Who is more deadly in combat


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

Liberty's Edge

The Paladin or the BArbarian?
I know the barbarian get all the love but The more I play my high level Paladin I am thinking that the stick up the butt guy is the one that the bad guys really don't want to see in front of them.
My Paladin has the ultimate ruin the GM days feat-Painful Anchor. I love it when the Big ole devil is getting beat down ,his HP are down to where he goes to teleports out, as he cackles to the the group that he will be back and hunt them forever there is a flash of light and he is laying in a heap at the feet of the Paladin.

Scarab Sages

Paladin against evil outsiders, undead, or dragons. Barbarian against everything else.


I'd say paladin's are the stronger overall combatants.
But just damage? Paladin against evil and barb against everything.

Liberty's Edge

Paladin's I think are also able to last longer in combat,ie better AC.
Iwould like to see a showdown tween a lvl 14 Barb against my Pally.


If allowed in range and not halted by spells, the Paladin will devastate evil outsiders, undead and dragons.

And yeah, it's a shame that some really useful feats usually just tick the DM off and make them want to render it useless.

Well, either that or blame you for the game being ruined when the DM failed to take all factors of high-level play into account.

Liberty's Edge

Yeah I just looked and with full buff I can theoretically kill an adult in one round.


Barbarians are more deadly than paladins under normal circumstances, but paladins get to be more deadly 1 to 7 times per day depending on the level. Paladins are harder to take out of a fight though if you can't ORKO them and they have an extra feat compared to barbarians who need raging vitality if they don't wanna risk exploding at 0 HP.


Why choose when you can have both?
You take your high level Paladin and use AURA OF JUSTICE while standing next to a high level Barbarian.
Now the barbarian gets smite & benefits from all your holy auras!
.
.
.
In answer to your question:
Barbarians are better at DEALING damage
and
Paladins are better at TANKING damage
... generally.

Liberty's Edge

I did eyes of the ten with my Pally and I think he took at most 20 Hp the entire course of the scenarios. He Killed 1 purple worm and 2 Stone Golems in one encounter without getting hit.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Or take a level of bloodrager some extra rage feats and then the rest paladin. Gets you the bulk of the barb awesomeness and all the paladin awesomeness.


MrCharisma wrote:

Why choose when you can have both?

You take your high level Paladin and use AURA OF JUSTICE while standing next to a high level Barbarian.
Now the barbarian gets smite & benefits from all your holy auras!
.
.
.
In answer to your question:
Barbarians are better at DEALING damage
and
Paladins are better at TANKING damage
... generally.

Barbarians are better at dealing damage against non-evil creatures in melee and charge range, and better at tanking lots of very small hits or mega-massive hits. Barbarians are also better at battlefield mobility.

Paladins are better at dealing damage against evil creatures, and better at tanking moderate to large hits in extended fights. Paladins are also much better at team support and not getting hit.


captnchuck67 wrote:

Paladin's I think are also able to last longer in combat,ie better AC.

Iwould like to see a showdown tween a lvl 14 Barb against my Pally.

what point buy and allowed content and such?

better yet, give me your attack routine against a CN Barbarian, and your character's ACs.

Liberty's Edge

HyperMissingno wrote:
Barbarians are more deadly than paladins under normal circumstances, but paladins get to be more deadly 1 to 7 times per day depending on the level. Paladins are harder to take out of a fight though if you can't ORKO them and they have an extra feat compared to barbarians who need raging vitality if they don't wanna risk exploding at 0 HP.

Oath of Vengeance makes it potentially much more often than that and Barbarians are limited by Rage rounds too.

Really, the big difference is target selection. Paladins do more damage against small numbers of evil creatures (even powerful ones), Barbarians do more damage against everything else.

Grand Lodge

The Barbarian is likely more deadly, but assuming they're both 2H Power Attackers the damage will be pretty damn close. Close enough that it wouldn't really matter.

Sovereign Court

Oncoming_Storm wrote:
The Barbarian is likely more deadly, but assuming they're both 2H Power Attackers the damage will be pretty damn close. Close enough that it wouldn't really matter.

Of course - even that varies by level. At level 16+ when you get your 3rd iterative attack, Power Attack isn't even very good for upping total damage. (It varies by target, but it'll often screw up your iterative accuracy too much and generally lower DPR.)

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Obviously, the most damage is done to the party's enemies by the wizard who casts Haste on both of them.


Don't forget Paladin archer is a thing. Otherwise, as others have said, Paladin for Evil, Barbarian for everything else. Barbarians are great at doing damage, Paladins are great at surviving damage. They both fly and can dispel magic (ish). Unless you mean UBarb, then just Paladin. UBarb removed the nicer Barbarian stuff, including explicitly gutting any way for them to fly.


Captn, would you mind posting your build? Currently playing a Paly in Kingmaker myself. Dealt 370 pts of damaga in one round yesterday in one round despite being not really optimized. A big thing charged critically into my braced nodachi. When my turn came I got two more crits and two normal hit. Quite a masacre and a stunned GM. Btw. Pala 11, bard 1, fighter 1

Silver Crusade

Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Don't forget Paladin archer is a thing.

Archer paladins do well with Oath of Vengeance. Since you're not taking as much damage sitting on the back line, you can afford to trade in your daily Lay on Hands allotment for more smites.

From levels 1-3, you still only get 1 smite per day. At level 4, that jumps to roughly 4 per day, depending on your charisma. By level 10, you can smite almost every minion you face without worrying about running out of daily smites before the BBEG.

Again, the only down side is when you face neutral enemies. Then, you're still an archer with a composite longbow and some archery feats, but without bonus feats, you're not quite as effective as a ranger or zen archer.

Grand Lodge

As has been said, if you're just calculating average DPS, then the barbarian wins out. However, a paladin can overcome that vs. evil, again as already mentioned.

However, if you take into account what the enemy might be doing, the scales lean more towards the paladin. Their saves are going to be significantly more likely to keep them safe and between on-the-fly weapon enchantment, immunities, and the ability to heal themselves for not insignificant amounts of health means they are significantly less likely to get taken out of a fight as rapidly as a barbarian, making them more likely to output damage over the course of an actual fight, or at least survive the initial onslaught of Save or Suck/Die/sleepy-time spells.

Most fights don't tend to drag on, so your experience may vary in a given game.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Who is more deadly in combat All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.