligent upon seeing a Paladin would make sure to put as much obstacles/mooks/distance between, and go for the squishies behind the Paladin. And mobility isn't Paladins forte, that's where Monks (very), Barbarian (quite) and Fighters (heck, armor training ftw) all run circles around him, literally.
I'm assuming the bad guys will mostly focus on the paladin because I'm assuming the bad guys mostly believe (even if mistakenly) they can win, and that their goal is to win, not merely cause the most damage to the party.
Going after the squishies might mean you'll saddle the party with a resurrection bill, but in the meantime the paladin will swift-heal up to maximum and kill you. If you seriously believe you can win, you're better off killing the paladin; if you can manage that, everyone else is as good as dead. If you can't, you'll lose anyway.
It's just like from the other side of the DM screen: you focus fire on the regenerating enemies.
I have to disagree with you there. If I were to run a game, my intelligent NPCs would keep the beefy, regenerating guy busy/controlled/entangled, and I would focus fire on the squishies that look like they can damage me the most. Plinking away at the Paladin won't accomplish much while his buddies are peppering me with arrows/spells/what have you. Once the party's artillery is dead, proceed to the next largest threat until the beefy guy is all by his lonesome, and can be appropriately mopped up at my leisure.
1.1 How many hats the pally has to wear affects his LOH uses. If he's subbing for a cleric he gets to LOH himself alot less because he'll use them at least occasionally on his buddies for condition relief.
You have a cleric so it sounds like your pally is (quite fairly) being selfish with his LOH.
In fact, the session where the paladin seemed indestructible and more powerful than anyone else was a session when the cleric didn't show up.
As some people (I think? it may have been another forum) pointed out, healing in combat is often a losing proposition. You're spending resources while the enemy keeps hitting you, and you're not hitting them. The Pathfinder cleric's channel energy is an exception to some extent, but it still means the cleric isn't killing monsters.
Without a cleric, everyone just grits their teeth, hopes they kill the monsters before the monsters kill them, and relies on CLW wands later. And the paladin does the same, and heals 3d6 as a swift action.
2.Now I confess to not having played Kingmaker, but any half intelligent EVIL creature will not simply stand still and trade blows with a Pally. Pally's are a common enough class in PF that Bad Guys can be resonably expected to know what smite does. Pally's suck at Mobility, so you need to have half intelligent enemies exploiting that. Really unless the AP gives you dumb monsters you shouldn't play em dumb (not saying you are but people often do...)
Running away is usually quite difficult in D&D. If you plan to do anything other than move away, you get attacked. If you plan to do anything other than move away, you're within charge range. If you run away really far, you get attacked with bonuses.
I'm assuming enemies with typical mobility for the difficulty level, say lizardmen, trolls, undead warriors, fey enchantresses (some encounters where the paladin came across as really powerful in our game). Put him up against a flying archer or something like that, and yes, he's screwed, but not that much more screwed than the fighter or even the monk (who's the ultimate in mobility, barring spellcasters).
3. This is VERY important. Pally's are pretty hard to get wrong. Check out the Masochist Paladin handbook. Most Pally's seem to go switch hitter and mounted (in the same build), OR dump everything into TWF/Shieldbash.
What's a switch hitter?
Funny you point this out: our paladin isn't very optimized at all. He has a greatsword. He hits thing. He heals himself.
He's not looking at TWF or Rapid Shot to squeeze extra juice from smite, or anything like that. He's just playing the class in the most obvious way possible (perhaps second most obvious, if we consider naive non-TWF longsword and shield the default).
I fear to think what it would look like if he tried to squeeze the absolute most out of the class.
4. AP's do Make a difference to party play! A certain theme/plot line vastly effects what your players face and what rescources they'll have.
EG Playing a Pally in skinsaw Murders will have you running out of LOH real quick since for the most part in the Misgivings the number of Haunts will chew through your LOH either through using it for turning or healing buddies. Remember the Pally's code.Mage: we'll the Barb just failed his will save, again! and jumped out the window- Pally, can you please turn these damn hauntings!
Pally- Nope. My saves mean the hauntings aren't getting me and I may need to use my LOH later on myself later.
Mage: But all we've seen so many hauntings, no real enemy threats and were running out of Charges on this Cure wand. Doesn't your honour code obligate you to help your fellow adventurers.
Pally- Yes but *I* do that by damage soaking and smiting, not turning or healing others.
*Ranger facepalms.*
You seem to be saying that the paladin comes across as less powerful against unquiet ghosts than in open wilderness exploration. Shouldn't it be the other way around?
In my opinion, exploring haunted mansions is where the paladin should really shine. Assaulting a lizardman village isn't, but he gets to shine even brighter becasue, hey, no undead anyway, so why not just spend all that positive energy to make myself unkillable.
Sorry dude,
As a trained soldier -that is freaking terrible tactics.
+1
It isn't that LoH is "overpowered," it's that all other healing spells are terrible.
Quite frankly LoH is what every healing spell or ability should be.
It's like, hey, FINALLY something for in-combat healing is worthwhile to reduce the rocket-tag nature of combat. And you want to nerf or kill it? Why?
Because I don't want everyone (or even all melee guys) to have to play paladins in order to be allowed into this brave new game of yours where healing is completely different.
I'll grant that it might be a better game than the default rocket-tag.
But if you don't accept rocket-tag, healing needs to be reworked. Make all healing swift, cut it to half strength (or quarter, or... numbers to be adjusted to desired precision). But a single effect, on a single class, only when it targets that single character? If that one thing is vastly better than all other things of its type, it's not some brilliant new paradigm, it's just overpowered.
I have to disagree with you there. If I were to run a game, my intelligent NPCs would keep the beefy, regenerating guy busy/controlled/entangled, and I would focus fire on the squishies that look like they can damage me the most. Plinking away at the Paladin won't accomplish much while his buddies are peppering me with arrows/spells/what have you. Once the party's artillery is dead, proceed to the next largest threat until the beefy guy is all by his lonesome, and can be appropriately mopped up at my leisure.
Controlled/entangled?
Monsters are rarely the combined arms tactics teams that the PCs are. They're mostly either a single huge badass, or a moderate badass followed by a bunch of mooks.
Some of the most dangerous encounters (at the level where they were encountered) in Kingmaker have been: three trolls, one of which had fighter levels; a lizardman with fighter levels, a will-o'-the-wisp, and a bunch of generic lizardmen; a powerful archer and several warrior types; a fey enchantress.
The paladin dominated (compared to the rest of the party) all of them, except the fey enchantress, where he was just as locked down as everyone else (even though he had better odds than most, thanks to good Will and divine grace).
The fact that you need to shape the encounters and the monsters' tactics around the paladin is a good indication that he is more powerful than anyone else.
|
A 6th-level paladin can lay on hands some 7 times per day for 3d6 hp. He can heal himself as a swift action.
This is precious little different from fast healing 10, for the whole of a fight or two, on a 6th level PC.
It seems to me that anything that can even remotely threaten a paladin will easily rip through any other PC.
Am I missing something? Is there some reason why this is not a problem?
What are you trying to achieve from this thread?
A number of people have agreed with you that there is a problem. More have recounted that, in their experience, the problem you perceive does not exist, or tried to give you reasons why they think it is not a problem. You have consistently dismissed these as they do not parallel your own experience – which is fine, no one should refute your experience (though they might well question the circumstances and underlying assumptions).
You are not likely to convince the people who disagree with you, nor they you. What are you hoping to achieve by persisting on this topic?
I would suggest that if you are not convinced that there is no problem then you need to consider implementing a house rule or two in your game to kerb the paladin’s perceived dominance, or change your play-style (or GM-style) to better challenge the group as a whole including the paladin.
Are you looking for suggestions in regards to the above?
EDIT: Note, I'm not trying to be dismissive or hostile, just trying to understand what you want and where you see this thread going.
I have to disagree with you there. If I were to run a game, my intelligent NPCs would keep the beefy, regenerating guy busy/controlled/entangled, and I would focus fire on the squishies that look like they can damage me the most. Plinking away at the Paladin won't accomplish much while his buddies are peppering me with arrows/spells/what have you. Once the party's artillery is dead, proceed to the next largest threat until the beefy guy is all by his lonesome, and can be appropriately mopped up at my leisure.Controlled/entangled?
Monsters are rarely the combined arms tactics teams that the PCs are. They're mostly either a single huge badass, or a moderate badass followed by a bunch of mooks.
Some of the most dangerous encounters (at the level where they were encountered) in Kingmaker have been: three trolls, one of which had fighter levels; a lizardman with fighter levels, a will-o'-the-wisp, and a bunch of generic lizardmen; a powerful archer and several warrior types; a fey enchantress.
The paladin dominated (compared to the rest of the party) all of them, except the fey enchantress, where he was just as locked down as everyone else (even though he had better odds than most, thanks to good Will and divine grace).
The fact that you need to shape the encounters and the monsters' tactics around the paladin is a good indication that he is more powerful than anyone else.
Not really, no. My tactics are not shaped around the Paladin specifically; rather my intelligent folks would use the same tactics against any melee type that doesn't go down easily. It doesn't take a SpecOps team to take down a party (though that would be a good encounter). Have a boss order his legion of disposable cannonfodder minions to dogpile the melee guy. While he's busy, focus fire with the rest of your people in the manner I previously described.
A single enemy is screwed no matter what the class makeup of the party is. The action economy is just insurmountable at that point.
If you have a homebrewed game or tinker with the APs, you can find plenty of ways to throw different challenges at the party to bypass the Paladin's strengths. Just don't do it all the time, because the Paladin player will feel punished for doing what Paladins do best: fight, and outlast, evil.
I have a paladin in my games now.
Jasin,
If I brought a Ranger with a Bane Bow into your "All Giants, All The Time" campiagn, and (as expected) destroyed everything, would you then decide both class and weapon needs to be generally nerfed?
You can't use a Pathfinder AP to judge this. They're not well balanced. Paizo just loves their BBEGs too much. You don't have to "Tailor" encounters, just don't throw the same Iconic Baddies over and over, because that's who the Paladin kills. Mix it up a little. This problem goes away.
Better yet, make LoH a standard action all the time. Then run your party though a AP with few to no evil foes. A conclave of Druids that want to wipe out a large city because it's destroying the wilderness. Neutral Druids, Neutral allies, and Neutral Magical Beasts. The whole campaign. Watch Paladin die first Every, Single, Time.
This is an extreme example, but it shows what happens when you don't let a Paladin do what he does best. If you always let a Paladin do what he does best (as, say, Kingmaker does) the result is just as bad.
If you do decide to gimp Paladins, well then you DO need to tailor encounters. If you take the Paladin's performance at his peak, and use it as a baseline, then you need to make sure the Paladin always fights what he can kill: Single Evil Guys.
Moreover, generally people consider game breking things that trash encounters, not that make one dude more durable. Myself, I'm just a little bit surprised, I guess that for other people could be the same.What do you mean by "trash encounters"? Win? That's what the PCs are expected to do anyway. That's not a problem.
A problem is when one PC does most of the heavy lifting, while the others are reduced to supporting cast or, worse, liabilities (v. all the suggestions along the lines of "the paladin might be an indestructible murder machine, but why not have the monsters just crush the rest of the party, he'll be pretty powerless to stop that!")
I mean for trash that "trivialize" them, make them laughable like sometimes heppens with sleep or color spray at level 1 (and even that, is not so easy for an enormous amount of factors).
Jasin, I already said, or other people said.. other classes have other features (mobility, more flexibility about damage and combat maneuvers, and stuff).
I can admit that a paladin is more easy to play compared to a fighter and even a barbarian. Barring aligment features. But I just want to ask you to check if the monsters are played at best, or other classes are, before nerf a class, because THERE IS A PLAYER BEHIND THAT CLASS.
If for your gamestyle and campaign is too powerful nerf the way I or other posters suggested. IMO, this is the first time the paladin is awesome, I want to enjoy it.
What are you hoping to achieve by persisting on this topic?
What do you mean "persisting"? As you've said, opinions have been stated and somewhat backed up by arguments, and further polarized to the point they're unlikely to change.
However, I see no particular reason to categorically stop reading or replying. If I think a post merits a reply (whether to agree or disagree), I'll reply, without some a particular goal to achieve. Anyone who is frustrated by the thread, is free to stop "persisting" themselves.
|
|
What are you hoping to achieve by persisting on this topic?What do you mean "persisting"? As you've said, opinions have been stated and somewhat backed up by arguments, and further polarized to the point they're unlikely to change.
However, I see no particular reason to categorically stop reading or replying. If I think a post merits a reply (whether to agree or disagree), I'll reply, without some a particular goal to achieve. Anyone who is frustrated by the thread, is free to stop "persisting" themselves.
Fair enough. I was hoping to figure out if I could offer you any insight or somehow help you achieve your goal. Since that is not the case, I will indeed stop posting to this thread. Not sure what you mean by putting "persisting" in inverted commas, it implies that you have an issue with my use of the word. I believe it was used correctly in the context.
If I brought a Ranger with a Bane Bow into your "All Giants, All The Time" campiagn, and (as expected) destroyed everything, would you then decide both class and weapon needs to be generally nerfed?
Of course not.
But "All Giants, All The Time" is not a typical game, while "Most Evil, Most of the Time" is.
You can't use a Pathfinder AP to judge this. They're not well balanced.
This is a matter of individual priorities: since the Pathfinder RPG was published primarily so that Paizo could keep publishing adventures without being tied to an out-of-print game, it could be argued that if the game doesn't work well with the adventures, it's the game that's at fault, that fails to achieve its goals.
I'd rather adjust the class to work to my satisfaction, and then use the adventure paths, than adjust all the adventure paths I ever run.
Better yet, make LoH a standard action all the time.
Actually, I'm thinking of a choice of standard action for the listed amount (whether targeting self or others) or swift action for half that (whether targeting self or others).
It would make the paladin less indestructible, and offer a boost to anyone fighting alongside a paladin.
[qupte]Then run your party though a AP with few to no evil foes.
Is there such an adventure path?
Evil foes aren't a corner case, or even one of many equally valid and situations, they're the default. Neutral and even Good opponents have their place, and indeed offer opportunities to put a paladin in a difficult spot, but I don't think "paladin owns against Evil, but sucks against Neutral in equal measure" is a valid argument, since (unless the DM goes out of his way to ensure otherwise, as in your druid example) he'll be fighting Evil most of the time.
IMO, this is the first time the paladin is awesome, I want to enjoy it.
I'm sure players of other classes would love to feel the same.
IMO, this is the first time the paladin is awesome, I want to enjoy it.I'm sure players of other classes would love to feel the same.
Paladin has not feats or rage powers or a better use of movement, weapons and armors. No rogue tricks or favored enemies. Takes combat feats at the same rate of the SORCERER.
Has two things: is more durable, and shares such durability with others (buffing other's defenses, mercy) and is occasionally a terrible enemy against evildoers. And yes, can be terribly efficent in it. It's a paladin worth his name.
If you think that is anyway OP in your games and for your gamestyle, nerf it and see how it goes for you! But I strongly suggest to talk with your player, and make clear that, if later tables turn, things will be restored.
I anyway think that is worth to be discussed and stuff. I simply disagree :)
You can't use a Pathfinder AP to judge this. They're not well balanced.This is a matter of individual priorities: since the Pathfinder RPG was published primarily so that Paizo could keep publishing adventures without being tied to an out-of-print game, it could be argued that if the game doesn't work well with the adventures, it's the game that's at fault, that fails to achieve its goals.
The designers balanced the game to what they thought would be "normal play" They did not author the APs. Most of the APs were authored by the same pool of writers, who really their BBEGs and didn't think to change the mix a little.
I'd rather adjust the class to work to my satisfaction, and then use the adventure paths, than adjust all the adventure paths I ever run.
Then you should leave the Pally alone. A Paladin isn't even a little overpowered when not doing his thing. If you nerf the Pally, you need to make sure he can consistently do his thing.
Then run your party though a AP with few to no evil foes.Is there such an adventure path?
There is if you write one yourself. MY preferred method as both DM and player.
Evil foes aren't a corner case, or even one of many equally valid and situations, they're the default. Neutral and even Good opponents have their place, and indeed offer opportunities to put a paladin in a difficult spot, but I don't think "paladin owns against Evil, but sucks against Neutral in equal measure" is a valid argument, since (unless the DM goes out of his way to ensure otherwise, as in your druid example) he'll be fighting Evil most of the time.
Evil isn't what a Paladin does, One Evil Guy is what a Paladin does. If the Pally tears up some evil mooks the party was supposed to bowl through anyway, nobody cares. And if he used up a smite and some LoH to do it, all the better. Just mix up the bosses a little. This is good advice even if you don't have a Paladin. Istead of a dragon, throw a wyvern at them. Same CR, Looks the same, but when was the last time you fought one of those? Instead of a the Evil ArchMage, use the Evil Triumvirate. A Fighter, Wizard, Clerc, all three equally devious and fleshed out, has better action economy and will end up being more of a challenge and a more memorable encounter than the BBEG and his faceless mooks.
The problem isn't that PF is unbalanced, it's that the encounters in the APs are all the same. One Big Bad Evil Guy. Yeah, that's the archetype, and meat and potatoes are great, but meat and potatoes for Every, Single, Meal, gets old. You gotta spice it up a little. Which is one of the reasons I don't favor the Pathfinder APs, or, at best, I'll read an AP for inspiration, then write my own, tailored for my group. So that everyone has a chance to not only do what their characters do best, but also that everyone gets to do what they enjoy most as players.
IMO, this is the first time the paladin is awesome, I want to enjoy it.I'm sure players of other classes would love to feel the same.Paladin has not feats or rage powers or a better use of movement, weapons and armors. No rogue tricks or favored enemies. Takes combat feats at the same rate of the SORCERER.
Has two things: is more durable, and shares such durability with others (buffing other's defenses, mercy) and is occasionally a terrible enemy against evildoers. And yes, can be terribly efficent in it. It's a paladin worth his name.
If you think that is anyway OP in your games and for your gamestyle, nerf it and see how it goes for you! But I strongly suggest to talk with your player, and make clear that, if later tables turn, things will be restored.
I anyway think that is worth to be discussed and stuff. I simply disagree :)
The sorcerer gets bonus feats. Along with the bard, the paladin is the only class in game with no bonus feats/abilities that mimic feats whatsoever.
I am playing a paladin in Serpent's Skull, and I am doing well enough. I have been downed on a couple of occasions, but generally kept up and going strong. My smite have come into effect a couple of times, but it has never been an "OMG! You broke the encounter!" issue.
Sure, paladins are strong and durable. It is what the class is supposed to be; reliable champions of good. They take a back seat to the feat-heavy fighter, the raging barbarian, the blasting arcane caster etc, when it comes to most everyday encounters. He is a reliable presence, makes all his saves and contributes to the fights, but doesn't do nearly as much damage. BUT, then along comes a terrifying solo encounter, and THIS is where the paladin shines. He has been held back for so long, but when the grand crescendo starts, he steps forward and does HIS thing.
My paladin is outdamaged by the ranger when he hits with his rapid shots, as well as the rogue when she hits with one, and especially both, sneak attack(s). Even when he smites, the difference is not huge, but then again, we haven't encountered anything with significant DR yet.
The Lay on Hands ability is a life-saver, but mostly because I roll really well. I consistently roll over average, but that is more luck than a bad-ass ability. 2d6 can mean 12 hp back, but it can also mean 2. And I run out really fast. I am usually completely out by the end of the 3rd encounter, even if I try to be stingy to optimize the use (never use it until I can gain full benefit of rolling all 6s). Also, I have found the need to use it on others, and as a paladin I can't really go "NO! This is _MY_ healing! Go bug the cleric!" as a paladin, now can I?
The designers balanced the game to what they thought would be "normal play" They did not author the APs. Most of the APs were authored by the same pool of writers, who really their BBEGs and didn't think to change the mix a little.
If you have to argue that the Pathfinder adventure paths don't constitute normal play for the Pathfinder RPG, I think you're reaching.
Then you should leave the Pally alone. A Paladin isn't even a little overpowered when not doing his thing. If you nerf the Pally, you need to make sure he can consistently do his thing.
Don't you agree that in a Pathfinder adventure path, he can consistently do his thing?
There is if you write one yourself.
So, that's a no.
I like running my own stuff. I also like running Paizo's adventure paths. I'm not changing either of these things I like to accommodate rules I don't like. I'll rather change the rules.
I like running my own stuff. I also like running Paizo's adventure paths. I'm not changing either of these things I like to accommodate rules I don't like. I'll rather change the rules.
I'm still trying to figure out how the Paladin is unbalancing your game. Is it just the HP? The smite isn't bothering you, the saves, the bond, the auras? His AC shouldn't be that great, if he's not two-handing, he's only has a light shield (+1 AC isn't all that) the Fighter should have the same armor, better dex and no speed reduction. I supposed if your Pally is turtling up, but then he loses damage. When the Paladin isn't smiting, which should be most of the time (unless you fight less than 4 enemies per day) he's killing things slower than the fighter so he should be taking more damage.
Unless... your party fights exactly one thing. Paladin smites, spellcasters use half their spells. They fight exactly one more thing. Paladin smites, spellcasters use other of half their spells. Rest. The PF APs I've played usually aren't that slow paced. Typically, you have a dungeon, or something you have to clear, with several encounters. If you stop and go home, the monsters get wise, pack up and go somewhere else. Or at least have a surprise waiting for you.Or is there something else I'm missing? Are you playing the baddies effectively? If the Pally has too many HP, hit him more, or, don't hit him at all; drop the Cleric, then go after the squishies. If the encounters are all just 1 foe, that's the problem right there. Action economy is king. Any 6th level party, Paladin or not, will do better against 1 CR 8 than 3 CR 5s this goes double if you have a large party. Heck fighting just one evil guy is what a Pally does best anyway. If that's all the AP throws at you...
I don't know, I can't figure it out. Even if you fight 100% Evil, there should be enough foes in a day that the Pally can't smite them all. And without smite, all he has is LoH. which are just extra HP if he uses them all himself.
|
The PF APs I've played usually aren't that slow paced.
In small encounters, nobody notices the paladin since it basically boils down to blasting a few enemies and perhaps one character falling. In any bigger encounter, paladin starts getting massive damage and keeps standing. Everyone else just hides behind him
drop the Cleric
Yes, good luck with that too :D
Interestingly, both of those APs hold some serious problems for Paladins — and not so much for other classes. Both are going to reach points where the party feels almost gimped for having so many.Is that a problem? Hasn't really been so far for our group, but Rise of the Runelords has two Paladins out of five PCs and Council of Thieves has three out of sixSee, that's exactly what I'd like to avoid.
Interesting--We're on module 4/6 for both campaigns, and I think I know what you mean for Council (there's a few issues there), but I'm GMing Rise and have read all the modules, and I'm unsure what you mean for Rise.
I'm still trying to figure out how the Paladin is unbalancing your game. Is it just the HP?
Primarily, but...
The smite isn't bothering you, the saves, the bond, the auras?
... you're starting to get it!
The paladin have several abilities good enough to be the signature ability of a class.
Of those, the ability to replenish hit points without compromising offense appeared to be most noticeably powerful in play, and upon reflection, is the one that's most unusual within the wider context of the game.
Action economy is king.
Which is precisely why swift action healing is hugely powerful.
What if a caster binds or summons an angel to heal the whole party, at higher level? You ban it because of action economy abuse?
|
After lvl 5 the paladin will have an aura of good, which is detectable - I make use of that: he will be the focus of attention.
Just fyi, per RAW, the paladin has this from level 1.
So some evil enemies will be able to tell from day one, that he's either a higher-level badass, or specifically devoted to opposing them, and will take appropriate steps.Creature/Object ....Aura Power
................................None...Faint...Moderate...Strong...Overwhel ming
Aligned creature(HD)...1-5... 6-10....11-25......26-50.....51+
Aligned Undead (HD).....--....1-2.....3-8.......9-20......21+
Aligned Outsider(HD)....--.....1.......2-4.......5-10......11+
Cleric or paladin...........--.....1.......2-4.......5-10......11+
So a Paladin 1 glows like a GoodFighter6, Pal2 glows like a GoodFighter11, a Pal5 glows like a GoodFighter26!
I'm still trying to figure out how the Paladin is unbalancing your game. Is it just the HP?Primarily, but...
The smite isn't bothering you, the saves, the bond, the auras?... you're starting to get it!
The paladin have several abilities good enough to be the signature ability of a class.
Of those, the ability to replenish hit points without compromising offense appeared to be most noticeably powerful in play, and upon reflection, is the one that's most unusual within the wider context of the game.
Action economy is king.Which is precisely why swift action healing is hugely powerful.
I always think of the LoH as straight up extra HP, (that's what it usually ends up being) that a Pally can use for other stuff. Swift Action healing basically does mean a Paladin's LoH are easily converted to extra HP as he needs it.
Are Pallys better at Pathfinder APs? Maybe, but Clerics would be better at Undead adventures, and Rangers would excel at adventure with only a few creature types, Druids are better outdoors, etc. I doubt a Party of 4 Paladins would be optimal in any adventure path. So every one should still excel at something.
When do you find the Paladin steals the show? Is it all the time? Just the Bosses? I suppose it would be easier to try to fix a few class features than try to balance every encounter.
Which characters does the Paladin over shadow? Maybe give that character a magic item, somehow, or just don't attack that character as much so he doesn't drop first.
I only have my experiences as a player, and when I play Pally's, even against the Skeleton King, I took that sucker down before it could really wail too much on my party, but everyone still got they're shots in so everyone was happy.
If the Pally is still beating down monsters after everyone else has dropped, it sound's like, if not for the Pally, that could have been a TPK. Maybe the party needs their full power Pally. You could try nerfing the encounter to end before everyone drops. The Pally will still deal half the damage, but everyone will contribute and no one will die, so everyone should be happy. If you have two Pallys, don't nerf the encounter so hard, but now you have at least two players that are happy, so that's a definite plus
I haven't been seeing the Paladin outpace the other classes. Anecdotal evidence to be sure, but so is the original complaint. I suspect this is a style of play issue.
It's no secret that the paladin has improved since 3.5... maybe these paladin-heavy parties are just forming because it has only now become a fun class to play?
Anyway, in my group, the wizard still stolves the problems, the barbarian still has more hit points (even if you count LoH as HP), and the fighter still does more damage. If I went and took away LoH from my Paladin it would be unfair to that player.
(Full disclosure: I feel the Smite Evil erratum was justified and Aura of Justice is still rather scary, but we haven't reached that level yet.)
Aura of Justice. Me Wants It!
I always think of the LoH as straight up extra HP, (that's what it usually ends up being) that a Pally can use for other stuff. Swift Action healing basically does mean a Paladin's LoH are easily converted to extra HP as he needs it.
Right. And looking at it that way, it doesn't strike you as suspicious that all the other 6th-level PCs have between 6d4 and 6d12 hp, while the paladin has 6d10+15d6?
Are Pallys better at Pathfinder APs? Maybe, but Clerics would be better at Undead adventures, and Rangers would excel at adventure with only a few creature types, Druids are better outdoors, etc.
But Pathfinder adventure paths aren't some odd corner case which just happens to favour one particular class! They're the adventures that the Pathfinder RPG is intended to run! They're the primary reason for the existence of the game!
When do you find the Paladin steals the show? Is it all the time? Just the Bosses?
Just the truly important, tough encounters.
In the forgettable attrition encounters against mooks where everyone is certain of victory anyway, he does no better than anyone else.
It's no secret that the paladin has improved since 3.5...
In fact, it is without a doubt the single class that has gotten the most power ups, comparing the Pathfinder classes to their 3.5 incarnations.
maybe these paladin-heavy parties are just forming because it has only now become a fun class to play?
I've found killing CR = level monsters in a single blow plenty fun in 3.5.
I haven't been seeing the Paladin outpace the other classes. Anecdotal evidence to be sure, but so is the original complaint. I suspect this is a style of play issue.
It's no secret that the paladin has improved since 3.5... maybe these paladin-heavy parties are just forming because it has only now become a fun class to play?
Anyway, in my group, the wizard still stolves the problems, the barbarian still has more hit points (even if you count LoH as HP), and the fighter still does more damage. If I went and took away LoH from my Paladin it would be unfair to that player.
(Full disclosure: I feel the Smite Evil erratum was justified and Aura of Justice is still rather scary, but we haven't reached that level yet.)
Yep, even with all these Paladins, I feel that other characters get their chance to shine (except maybe the Barbarian and the Monk in Rise of the Runelords, but honestly Fighters are better than Barbarians and Monks in core PFRPG too, so that isn't only Paladin's fault). The only time any of these Paladins truly dominated was in Burnt Offerings back when it was a single Paladin, and I've run that adventure more than once and seen even a Barbarian dominate it almost as well as the Paladin did--low levels are swingy, and a few neat tricks (in the Paladin's case unhittable AC, Lay on Hands in case they roll a 20, and actually good offense) can make you unstoppable. Now at higher levels, Wisdom Drain monsters make him sad, and he got killed from nearly full by a certain Barbarian's hook crit (he was rezed).
If you feel that particular ability is going to be abused like that, houserule that healing with that ability is an attack of opportunity. I'm actually surprised that it isn't when they specifically mention that using it against undead doesn't grant an attack of opportunity.
What if a caster binds or summons an angel to heal the whole party, at higher level? You ban it because of action economy abuse?As a caster, I always feel bad about people binding angels. And it's not because of in-game morality :D
You prefer binding fiends?
*insert joke here*
|
|
One way of fixing it is to alter the bosses. Take some of the bosses and make them Neutral instead of Evil, if they can fit in as neutral and not evil. A necromancer who's going to take over the world using an army of undead isn't really a great fit for Neutral (although you could make a convincing background to make him such, I'm sure). However, some baron that wants to take over the country by killing the king could indeed be Neutral very easily.
Agreed.
A lot of opponents seem to be given an evil alignment as a lazy default, or because the GM or writer wants to be able to twirl his moustasche and chew the scenery in the climactic fight.You can still have the Overly Complicated Masterplan, and the bombastic speech, with a Neutral BBNG. And in many cases, it works better, since it's more likely to have some believable reasoning behind it than the tired excuse of 'I did it because....I'm evil?'
Try Lawful Overzealous,
Neutral Misinformed,
Chaotic I'mnotgoingtotakeanyofthisshitanymore.
Evil in D&D is objective, not subjective (and a good thing, too, since then we'd have almost NO evil NPCs, since virtually no-one self-identifies as 'evil').
But that cuts both ways; it means you have to be objective when assigning alignments, and avoid a common double-standard, where every starving peasant that takes to banditry has a glowing 'eeeevil' tag, while violent, petty actions by the PCs are allowed to slide.
If it's not bad enough for a PC to be designated evil, then neither should an NPC. If the behaviour is truly heinous to affect an NPCs alignment, then a player can't sidestep this by writing 'CN' on his character sheet.
|
Yeah, I'm curious as to why you (jasin) would think that a paladin's limited resources in relation to smite evil and lay on hands is not a good balancing method? If you have more than a couple of fights per adventuring day (scales with level) you will quickly see the paladins weaknesses in comparison to a fighter etc.Because extensive experience has shown that when the PCs have significantly depleted their resources, they rest.
That's why clerics, wizards, and druids dominated 3E so thoroughly. They could only keep going at godlike levels of power for minutes, or at best a few hours each day. But when that time is up, the smart thing to do is rest. Even if there's time pressure (unless it's specifically contrived to counter particular classes, which I as a DM don't want to be required to do, and which Paizo's adventure writers don't do either), it's almost always quicker to deal with things at peak power, rather than push on while weakened and risk significant time and resource setbacks (like death).
But Kingmaker specifically has safe-guards against this: While exploring, the PCs have a 25%+ chance of a random encounter each night. If the PCs don't get their 8 hours of sleep, they don't restore their spells. and 80% of those wandering monster tables are N animals or N giants... If you have an issue, make this 25% into 40%.
|
|
But Kingmaker specifically has safe-guards against this: While exploring, the PCs have a 25%+ chance of a random encounter each night. If the PCs don't get their 8 hours of sleep, they don't restore their spells. and 80% of those wandering monster tables are N animals or N giants... If you have an issue, make this 25% into 40%.
All right, we get to have double lycanthropy :D
Problem is there, problem is made...
I sense the troll in you... may it be with you but seriously... trolling ... smurf!
Hah, joking aside.
1)Paladin is overpowered according what I understand plus the abilities s/he got
2)Other party members feel like being supporters or side-kicks
Paladin is LG, embodient of their God/Goddess and bring the joy, flowers etc to world... and pain to Evil and other smugs
1.a)Ability to use Smite Evil
1.b)Ability to use Lay of Hand
1.c)Plusses to saves
1.d)Other minor stuff
1.e)Able to Heal and Cause damage same round = 2 action / 1 round
So...
We have also answers here:
1.1)House-rule: LoH is standard action
1.2)House-rule: LoH provkes AoO
1.3)Adventure Path is what it means. Adventure and there is in the end something like Big Bad Evil Boss
1.4.a) BBEG= Change the alingment to Neutral
1.4.b) BBEG= Change tactics.... play more wisely
1.4.c) BBEG= Get 4-5 side kicks to help him or something
1.5)Honor Code: Heal your allies. Of course this you can argue and people play as they see fit
1.6)You are the GM/DM. You should see how your group play, you can plan this in advance or try to come up with something sudden.
2.1)Other characters = help them to optimize or something, I don´t know since I don´t play with you or with them.
2.2)All characters are good. Point! It´s way of playing, or coming up with tactics.
2.3)It is proven quite alot in this forums that all characters can do tons of damage or are good at what they do.
2.4) Try to play with them around or ask if the paladin could play together with team-> look at 1.5=Honor Code
2.5) All of them can do stuff which paladin is unable to do. Let the others get honor of killing BBEG-> keep the paladin busy
2.5.1)Minions
2.5.2)Difficult Terrain
2.5.3)Force Cage, Black Tentacles, etc etc
2.5.4)Make him waste those smites
2.5.5)Make him waste those LoH-> keep hitting him with conditions.
Paladin sucks against Fighter = True. Against BBEG= Fighter sucks against Paladin = true. Thats how it is->> Because they are designed for that.
Same again with Wizard-> Same again with Cleric etc, etc. How you play the campaing, how the people play the campaign.
e.g Evil Wizard vs Paladin
1) Scry at them
2) Get out the tactics
3) Fight-> Just push others out & leave paladin there
4) minions attack Paladin-> Make him WASTE those smites.
5) No Smites Evil - No +AC, No + Atk & Damage
etc and etc, there is tactics.
I don´t see problem with this. Honestly and just as a friendly advice, you could try to change your tactics here
|
|
Come to think of it even Good Conjurers should be asking themselves dome hard questions before doing such a thing. Maybe for some short term service in an appropriate cause might be arguable.
In raw, wizards must offer money and whatnot. Aligned clerics need to just ask for help, since they're powerful clerics of that alignment and everyone in heaven is really impressed
I agree there should be some extra work involved, but that could derail the AP
Luckily, PFRPG nerfed summoning HD's from 3.5. I have yet to see how that works out for us. In age of worms 3.5, most of the work was done by Angelica the angel, we gave her some lovely magical equipment, and then stood by and watched her burn stuff with holy anger (yes, I'm exaggerating, but not a lot)
I had an interesting conversation popup this past weekend while my players were doing a mid session level up (I was expecting them to be a level higher before facing the next couple of encounters but hadnt reached a planed encounter in the previous one so they leveled up mid session this time around). Present that day was a Paladin who was sword and board with 2 weapon fighting, A 2 weapon fighting (with weapons) ranger, and a Time theif[by super genius games] (also two weapon fighting). I was dmpcing a sorceror to fill out the party a little for a unusually low attendance game for our group.
The fighter and the paladin players were talking as they levels about their various strengths. After the hp roll they were comparing hp. The fighter remarked he had 20 more hp then the paladin (due to slightly better rolls on hp and a higher con bonus since he didnt need any mental stats for his character and we were doing point buy), to which the paladin remarked he could make up for it with his lay on hands. Then they compared their damage rates and AC's and as I was jotting down some notes I said, 'fascinating, you guys have discovered that different classes have strength and weaknesses. Please put your willies back in your pants and lets get on with the adventure.