I don't much think Paladins are overpowered. They can situationally shine of course (with smite), but then there are troughs as well (fighting neutrals or once you are out of smites).
On the plus side, they do get heals and good saves, but many of their powers are use limited per day, and that also cuts into any claims of being overpowered. Personally I'd say a Barbarian is more powerful. Honestly I think the barbs are the kings of melee at upper levels, and nobody really can touch them. Then isn't to say you can't play rock, scissors, paper to build a barb killer, but for general power level they are the kings. I should clarify that I also don't think barbs are overpowered considering what spellcasters can do at those levels.
Paladins are relentless. While they don't do the overwhelming damage that some fighters and barbarians do, they have far better saves, immunities to certain attacks, and the ability to heal themselves.
It's not easy to take a paladin down.
Part of this is the comparison to the 3.0/3.5 paladin. Who, honestly, were terrible. So, paladins in PF ARE a lot better than they were. But I'm not sure I'd say overpowered. Just regular powered, and terrifying the right environment.
Of course therein lies the rub. Paladins are terrifying in the right environment.
Barbarians are terrifying no matter where you drop them (ok, some hyperbole here, but they are more universal than paladins).
I see strengths in both of course, but prefer if barbarians were the set point of martial class balance.
Paladins are NOT OP. Particularly not in comparison to a high-level wizard or a fully-buffed cleric.
Paladins would require more spellcasting (level 6ish), bonus feats, etc to even start to become OP.
Paladins aren't even massively overpowered against creatures of pure evil: demons, devils, evil dragons, undead, etc.
If any class is overpowered in PF, it would still probably be one of the Tier 1 classes: cleric, druid, and wizard.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I didn't care much for the paladin in my latest games, until one player decided to play one. The group is level 4 by now, and the paladin is easily the most powerful character in the party (who consists of him, a two-handed ranger, dervish cleric and wizard). That trend will only continue when he gets Divine Bond next level (adding keen to a weapon on level 5 is a big deal).
The thing is, he's not really optimized. He has Power Attack and the Greater Mercy feat, which lets him heal himself 3d6 damage each round. He deals more damage than any party member, has way better saves, and can heal himself as a swift action for 3d6 5 times per day. The AP I'm DMing (RotR) has plenty of evil people (and some evil outsiders/undead) so the Smite is extremely relevant (and it now lasts for an entire encounter!).
I'm not going into the "caster X martial" discussion, but I can easily say that, in the fields of AC, attack bonus, damage, saves, and suvivability, the paladin comes out ahead of the curve. Sure, a barbarian may deal more damage in a rage, but he does not have the crazy saves and auto-heal of the paladin, and rage mechanics actually make him extremely risky (I've had at least one barbarian dying when the rage wore off, and many others near death in the middle of combat).
To be sure, I'm not saying the paladin breaks the game. Having experienced one of those for the first time in Pathfinder, I'm finding them extremely powerful in those fields comparing to the rest of the party. I do not claim to know the future, but I only see that disparity growing as the group levels. Even against non-evil enemies, he's still a guy with high AC and saves chucking a +1 keen greatsword (2d6+14) at an enemy and healing himself 3d6 damage per round.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not going to say that Paladins are over-powered per se... since I'm not driven by an all-cosuming need for game balance I'm fine with the fact that some classes are more powerful than others, but if ranking them I'd have Paladins right near the top... of course that's based off potential as any class can be well made to take advantage of its abilities or poorly made to seem 'meh'.
I would say that the thing that truly makes them potent is their Lay on Hands ability - the ability to self-heal as a swift action is probably the most potent class feature in the game, certainly for a martial. That, layered with their many immunities and very high saves make them the penultimate tank. Having a customizable magic weapon, Smite and some very under-rated spells is all icing on the cake.
Characters shouldn't have to rely on magic items - much less specific magic items - to be considered 'good' characters and the Paladin has zero inherent weaknesses or flaws (unless you count the role-playing aspect which I do not). Consider a Human Oath of Vengeance Paladin with the following stats:
STR - 14
DEX - 14
CON - 14
INT - 12
WIS - 8
CHA - 14 (+2 racial bonus, +1 at 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th and 20th)
1st - Fey Foundling (reflavored as Divine Birth)
1st - Power Attack
3rd - Deadly Aim
5th - Extra Lay on Hands
7th - Extra Lay on Hands
9th - Furious Focus
11th - Dreadful Carnage
13th - Extra Lay on Hands
15th - Extra Lay on Hands
17th - Extra Lay on Hands
19th - Greater Mercy
Now here is a character who ultimately has (not counting any magic items whatsoever) 25 uses of Lay on Hands that eventually heal as much as 88 points of damage per use as a swift action - that works out to an extra 2200 hit points a day to play around with without ever breaking from charging or full attacking. Those extra LoH's also can be used to remove conditions or fuel as many extra Smites as he may need... there's not a power in the game to match it.
Moreover, he's dangerous from both melee and at range, and in that simple build he has a free Intimidate check against the entire battlefield every time he makes a kill which is huge.
Finalyl, while he may not have the 'versatility' of say Ranger spells, consider the following favorites of mine:
Spells:
1st Compel Hostility, Divine Favor, Hero’s Defiance
2nd Litany of Righteousness, Communal Protection vs. Evil
3rd Blessing of Fervor, Dispel Magic
4th Dispel Evil, Bloodsworn Retribution, Shield of the Dawnflower
There are some pretty potent gems in there - Hero's Defiance lets you use your Lay on Hands as an immediate action, Litany of Righteousness lets you double your Smite damage as a swift action, Blessing of Fervor is probably the most powerful buff a martial can have and Bloodsworn Retribution is essentially a permanent +5 bonus to attack rolls, saves and checks...
That's swift action self-heals and spells, free action Smites and Intimidates - in this game action economy is everything. I'm not saying the Paladin is over-powered, but a well-built one can utterly dominate a game.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In 1st ed paladins and rangers were sub-types of fighter. They could do everything a fighter could do, and more! They needed something to balance them. Part of that was the ability score requirements (YMMV, but Gygax thought so) and alignment. Paladins got an extremely strict code, much stricter than it is now.
In 2nd ed paladins were a sub-type of cavalier, similar to but mechanically better than them. They used the same things to balance them as 1st ed; entry stats and alignment/strict code.
When 3rd ed came along the class was not a sub-type of any other, and it was already balanced. There was no need to employ harsh conditions to balance the class against the others, but tradition and flavour meant that the LG restriction remained. The code also remained, but in a much watered-down version, nowhere near as harsh as it used to be. It also was a class that had multi-class restrictions.
In PF the multi-class restriction has gone, and the other restrictions are no harsher than in 3.5. In 4th ed they even took away the alignment restriction.
So the class no longer needs game mechanics to balance it against the other classes, and the RAW restrictions are lax compared to previous editions. The problem is that some people hold them to the harsher codes of previous editions! RAW, the alignment part of their current restrictions is two-fold:-
1. A paladin must remain of LG alignment. RAW, this alignment is tracked in exactly the same way as any other class's alignment. It is not tracked in an especially harsh way, one act won't change your alignment. But many people do it differently for paladins, so one neutral act changes their alignment and they fall! This is wrong!
2. A paladin will lose his paladinhood if he willfully commits an evil act. This is different than other classes. The trouble is that some expect the paladin to 'know' what the 'good' thing to do is, and interpret anything else as evil and make him fall! They also think that the way they see 'good' is the only valid way, and any that have other ideas will fall. This is wrong! There are many different ways that 'good' can be interpreted. Also, 'accidentally' evil acts will not make you fall by the RAW, but many DMs make you fall anyway! It should be noted that in earlier editions atonement would not restore paladin status if the fall was caused by an evil act. This is no longer the case.
The problem with paladins is that, unlike any other class, each person has their own idea of how the class should be played, and far too many people then take any other way of playing them to be 'wrong' and make them fall. Far too many people conciously or subconciously take a paladin's very existence as a challenge to see if they can make him fall.
The problem is not helped by players who think that they need to tell everybody else what to do. The code only applies to the paladin; they are not required to expect the same behaviour from non-paladins. In a good-aligned party without a paladin, just as with a group of good people in the real world, torture, murder and such should not be tolerated. Stopping such behavior is not a 'paladin; thing, it is a 'good' thing. It's not the presence of a paladin spoiling your fun, it's your own alignment, and the alignment of the party. If your party uses these tactics regularly then it'd be an evil party and a paladin would not associate with it. Some allegedly 'good' parties like to use torture and murder, but they are the one's who are in the wrong, not the paladin who doesn't tolerate it.
So the class no longer needs game mechanics to balance it against the other classes, and the RAW restrictions are lax compared to previous editions. The problem is that some people hold them to the harsher codes of previous editions! RAW, the alignment part of their current restrictions is two-fold:-
1. A paladin must remain of LG alignment. RAW, this alignment is tracked in exactly the same way as any other class's alignment. It is not tracked in an especially harsh way, one act won't change your alignment. But many people do it differently for paladins, so one neutral act changes their alignment and they fall! This is wrong!
2. A paladin will lose his paladinhood if he willfully commits an evil act. This is different than other classes. The trouble is that some expect the paladin to 'know' what the 'good' thing to do is, and interpret anything else as evil and make him fall! They also think that the way they see 'good' is the only valid way, and any that have other ideas will fall. This is wrong! There are many different ways that 'good' can be interpreted. Also, 'accidentally' evil acts will not make you fall by the RAW, but many DMs make you fall anyway! It should be noted that in earlier editions atonement would not restore paladin status if the fall was caused by an evil act. This is no longer the case.
The problem with paladins is that, unlike any other class, each person has their own idea of how the class should be played, and far too many people then take any other way of playing them to be 'wrong' and make them fall. Far too many people conciously or subconciously take a paladin's very existence as a challenge to see if they can make him fall.
The problem is not helped by players who think that they need to tell everybody else what to do. The code only applies to the paladin; they are not required to expect the same behaviour from non-paladins. In a good-aligned party without a paladin, just as with a group of good people in the real world, torture, murder and such should not be tolerated. Stopping such behavior is not a 'paladin; thing, it is a 'good' thing. It's not the presence of a paladin spoiling your fun, it's your own alignment, and the alignment of the party. If your party uses these tactics regularly then it'd be an evil party and a paladin would not associate with it. Some allegedly 'good' parties like to use torture and murder, but they are the one's who are in the wrong, not the paladin who doesn't tolerate it.
The best home rule 'fixes' for Paladins I've ever seen got rid of the alignment requirement, got rid of the 'evil' part of Smite Evil and got rid of the ability to Detect Evil (something Paladins hould never have had anyway in my opinion). Instead Paladins were devoted to a particular God (you know, where they actually GOT their powers from), and their code was one of devotion to that particular God's service with their Smite being useful against that particular God's enemies. Worked much, much better and made far more sense.
|
Well, I didn't care much for the paladin in my latest games, until one player decided to play one. The group is level 4 by now, and the paladin is easily the most powerful character in the party (who consists of him, a two-handed ranger, dervish cleric and wizard). That trend will only continue when he gets Divine Bond next level (adding keen to a weapon on level 5 is a big deal).
The thing is, he's not really optimized. He has Power Attack and the Greater Mercy feat, which lets him heal himself 3d6 damage each round. He deals more damage than any party member, has way better saves, and can heal himself as a swift action for 3d6 5 times per day. The AP I'm DMing (RotR) has plenty of evil people (and some evil outsiders/undead) so the Smite is extremely relevant (and it now lasts for an entire encounter!).
I'm not going into the "caster X martial" discussion, but I can easily say that, in the fields of AC, attack bonus, damage, saves, and suvivability, the paladin comes out ahead of the curve. Sure, a barbarian may deal more damage in a rage, but he does not have the crazy saves and auto-heal of the paladin, and rage mechanics actually make him extremely risky (I've had at least one barbarian dying when the rage wore off, and many others near death in the middle of combat).
Just a quick note: Smite Evil does not last a whole encounter. It lasts until the target of the Smite is killed or combat ends. If he's fighting 10 goblins, he's going to have to burn 10 uses of Smite Evil to get the benefit against each one.
Honestly, even when I was playing an Archer Paladin, I didn't feel like I was making anyone else look bad. The spellcaster dropped opponents much more reliably, the barbarian and synthesist (when the latter didn't roll terribly!) would tear things to bits, and I felt like I was a contributing member of a team.
I don't think Paladins are "overpowered" at all, but I do believe they are strong because of the powers granted to them by their strict code of conduct.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eh, the last paladin I played with was quite strong, but so were the fighter and the barbarian (fighter was optimized, barbarian not really).
As for whether the alignment restriction and code of conduct are necessary to balance the class:
Oh, there are plenty of "other" reasons, but you shouldn't balance flavor with mechanics, or vice versa...
This comment was not made about paladins, but I certainly think it is relevant. The code of conduct is flavor and shouldn't be used as a balancing factor for the paladin's mechanics.
So the class no longer needs game mechanics to balance it against the other classes, and the RAW restrictions are lax compared to previous editions. The problem is that some people hold them to the harsher codes of previous editions!
...
The problem with paladins is that, unlike any other class, each person has their own idea of how the class should be played, and far too many people then take any other way of playing them to be 'wrong' and make them fall. Far too many people conciously or subconciously take a paladin's very existence as a challenge to see if they can make him fall.
The problem is not helped by players who think that they need to tell everybody else what to do. ... In a good-aligned party without a paladin, just as with a group of good people in the real world, torture, murder and such should not be tolerated.
Excellent points.
The best home rule 'fixes' for Paladins I've ever seen got rid of the alignment requirement, got rid of the 'evil' part of Smite Evil and got rid of the ability to Detect Evil (something Paladins hould never have had anyway in my opinion). Instead Paladins were devoted to a particular God (you know, where they actually GOT their powers from), and their code was one of devotion to that particular God's service with their Smite being useful against that particular God's enemies. Worked much, much better and made far more sense.
I'm playing with this in my next campaign to make a range of non-LG paladins, most of which are dedicated to campaign-specific deities.
Actually, if we take the full-casters out of the mix (Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Wizard), then we might actually be able to see if Paladin is "OP" in comparison.
In terms of sheer combat power in Core PF, they certainly beat bards and monks.
Barbarians have rage and more sheer hack power, but less defense. Fighters have more feat capability, but less cool benefits. Rangers have an animal companion and some nifty stuff, plus the same level of spellcasting. Rogues are very circumstantial in comparison.
If we go further and toss away any notion of "aiding the party in ways other than smashing," i.e., skills/utility spells don't count, then it really comes down to those 5: The Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger and Rogue.
I honestly don't see ANYTHING that makes the Paladin that much better. The only possibility is the healing in combat thing, but keep in mind that fighters get about 2x the number of feats, barbarians have rage, rangers have an animal companion, and rogues have sneak attack. Hmmm.
Opinions?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, if we take the full-casters out of the mix (Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Wizard), then we might actually be able to see if Paladin is "OP" in comparison.
In terms of sheer combat power in Core PF, they certainly beat bards and monks.
Barbarians have rage and more sheer hack power, but less defense. Fighters have more feat capability, but less cool benefits. Rangers have an animal companion and some nifty stuff, plus the same level of spellcasting. Rogues are very circumstantial in comparison.
If we go further and toss away any notion of "aiding the party in ways other than smashing," i.e., skills/utility spells don't count, then it really comes down to those 5: The Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger and Rogue.
I honestly don't see ANYTHING that makes the Paladin that much better. The only possibility is the healing in combat thing, but keep in mind that fighters get about 2x the number of feats, barbarians have rage, rangers have an animal companion, and rogues have sneak attack. Hmmm.
Opinions?
My opinion is that a well-made Paladin is unkillable and un-controllable and pretty hard to take out of any fight. Not so with Barbarians, Rangers and Fighters. Paladins help their party more than the other martials and are far less likely to become a liability to them. That makes it a no-brainer for me.
The only time a Paladin can even be fairly compared to the other martials is when you're facing a non-evil foe, something that happens perhaps 30% of the time? Bonus feats are nothing compared to swift self-heals, potent spells, immunity to mental effects and customizable magic weapons. Sure when you start stacking on magic items to hide a Fighter's weak points the comparison draws a little closer, but we're comparing classes here, not laundry lists.
I'm not going into the "caster X martial" discussion, but I can easily say that, in the fields of AC, attack bonus, damage, saves, and suvivability, the paladin comes out ahead of the curve. Sure, a barbarian may deal more damage in a rage, but he does not have the crazy saves and auto-heal of the paladin, and rage mechanics actually make him extremely risky (I've had at least one barbarian dying when the rage wore off, and many others near death in the middle of combat).
Ok, I should be more specific that you can make barbarians that are capable of trumping paladins if you know how. Superstition evens the score on saves (IMO since magic is the main threat). There are two ways to mitigate any danger from the rage drop HP loss (guarded life or raging vitality). Those really aren't big concerns as I see it.
Barbarians don't look that impressive till you really delve into the rage powers and get how they can interact with archetypes and whatnot. They really are quite impressive. Of course that does mean I'm talking certain specific build directions.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One element to keep in mind when comparing classes is skill level. It takes skill to build, equip, and play a character effectively. Some classes require a higher level of skill than others to be effective.
Between the melee classes Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, and Paladin, I think a Paladin is the hardest to screw up because it asks for the fewest choices in build, and is the most forgiving in play. Also, I think all four of the full-BAB classes are more forgiving in combat than Monk, Rogue, or Bard, for example. On top of that, the "Tier 1" classes (Cleric, Druid, and most especially Wizard) are among the most difficult to build and play well.
Fighter - Highly variable because most of your class abilities are actually feats, and there's a huge list of feats to pick from, many of which are poor choices. Also, because of Weapon Training and Weapon Specialization, fighters tend to be heavily invested in a single weapon, with a lot of poor choices on the list.
Barbarian - Rage powers make up a large part of your power, but the choices vary from useless to awesome. Also, rage management isn't always easy during play; timing is important, and there are some risks involved (Raged on the minion, now your fatigued for the BBEG!).
Ranger - Must choose a fighting style, bonus feats, favored enemies, and an animal companion. Again, all of these choices have plenty of traps along the way.
Paladin
- No bonus feats to choose, and most of your powers are already picked out for you.
- While you're probably choosing a primary weapon, unlike the Ranger or Fighter you're unlikely to have a heavy investment in a particular weapon, so a poor choice can be corrected by simply picking up a different weapon.
- You pick a deity, but without domains or a free weapon proficiency, it's really just a matter of flavor rather than rules or power level.
- You do have to choose a Divine Bond (Mount or Weapon), but both are perfectly good choices!
- In play, rather than having a risk-added ability like Rage, you have a risk-abating ability in Lay on Hands. So, if you make a poor choice and get yourself in trouble, you can grab a few extra HP as needed.
TL;DR = It's hard to screw up a Paladin.
The thing with paladins is, they have a great strength (smite evil) and their alignment restriction is their only weakness (unless you count poor skills). You can make a paladin work with only mediocre stats, and with good stats they are terrifying.
However, they are terrifying against single foes, not against multiple ones. A paladin fighting a lynch-mob of enraged but otherwise not evil citizens is in a real bind, for example. He isn't weak at this, but it sure isn't his strong point.
If you have a group of BBEGs rather than just one, then the pally has problems. But if you rely on single, combat oriented foes, you are playing to the paladin's strengths.
It's really out of combat where you notice the paladin's shorcomings. Paladins can't climb. Paladins can't swim. Paladins can't jump or keep their balance. Paladins don't notice things.
On multiple occasions in Pathfinder Society, I've seen Paladins struggle to climb a rope.
I just... could never play one.
Why would they struggle to climb a rope? Their Str bonus alone should make a DC 5 climb check trivial.
Why would they struggle to climb a rope? Their Str bonus alone should make a DC 5 climb check trivial.
HAHAHA, We were doing that way wrong. Ok, not so bad. Still, I'd be terrified of water...
Paladins are definitely not overpowered unless you are only comparing them to the fighter and the rogue.
In comparison to the mage and cleric they are pretty solid middle of the road.
Now whether it's a particularly well designed class is a whole different story and whether alignment restrictions make it problematic in many campaigns is definitely a good question.
Personally I think you can solve most of the issues about the Paladin being overpowered by just buffing the Fighter and Rogue, or getting rid of the Paladin as a regular class and replace it with the prestige paladin.
The paladin has better burst damage than the Fighter in some cases (smite evil) but should lag behind in terms of non-burst damage. Both suck in terms of skills but having charisma be a primary stat generally makes the Paladin a decent face character.
The major difference between the fighter and the paladin is in terms of sheer durability as the bonuses to saves and the ability to self-heal with a swift action are two major advantages. Paladin spellcasting isn't stellar but it gives the Paladin a couple of tricks that the regular fighter doesn't possess.
If the Fighter wasn't subpar in so many areas I think the comparison of fighter to paladin wouldn't be so problematic but right now the Paladin just has a ton of advantages that the Fighter with his bonus feats and static bonuses can't negate.
|
|
Curious about one thing, if the paladin is the standard sword and board type, to use their LoH as a swift action, wouldn't they need to either drop the shield or sheath the weapon to use it? And does either one of those actions provoke an attack of opportunity? I have yet to ever play one and i'm fuzzy on the rules for that situation.
Paladins are going to want to use a light shield so they can cast or lay on hands as necessary.
Personally I think the TWF Sword and Board Paladin is the preferred build for this reason.
where are the rules to govern light shield vs heavy shield in this situation?
where are the rules to govern light shield vs heavy shield in this situation?
In the equipment section. With a heavy shield you can't use that hand for anything else.
A light shield allows you more freedom.
IIRC
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
so how is a light shield different in that way than a buckler or does it not necessarily call anything out?
Also does a paladin specifically have to put his hand on another part of his body?
I mean his hand is on his hand, isn't it?
the power flows through him (hence why it's a swift action and not a move action)
Its a move action to touch someone else, it;s a swift to just will the power.
No D'vynls theme song required.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We use to refer to 3.5 as Druids of the Coast instead of wizards as they could crush any class.
I now refer to Pathfinder as Palyfinder... They are by far the most powerful class. Martial, melee, spells, animal companion... Only weakness non-evil, well Golarion is (what?) 70 to 75% evil? If you allow 3.5 or PF 3rd party it becomes stupid. Lawful good... I luv that alignment... Not near as restrictive as one might think.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We use to refer to 3.5 as Druids of the Coast instead of wizards as they could crush any class.
I now refer to Pathfinder as Palyfinder... They are by far the most powerful class. Martial, melee, spells, animal companion... Only weakness non-evil, well Golarion is (what?) 70 to 75% evil? If you allow 3.5 or PF 3rd party it becomes stupid. Lawful good... I luv that alignment... Not near as restrictive as one might think.
Lolwut
Disbarring the Wizard, Druid, and Summoner who laugh in your face, as well as a bunch of other classes who are on par or better than the Paladin, IMO the Inquisitor both fills the Holy Warrior niche better and PLAYS better than Paladin (better spellcasting, effectively Full BaB+ with Judgements, Bane screws anything you can think of, and Domains).
I've got a 3rd level Paladin right now and he's pretty awesome. Nobody in the group is overly optimized... but my Paladin REALLY shines. Honestly, its his saves... and his love of heavy armor that makes him such a beast. 9,5,7 for saves at level 3 is pretty nice... and almost to where my last rogue was around level 12.
I think the key to Paladins how EVERYTHING gets based off Charisma. Saves, Lay on hands, Class Skills... Con and Strenght are nice, but everything else they do is tied into one stat.
I don't know how they balance out at higher levels... but during the early levels, in our group of arcane Sorcerer, rogue, and monk1/magus2 my Paladin3 is kicking all sorts of butt.
Why would they struggle to climb a rope? Their Str bonus alone should make a DC 5 climb check trivial.
Depends on their armor. My guys wearing heavy armor (half-plate and shield) anything he needs dex for gets a -6 or -8 on it... Climbing a rope requres either an 11 or better... or losing your armor before the climb...
Armor is the bane of paladins... and I assume other fighter types too. There have been WAY too many attacks at night so far... my guy went and bought a set of Studded leather pajamas that he sleeps in now :D
so how is a light shield different in that way than a buckler or does it not necessarily call anything out?
Also does a paladin specifically have to put his hand on another part of his body?
I mean his hand is on his hand, isn't it?
the power flows through him (hence why it's a swift action and not a move action)
Its a move action to touch someone else, it;s a swift to just will the power.
No D'vynls theme song required.
Buckler: This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can't make a shield bash with a buckler.
Shield, Light; Wooden or Steel: You strap a shield to your forearm and grip it with your hand. A light shield's weight lets you carry other items in that hand, although you cannot use weapons with it.
Shield, Heavy; Wooden or Steel: You strap a shield to your forearm and grip it with your hand. A heavy shield is so heavy that you can't use your shield hand for anything else.
The paladin most likely still has to touch himself, just like a caster using a touch based spell would.
My common practice is to use the weapon cord from Adventurer's armory and ultimate Equiptment.
Standard Action: Attack
Free Action: Drop sword
Swift Action: Lay on Hands
Next round.
Swift Action: Recover sword
Standard Action: Attack
Gets a bit tricky sometimes with the order so specific, but it comes in handy :)
For that matter, I'm also loving the... Gift of Health (I think??) feat. Whichever one that lets you lay on hands someone else... and get your own CHR bonus back yourself. He's still level 3, so it's 1D6 to Ally, and 4 back to me... VERY nice to double dip the healing when I can ^_^
|
|
We use to refer to 3.5 as Druids of the Coast instead of wizards as they could crush any class.
I now refer to Pathfinder as Palyfinder... They are by far the most powerful class. Martial, melee, spells, animal companion... Only weakness non-evil, well Golarion is (what?) 70 to 75% evil? If you allow 3.5 or PF 3rd party it becomes stupid. Lawful good... I luv that alignment... Not near as restrictive as one might think.
Lolwut
Disbarring the Wizard, Druid, and Summoner who laugh in your face, as well as a bunch of other classes who are on par or better than the Paladin, IMO the Inquisitor both fills the Holy Warrior niche better and PLAYS better than Paladin (better spellcasting, effectively Full BaB+ with Judgements, Bane screws anything you can think of, and Domains).
I will give you Druid s even though they fixed wild shape it is still a contender.
Summoner is only broke because most people don't rule arc type correctly but I would still go Mono a Mono with equal level Paly.Wizards? Depends... All save spells are out the window, debuffs with no saves yes.
My Paly (3rd party feats) in the 3rd party adv. Slumbering Tsar is 16th level and the party (7 players, all veterans) has all died twice, I am the only original PC. Swift lay on hands, mercies, High AC, damage dealer, smite (more AC), alternate mount, dual bond items (weapon, armor and mount), domain abilities...etc... I crush encounters since level 4 and have not looked back. I almost died once... But thanks to Paly spells Hero's Defiance, Litany of Righteousness, and after that round... Control Summon Creature (through PF feat Unsanctioned Knowledge) nothing has touched me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And that's cool and stuff but I'd be willing to bet good money that (depending on what the rest of your party was) that you're just better at optimizing than them.
Don't get me wrong, the Paladin's a damn good class IMO, but he's not the most powerful and he's definitely not OP.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paladin is good as far as martial classes go. Smite makes him king against single big evil dudes, and his overall survivability carries him through the rest of encounters. He also gets a very badass list of spells, perfect for boosting his offensive when evil isn't around.
That said, he's still a martial class. He can't teleport out of the dungeon when there's no other way to escape. He can't stack miss chances on himself until the enemy BAB becomes irrelevant. He can't divide the enemy forces with walls or single out the boss with Resilient Sphere/Prismatic Sphere/Forcecage. He can't handle entire rooms of weak enemies with one casting of Black Tentacles. He can't Gate-in a 30HD outsider to help with the fight. He can't effectively cover for other classes with a right use of high level Summon Monster. He can't create his own plane of existence where the whole team can chill and rest while only a fraction of time passes in the outside world. So on, so forth.
Even other martial classes can keep up with him, except poor fighters. Barbarians get all sorts of nice things (Reckless Abandon is practically Shock Trooper on steroids, then there's Pounce, Witch Hunter, Spell Sunder...). Cavaliers lose out on the awesome saves and immunities, but their Smite-equivalent works against any enemy you might encounter. Plus, they get Mount, they get ridiculous damage on mounted charge, they get a few extra feats... Rangers also get an animal companion, a very versatile spell list, free combat feats without needing to meet prerequisites, awesomeness that is Favored Enemy/Terrain, and ultimately even Save or Die effects on their weapon attacks.
Can a Paladin dominate an encounter when there are other martial classes around? He can, situationally. Just like the Ranger will dominate against his favored enemy (and preferably in his favored terrain as well), or the Cavalier will dominate when there's room for mounted charge, or the Barbarian will dominate... pretty much all the time when others can't get their preferred situation, but especially against magic users.
Meanwhile, a Wizard with the right spells memorized can dominate any of the above, regardless of whatever the martial types want to do about it.
|
|
I am just not in the wizard camp. They are all situational and bound by feats and school choices. Yes they rock at higher levels (say 7th or more accurately 9th) if they have the right spells ready. Paly rock from 1st level and do not need team support as wizards do until later levels. Most my game I have players end between 10 and 12 the level. So penny per pound I would take paly against any class one on one.
I am just not in the wizard camp. They are all situational and bound by feats and school choices. Yes they rock at higher levels (say 7th or more accurately 9th) if they have the right spells ready. Paly rock from 1st level and do not need team support as wizards do until later levels. Most my game I have players end between 10 and 12 the level. So penny per pound I would take paly against any class one on one.
Level 1 - Color Spray and Grease
Level 3 - Web, Glitterdust and PyrotechnicsLevel 5 - Sleet Storm, Spiked Pit and Slow.
Each of these can effectively win an encounter. School choices matter little in PF because you can still learn and use all spells ever. And they aren't even situational - you really can't go wrong memorizing either of these spells. Ninth level isn't more accurate than 7th because 7th level is where you get Black Tentacles and win every encounter against ground-based enemies until long after tenth level. One spell expenditure, one standard action - BAM! entire room full of enemies is now hardcore hentai material, while the martials can only watch and grind their teeth. Again, this is a no-brainer spell and you'll never regret memorizing it.
Self-reliance and 1-on-1 comparisons are the worst way possible to gauge class power, because a)you won't be going alone and b)neither will the enemies. It doesn't matter how awesome you can be in a duel, it matters how much you can contribute to a 4-5 person party fighting an equal or greater number of opponents. And in this regard, the paladin has nothing on wizards and clerics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am just not in the wizard camp. They are all situational and bound by feats and school choices. Yes they rock at higher levels (say 7th or more accurately 9th) if they have the right spells ready. Paly rock from 1st level and do not need team support as wizards do until later levels. Most my game I have players end between 10 and 12 the level. So penny per pound I would take paly against any class one on one.
Single combat has nothing to do with how good a class is in an actual adventure. Bards are not great one on one, but they almost always have a way to stay useful if played well.
The "right" spell logic is a fallacy. Just because a caster does not have the best spell for a job that does not mean another spell won't work, and I have never seen a wizard without a spell or scroll that can be useful when the party needs it. I am sure it has happened at someone's table, but that is most likely a player issue.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One on One is the Only way to compare power level. Anything else brought into the mix changes the math and will make one class better then the other depending on the situation, environment, creatures etc... The only True way to compare power is one on one. I am not talking group dynamics but strictly class power.
@Amorangias If your winning encounters with those spells well you have not faced a veteran DM of worth.
As for RP... Paly can out diplomatic a Bard any day of the week. Lol.
Right spell is not a "fallacy"... In my over 30 years of DMing... The words "if I had only memorised that, this other..." Lol
but as you state its a player issue... So I will try not to assume you mean you and those you DM are better at the game than the rest of us.
One on One is the Only way to compare power level. Anything else brought into the mix changes the math and will make one class better then the other depending on the situation, environment, creatures etc... The only True way to compare power is one on one. I am not talking group dynamics but strictly class power.
@Amorangias If your winning encounters with those spells well you have not faced a veteran DM of worth.
As for RP... Paly can out diplomatic a Bard any day of the week. Lol.
Right spell is not a "fallacy"... In my over 30 years of DMing... The words "if I had only memorised that, this other..." Lol
but as you state its a player issue... So I will try not to assume you mean you and those you DM are better at the game than the rest of us.
Power level is discussed as in most useful in an adventure, not who can win in arena combat.
With that aside the paladin still can't hand with a wizard.
As an example a wizard can be used as BBEG on his own even. Martial classes can't do that by the time the party is level 7. The pally has no way to combat action economy, so no matter if it is one on one, as a chance to be used as a BBEG, and overall usefulness to a party the pally is not OP, nor the best class. He wins at DPR versus evil creatures, and he can do some healing, which makes him every useful, but I have never had issues handling a martial class in a game. OK, I have never had issues with casters either, but they do make me put forth more effort as a GM.
edit:I ran a 20th level tournament on the pbp boards a while back. The antipaladin did well, but he would have defeated the caster he made, nor the one I made if I did not suddenly have to go from player mode to GM mode because the original GM dropped out.
One on One is the Only way to compare power level. Anything else brought into the mix changes the math and will make one class better then the other depending on the situation, environment, creatures etc... The only True way to compare power is one on one. I am not talking group dynamics but strictly class power.
@Amorangias If your winning encounters with those spells well you have not faced a veteran DM of worth.
As for RP... Paly can out diplomatic a Bard any day of the week. Lol.
Right spell is not a "fallacy"... In my over 30 years of DMing... The words "if I had only memorised that, this other..." Lol
but as you state its a player issue... So I will try not to assume you mean you and those you DM are better at the game than the rest of us.
I would not say better, but most of the people I know have spells or scrolls for a variety of occasions. They also choose spells with more than one possible use such as disintegrate. It can be used in combat, but it can also be use to move a large section of a dungeon wall. Summoning can be used to add offense, and control the battlefield, by blocking enemy routes, which is not its primary function. It can also be used to summon creatures with cleric levels to get access to spells that you don't have. That is what I mean when I say you don't need the "right" spell. You just need one that will work.
|
|
Well we will have to agree to disagree. I could go all day with similar examples and situations but I answered the OP... Mission accomplished and I know from many many years of being on these boards what defending a point will get me... Wasted time. Everyone plays their own game and what works in one group will not fly in another.
Paly's Rule!!! Lol
I don't like the amount of what they get, too many abilities.
One on One is the Only way to compare power level. Anything else brought into the mix changes the math and will make one class better then the other depending on the situation, environment, creatures etc... The only True way to compare power is one on one. I am not talking group dynamics but strictly class power.
@Amorangias If your winning encounters with those spells well you have not faced a veteran DM of worth.
As for RP... Paly can out diplomatic a Bard any day of the week. Lol.
Right spell is not a "fallacy"... In my over 30 years of DMing... The words "if I had only memorised that, this other..." Lol
but as you state its a player issue... So I will try not to assume you mean you and those you DM are better at the game than the rest of us.
If only I had memorised:
Not get my a** handed to me.
Protection from arrows.
Er, an anti-grapple spell.
Not be split in twain.
Well we will have to agree to disagree. I could go all day with similar examples and situations but I answered the OP... Mission accomplished and I know from many many years of being on these boards what defending a point will get me... Wasted time. Everyone plays their own game and what works in one group will not fly in another.
Paly's Rule!!! Lol
I agree that playstyle matters, but I know that pallys are not the best class either. I can always stop a pally, even if I have never seen the build. The same can't be said for casters.