| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paladins are not significantly more broken than other martial ranged builds (see weapon training/weapon focus/weapon specialization with a fighter, favored enemy+instant enemy with a ranger, the whole gunsliger class, see cavilers/sam builds with ranged weapons, or the whole zen archer package). I am not surprised in the least.
Paladins are just really good at killing demons and evil dragons a few times a day. I am more than willing to live with that, especially considering that they have to be paragons of TRUE JUSTICE.
We 'fixed' the Paladin by doing a handful of simple things...
1) Took away the double damage bonus on initial Smites vs. select foes.
2) Made Lay on Hands a standard action across the board.
3) Removed the alignment restriction by making them beholden to their deities rather than alignment.
To make up for the first two and to more fully embrace the third we considered replacing Divine Bond with a Domain... but that didn't make the final cut.
Then of course, we scrapped it all and did something completely different that we liked better, but this seemed to address the many concerns some had.
It has to be said though, anyone worrying about Paladins should be spending their time on full casters first... otherwise you're just pissing into the wind.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I fixed it by throwing it out.
I fail to see how paladins are broken at all. Their smite trick is 100% situational (if you enemies aren't evil, this may as well not even be an option). Also, without the fly speed that many evil creatures come equipped with, there's no reason a paladin SHOULDN'T be able to smite at range. Pathfinder did the right thing when they gave a buff to ranged combat, in my opinion. Aside from the alignment restriction, I see no problem with how it is written now.
@Coolheinze
Would you feel the Paladin is 'less broken' if it didn't have Litany of Righteousness? That spell seems to figure quite strongly in your argument.
I fixed it by throwing it out.
Ok, really, have you never heard of the middle ground?
But OT, this isn't too big of a deal. Honestly, I dislike the Smite Evil and Favored Enemies for one reason: situationality. If that's even a word.
Some tricks don't work in specific circumstances (enemy is invisible, enemy can teleport as a swift, it's underwater, whatever) whereas those only work in specific circumstances.
Otherwise, it's great.
I fixed it by throwing it out.Ok, really, have you never heard of the middle ground?
Yes, I have. Why do you ask?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know, if you un-brake the Paladin it's just gonna slide the rest of the way down the slippery slope it's on.
PS - I "unbroke" all of the core classes by completely remaking all of them.
I'm confused, I didn't know that paladin was broken.
Is an archer paladin any worse than an archer anything?
Paladins don't have any bonus feats so if you're gonna go archer good luck doing anything else. That tree has more taxes than Uncle Sam.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anyone who claims Paladins are broken has no clue about game balance. They are one of the most well balanced in the whole game, next to Bards, Inquisitors and Alchemists.
Archery is way overhyped in these boards.
How is this different then say, a pouncing barbarian with 5 natural attacks, or a druid and animal companion that both pounce the enemy dealing like 10 natural attacks in the first turn? Why are we signling out the paladins ability to frontload tons of damage?
I mean granted that is ALOT of damage assuming everything hits (not a guarantee, but still very likely with the paladins high attack bonus). So why not address pieces of it instead of whole sale saying paladins cant be archers, which thematically is fairly dumb since there is a lawful good deity whose favored weapon is a longbow.
Take litany of rightouesness out of that equation, and those numbers actually look kind of pedestrian. Do that. Make litany of rightousness melee weapon damage only. Problem solved. Move on. No need to remove a concept of paladins that makes a ton of sense for you know, elves, and one of the core 20 deities.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some people will point out that if you (GM) send BIIIIG evilies at a paladin, you're asking for having them one-shot, and that the paladin just does, what she does. To those people I say: It's just not funny for EVERYONE else, when the paladin kills the big demon before ANYONE else gets to take a swing. And that includes the demon (this actually happened with a ranged paladin in our party). So yes, paladins may rightfully BE that powerful in your mind, but this a GAME, which means that it has to be fun for all.
Am I insane? (definitely) Did I miss something? (probably that too)
Comments are most welcome.
I wanted to respond to this part seperately, because this is a perception issue and an encounter design issue.
Fact 1: Paladins are SUPPOSED to be good at taking down singular big bad evil guys, especially if they are part of team evil (undead, outsiders or dragons). This is their thing. This is what they are better at then every other class.
You should account for this in your adventure the same way you account for the fact that the bard is super good at diplomacy and bluff. If you put an encounter that is exclusively bypassed by a high bluff or diplomacy, and your bard is friggan awesome at those, thats his moment to shine, and you shouldnt be upset when he blows the dc's out of the water.
The problem ofcourse is that the game has a long history of parking ONE big bad guy in a square room and calling that an ecounter. Even paizo does this. Thats an aweful idea, and even more so when theres a paladin in the party.
You know what the solution to this is? Dont do that. Dont have ONE demon as the encounter. Have 4. Heck Have 15. Sure they wont all be AS powerful as if you just had one, but thats fine, that means everyone is going to get to do something, and the paladin takes on, maybe even wipes out one of the big scary looking ones. Ok, he gets his moment, but the fight's still on, and there are other demons to fight, and he's out of smites (assuming you did your job and didnt let him show up to the boss fight with a full compliment of reosources).
The paladin isnt the problem here. The idea of a singular big bad evil guy is. And its a problem that is an issue with all sort of classes. What if the cleric gets off a banishment on that demon. Or the wizard gets off a save or die spell? Same deal, monster one shoted, encounter over. Or heck, the barbarian or the druid/animal companion pounce smash it? Same deal. Having one big bad guy and calling that an encounter is always a bad idea in a game where action economy is important, and the party generally has 4-5 people in it.
We 'fixed' the Paladin by doing a handful of simple things...
1) Took away the double damage bonus on initial Smites vs. select foes.
2) Made Lay on Hands a standard action across the board.
3) Removed the alignment restriction by making them beholden to their deities rather than alignment.
To make up for the first two and to more fully embrace the third we considered replacing Divine Bond with a Domain... but that didn't make the final cut.
Then of course, we scrapped it all and did something completely different that we liked better, but this seemed to address the many concerns some had.
It has to be said though, anyone worrying about Paladins should be spending their time on full casters first... otherwise you're just pissing into the wind.
We made Lay on Hands only work on others, that way the Paladin would be the warrior with the hands of a healer. Not someone who heals himself in combat.
I like the Paladin being LG, I have nothing against classes for other alignments.
We made Lay on Hands only work on others, that way the Paladin would be the warrior with the hands of a healer. Not someone who heals himself in combat.We 'fixed' the Paladin by doing a handful of simple things...
1) Took away the double damage bonus on initial Smites vs. select foes.
2) Made Lay on Hands a standard action across the board.
3) Removed the alignment restriction by making them beholden to their deities rather than alignment.
To make up for the first two and to more fully embrace the third we considered replacing Divine Bond with a Domain... but that didn't make the final cut.
Then of course, we scrapped it all and did something completely different that we liked better, but this seemed to address the many concerns some had.
It has to be said though, anyone worrying about Paladins should be spending their time on full casters first... otherwise you're just pissing into the wind.
I've grown to see the swift-LoH as part of the paladin's overall ability to take a chance, to wade in where others aren't able to. The paladin doesn't get armor training as the fighter does, but they do get the ability to heal themselves and suffer blow after blow from evil, while staying on their feet.
The swift-LoH ties in with a number of spells and abilities that mean they're great at the "last minute save." They can swoop in and rescue someone just before that crippling blow, and so on. They can take on the damage or affliction, then heal themselves. They can change places, and suffer the monster's attack, while moving a friend to safety. This is heroic and fits with the theme of the class.
So I don't see the swift-LoH as an issue. I see it as fitting within the theme of the class.
Granted, a side issue is the demand by the party that the paladin be their full-time healer instead of using his or her blade. Ideally, these roles are spread out, where everyone shares some of the burden. Then, everyone gets in on some of the fun. There is no reason a ranger, druid, or inquisitor shouldn't be asked to prepare Cures, for example.
Mechanics shouldn't need changed to address this. Rather, the table should be addressed as a whole.
This may not be what you're doing. If not, I apologize. It just made me twitch somewhat, as I've run into similar issues in the past.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*break
To the OP:
My suggestion to you is:
- Make smite melee-only. This fits with the heroic theme of the class. Archery is really one of your mains issues, here, because it acts as a multiplier.
- Take a hard look at the Litany spells before letting them into your game. Let some of them in, but not others. Treat them, in other words, just like any other additional content permitted into a game. For example, would you allow unfettered access to Leadership or the spell, Paragon Surge? Some DMs may, some may not.
I suspect with those two fixes, you'll be much happier. As a benefit, you'll not end up rewriting the class...the more house rules you have for example, the harder it can get down the line, especially when niche questions come up, or new material is published.
Starting with these two adjustments, moreover, would let you test the waters and see if any further ones are needed for your group's play style.
The slower approach is always the stronger one, and thematic adjustments trump purely mechanical ones.
- S.R.
PS Do not take this as agreement of the view that the class is broken. Rather, it's a nod that it may not fit as well as-is within your table's playstyle. Also, added/new content can sometimes be problematic; DMs and groups should always review it before accepting it into a game.
As a final note:
It would be helpful if you shared the rules your paladin is using, as well as the sheets of other PCs. It may be that someone is interpreting some feats or so forth incorrectly. The forum could help you sort them out.
Forgive me if this incorrect; it's more that in my experience, many similar frustrations end up having this as a contributing factor, on top of a difference in playstyle.
@Excaliburproxy: Hello there, thanks for commenting!
Well, the fact that other classes are broken doesn't make it right that the paladin is. It just means that the problem is more widespread in a game system that claims to be well-balanced.
Here's an real example (as real as a fantasy game gets, that is...): We met a bunch of foes including a huge demon, and we were in for a long, exciting encounter. Oh joy! First round: We moved into position (we saw the demon at some distance, so we had time to line up, while it was closing in), and our paladin readied a ranged attack at the demon. As soon as the demon moved within range, our paladin killed it outright. That was the encounter. The minions were relatively harmless - especially without their big brother. No challenge, no excitement, no fun.
If you think, it's cool...
Hey. Don't make every fight be against a Demon or evil Dragon. Paladins kill those. It is the thing that they do. In the old second edition players guide there is a paladin in hell. He is just there fighting demons. He is there fighting demons by himself because paladins can kill demons.
This is a thing that can be okay. It is what makes the Paladin feel powerful and special. Where other people cower in the face of Devils, he is defiant and victorious. If you are going to send most of an encounter's challenge in the form of one demon at the party then I don't even know what to tell you. Design your encounters differently. Without reading the whole thread: I am going to venture a guess and say that a lot of people have already given suggestions on designing challenging encounters for various party types (especially with a party with a Paladin).
As another note: who has been lying to you and saying that Pathfinder is balanced?
I fixed the paladin by building new custom non-paladin classes that were more like paladin. I got a samurai archer archetype called the yabusame whose primary special attack is very much like Smite. Like the paladin, its situational. I made this archer more palatible by limiting all the special archer features into standard actions. So if you want to use multi-shot, you can't do it using the classes special abilities - almost all of them require a level of concentration to make that one perfect shot each round. As soon as you try to shoot 2 arrows in the same round, none of its special abilities apply.
Actually most of my new class builds are more similar to ranger than paladin, except for the yabusame.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Lemmy:
Quote:
Anyone who claims Paladins are broken has no clue about game balance.That remark is just out of line, and I think, my arguments overwhelmingly prove you wrong.
And yet, Lemmy is still 100% right. I've yet to see any evidence that Paladins are overpowered, and I help my players optimize them for my games. As a GM, I'd definitely put them on the same level as Barbarians and Rangers.
Honestly, when I hear people go "Paladins = OP" or "the Paladin alignment stuff is to balanced their power", I just roll my eyes and shake my head.
The only thing I saw you point out is that Paladins are really good vs an enemy that has a specific sort of weakness/vulnerability. And one that was really optimized for pushing out as much direct damage at a single enemy as possible, who was burning daily resources like gasoline (litany of righteousness, smite evil, both of which are in fairly short supply).
Your breakdown of the mechanics likewise don't do much for actual play. You assume all attacks hit (which is a bad practice, even with a good Charisma modifier adding to hit), you assume that the Paladin is winning Initiative against a flat-footed foe (a big assumption given that Dexterity is generally not exceptionally high on a Paladin for most levels), the Paladin needs a solid clear shot to the enemy, nor did you mention feats that are near must-haves for a dedicated archer such as Precise Shot. At 11th level, you're looking at Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Manyshot, and Improved Initiative.
That's all of your feats up to 11th level. In taking these, you have given up Deadly Aim, Fey Foundling (which makes your Lay on Hands strong), Extra Mercy (for survival) or Extra Lay on Hands (for survival). There's a lot that you're giving up for what amounts to a fairly decent amount of burst damage a few times per day.
Meanwhile you're no stronger than you were at 1st level, relative to the enemies you're fighting. At 1st level, you could just shoot your damn bow and kill an enemy without smiting. If you did 6 damage on average with your bow at 1st level, you are probably going to kill something that is 1 step below your challenge rating, no resources expended. Heck, if you land Rapid Shot at 1st level, you can probably kill 2 enemies.
Meanwhile, at 11th level, you're complaining that the martial character, who is exceptionally specialized in it, who is eating her daily resources, all her feats, building specifically to be as strong an archer as she can, and devoting her spells to this, against an enemy who is apparently rendered defenseless by hypothetically losing initiative AND having a bad flat-footed AC, can drop a single enemy in 1 round of all-out attacking.
GEE WHIZ. What overwhelming power! We bow to your overwhelming knowledge of all things that is balance! Lemmy, Lemmy we were wrong! All fear the overpowered Paladin of overpoweredness that hails from Overpoweria! It's Paljiira!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A DPR-focused Paladin doing lots of damage against a single target while using Smite Evil and a spell is not proof of Paladins being broken. It's evidence that DPR-focused characters deal lots of damage against their prefered target, especially when burning resources to do so.
|
So, the problem with paladins is that they're good at dropping a single big, bad evil in one round. The "fix" then is easy: Throw multiple big, bad evils at the party. The paladin can drop one while the rest of the party takes on the others.
I don't know. I find these complaints that a class is "broken" because it's really good in particular instance rather tedious. It's like complaining that wizards are broken because they can incinerate an of the boss's minions with a single fireball or a rogue is broken because they can use sneak attack to do a crap ton of damage to a flanked enemy. Each class has something that it's particularly good at, but none of them are invincible in every situation.
|
|
My Paladin Changes:
*Reverse the LoH action usage. Swift for healing allies. Standard for healing the paladin himself.
*Smite Evil needs to be gutted. It might have been weak in 3.5 but it's absurd now. Yes, the paladin should be good at fighting evil doers. No, that does not mean that the DM should have to make every major villain neutral. I don't have a good fix for this one.
*Make Divine Grace scale up to the paladin's charisma mod.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no need to make villains neutral. There are many, many ways to avoid being killed by Paladins (or any other martial class, in fact). I can't compreheend how someone who can create literally any kind of enemy he can think of can't come up with challenges for Paladins. Don't your BBEGs use minions to block/surround the PCs and force them to spend resources?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's an real example (as real as a fantasy game gets, that is...): We met a bunch of foes including a huge demon, and we were in for a long, exciting encounter. Oh joy! First round: We moved into position (we saw the demon at some distance, so we had time to line up, while it was closing in), and our paladin readied a ranged attack at the demon. As soon as the demon moved within range, our paladin killed it outright. That was the encounter. The minions were relatively harmless - especially without their big brother. No challenge, no excitement, no fun.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, did you mean a legitimately huge demon, or were you just typing hyperbole? I mean, like a nalfeshnee huge? With a 23 INT and 22 WIS? Like the “a nalfeshnee's realm in the Abyss surpasses the strength and size of the largest of mortal kingdoms, for nalfeshnees display a singular gift for managing and ordering the chaos of the Abyss”?!?
The huge glabrezu is 16 INT & 16 WIS
The huge felius is 18 INT & 16 WIS
The huge choronzon (chaos) is 12 INT & 14 WIS (not genius like the others, but still better than average)
The huge shrroth (squid) demon is 14 IN 16 WIS
The huge vavakia is 18 INT & 21 WIS
I know I don't know which huge-sized demon it was, but my point is that even if it isn't the nalfeshnee (which I'll just use as an example), pretty much any huge-sized demon makes my point, which is this:
The demon just moved into range?!?
This is a very intelligent and very wise demon who should be fought as some sort of BBEG. The party has defeated the demon's minions and worked their way through its demense and finally confronts it in its lair. The demon should be well versed in the party's tactics.
The demon shouldn't have “moved into range.” The demon should have manifested its Unholy Nimbus (as a free action), waited a bit, then greater teleported (at will) right into the middle of the group right as the nauseating beams burst in a 60' radius (since teleporting would end the demon's turn there's a chance {WIL: 22} that some opponents will be dazed for d10 rounds).
Aside: with true seeing and a +31 perception, I'm not sure how the nalfeshnee wouldn't have known the group was there.
Or had some enslaved wizard cast, I dunno, protection from arrows on it.
Or displacement.
Or mirror image.
Or greater invisibility.
Or stoneskin
Or all five.
My point is this, and, yeah, I'll say it, “The paladin isn't broken . . . your DM is.”