When I think Paladin I think a warrior in heavy armor either wielding sword and board or a two-handed weapon with the change in mechanics to smite evil, paladins seem to be able to effectively duel wield and use ranged weapons, in fact the choice of duel wielding or using a ranged weapon (with rapid shot) is many times a better build than a two handed weapon or a sword and shield.
My question is how could I modify the rules for my gaming session to encourage players to use a two handed weapon or sword and shield, and discourage them from using duel wielding without making the paladin over-powered or underpowered?
First, let me say that People should be able to play what they want to play even if it goes against stereotypes.
Second, you could rule that smite evil only applies to one weapon, or go back to 3.X and say that it applies to melee attacks only.
EDIT: Also, how do you feel about dual wielding sword and shield?
I think the fact that dual wielding effectively requires a lot of feats and a really high dex is enough of a deterrant to a Paladin to avoid it. They already need Str, Con, Wis, and Cha. If it goes TWF it has to dump one of those other stats (unless you roll stats of course) and I don't think that's worth the loss.
As far as being an archer you have the same deal. Takes focusing ones limited feats to be a good archer plus you need to focus on Dex more.
I think the fact that dual wielding effectively requires a lot of feats and a really high dex is enough of a deterrant to a Paladin to avoid it. They already need Str, Con, Wis, and Cha. If it goes TWF it has to dump one of those other stats (unless you roll stats of course) and I don't think that's worth the loss.
As far as being an archer you have the same deal. Takes focusing ones limited feats to be a good archer plus you need to focus on Dex more.
Paladins don't need Wis, with spellcasting based off of Cha and Cha added to all saves, not to mention a good will save to begin with.
Paladins don't need Wis, with spellcasting based off of Cha and Cha added to all saves, not to mention a good will save to begin with.I think the fact that dual wielding effectively requires a lot of feats and a really high dex is enough of a deterrant to a Paladin to avoid it. They already need Str, Con, Wis, and Cha. If it goes TWF it has to dump one of those other stats (unless you roll stats of course) and I don't think that's worth the loss.
As far as being an archer you have the same deal. Takes focusing ones limited feats to be a good archer plus you need to focus on Dex more.
Oh my bad. I remembered Paladins being wisdom based casters.
First, let me say that People should be able to play what they want to play even if it goes against stereotypes.
Second, you could rule that smite evil only applies to one weapon, or go back to 3.X and say that it applies to melee attacks only.
EDIT: Also, how do you feel about dual wielding sword and shield?
I agree they should be allowed to play against stereotypes but, I would like to give them some incentive to play with the stereotypes instead of having it the other way. I think I'll implement that it only works with melee attacks so you can use a bow but you don't want to.
Duel wielding with sword and board I guess would be in line with a paladin, I'll see if I can make up a variant and I'll bounce it off you guys.
Ok so my current solution is this:
Paladins a paladin may only get bonuses from smite evil with melee weapons, the Aura of justice ability allows for paladins to grant smite evil to allies, an ally who smites evil may get the bonuses if they use ranged attacks
Zeal: a paladin using a two handed weapon making a full round attack against a smited opponent may choose to take a -2 penalty to all attacks made in that round in exchange to being able to attack one more time.
Zeal is supposed to work like rapidshot, but for two handed weapons.
I think that won't make the paladins too powerful, and since sword and board wielding is effectively duel wielding, it will work well for them too.
In my view, sure, certain approaches can be much more ´NOVA´,
but the thing is most encounters you aren´t going to be smiting.
And these ´nova´ approaches are very stat/feat intensive...
Yet most of the time the paladin WON´t be that impressive using these styles.
VS. a 2-hander being much easier to ALWAYS be impressive.
And Sword and Board is interesting because it´s a style that has benefits even when not 2WF´ing with it, or Smiting.
So I see Sword+Board (which seems more iconic than 2-handing for me) as the standard style for Paladins.
They don´t really need to take more than the first 2WF Feat. When SMiting the -2 doesn´t really matter, and when not Smiting they don´t have to use 2WF.
An Archer Paladin can be good, but will have less STR than a real Archer, who will tend to have other bonuses (Fighter/FavoredEnemy) all the time/alot of the time, again vs. limited Smite. Aura of Justice is awesome sauce, but really uses up your daily usages.
As to your solution/houserule, do you have a similar one for 2Handed Rogues? Why not?
And doesn´t that beg the question of Paladin dip so 2 Handed Fighters can gain an extra attack, x/times/day?
As to your solution/houserule, do you have a similar one for 2Handed Rogues? Why not?
And doesn´t that beg the question of Paladin dip so 2 Handed Fighters can gain an extra attack, x/times/day?
Well I guess the rule only applies for paladins because I think flavor wise a duel wielding rogue is an iconic thing as well, I see what you mean by a dip in paladin might be beneficial for a fighter (I made that whole idea up in 8 minutes so as you can tell, I didn't balance it exactly)
Maybe I could say that if one leaves the path of the paladin (breaks their code or takes levels in another class) they wouldn't gain the benefits of zeal, but it's something I JUST came up with so I would expect there to be some issues.
You could also put a level requirement on it like paladin 8. I play a Paladin in my campaign and I am a sword and board, non-twf build and when I Smite evil and defense up, my AC is in the 40's (against my smited target) and I hit on average per hit into the 40's, after the initial double in a lot of cases. Honestly I would not worry so much about if the player wants to be a TWF with either weapons or sword and board. If the output is seeming to much for you, look at how you are presenting monsters or how you are handling the smite evil. remember it is target based, not all evil are effected once it is play just the target, so through more piddly evil monsters in to waste his smites if you would like. My DM likes to throw in more Neutral mobs that I can't smite. Your campaign may be stock full of evil but smite evil is quite limited per day, and no feat changes it.
Personally, I like the archer paladin for the flavor, more like a shrine maiden.
I disagree with your strategy of changing the rules so that they only support the way you like paladins to fight. Instead of changing the rules, just tell your players that you prefer them to use only a single weapon if playing a Paladin.
Purely opinion, of course.