Paladin: Bring Back Smite Evil


Classes

51 to 67 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

so the paladin really is that weak.

felt really underwhelming when I looked through it....

Hope that Paizo reads that and fixes it.
and at the least consider yanking it to another book to fix it IF by the end of the play test the community still deems it too weak and broken to use at that point in time.

( Do note I did not say to yank it)

Sovereign Court

So in the 3rd chapter (The Affair at Sombrefell Hall) I have just run 4 players through a very harsh game, that was literally very close to a recreation of playing an original game of Zombies from COD. The facts from this were as follows:

3 newer players and 1 moderately experienced players.

2 Clerics (Standard makes, no dedications)
1 Paladin
1 Divine Sorcerer

All items and equipment/treasure were divided out as per suggestions in Doomsday dawn.

I am a 20 year experienced GM, and have run all manner of games/play styles.

This. Session. Was. DIRE.

Long story short, all players and myself noticed a huge difference on the Paladin, which almost did nothing the entire game. The areas were big and the waves of enemies forced players to be further apart, nullifying Retributive strike, and forcing the Paladin to literally become a punching bag while the clerics dipped in and out to fix the holes in the bag.

Lay on Hands? Pretty much only works out of combat. Champion powers? 2 points does a whole lot of nothing in an attrition fight of 26 (yes, that's the number of enemies) vs 4 without resting.

The Paladin had a total AC of 26 with shield and the +2 heavy armor, but still was getting negative energy, punched, clawed, and bitten (along with the other characters too) but every other class had something to go against it well. Even the sorcerer had angelic wings, the clerics had channel and healing hands, Heal spells, plus similar weapons and medium armors, but were all doing better than the paladin.

Is the Pally really just another fighter type with a strict code of conduct that must rely on purely Magic item extras that eat Resonance?


AldoDraca wrote:

So in the 3rd chapter (The Affair at Sombrefell Hall) I have just run 4 players through a very harsh game, that was literally very close to a recreation of playing an original game of Zombies from COD. The facts from this were as follows:

3 newer players and 1 moderately experienced players.

2 Clerics (Standard makes, no dedications)
1 Paladin
1 Divine Sorcerer

All items and equipment/treasure were divided out as per suggestions in Doomsday dawn.

I am a 20 year experienced GM, and have run all manner of games/play styles.

This. Session. Was. DIRE.

Long story short, all players and myself noticed a huge difference on the Paladin, which almost did nothing the entire game. The areas were big and the waves of enemies forced players to be further apart, nullifying Retributive strike, and forcing the Paladin to literally become a punching bag while the clerics dipped in and out to fix the holes in the bag.

Lay on Hands? Pretty much only works out of combat. Champion powers? 2 points does a whole lot of nothing in an attrition fight of 26 (yes, that's the number of enemies) vs 4 without resting.

The Paladin had a total AC of 26 with shield and the +2 heavy armor, but still was getting negative energy, punched, clawed, and bitten (along with the other characters too) but every other class had something to go against it well. Even the sorcerer had angelic wings, the clerics had channel and healing hands, Heal spells, plus similar weapons and medium armors, but were all doing better than the paladin.

Is the Pally really just another fighter type with a strict code of conduct that must rely on purely Magic item extras that eat Resonance?

While the Paladin needs help, I'll be the first to say, some parts of this don't make sense.

Can you post the Paladin build the guy was using?

Here is what doesn't make sense to me:

1. PC's at this point are 7th level:

My 7th level Build looked like this:

(Human - Half Elf - With Natural Ambition, Nimble, and an extra 5ft from half elf - I also had Fleet as a General Feat. Blade Ally.

My 7th level Stats looked like this:

Str 19/Dex 14/Con 12/Int 10/Wis 12/Cha 18

Class Feat Tree:
Warded Touch
Deity's Domain (Iomedae - Zeal)
Hospice Knight
Channel Life
Attack of Opportunity

Spell Points: 6

Lay on Hands: (as per errata) this is heightened 3 (as a 4th level spell) so 7d6+4 per use. A lot (and I mean a LOT) more than 2pts of healing. Average of around 25 healing per shot.

Armor: +2 Half-Plate (AC = 27 (10+5+2+2+7+1)) Raising Shield 29)
Weapon: +1 Longsword w/flaming Rune from Ally.
Shield: Expert Quality Heavy Steel Shield can take 2 Dents before breaking, has a 6 Hardness (you aren't using this much for blocking to be honest)

You have a +13 (+7+1+1+4) to attack and do 2d8+4+1d6 fire per shot. An average of 16-17 per shot.

-----

How does this stack up?

Click if you want spoilers:

Vs the Vampire Spawn Rogues:
The Vampire Spawn Rogues can't hit the Paladin unless they roll a natural 18 if the Paladin's shield is raised. That is on their first attack by the way. His Attack of Opportunity also helps to encourage them not to flank. With an AC of 19 the Paladin is going to hit them on a 6, 11, and 16. While their resistances will indeed cut his damage down to around 11-12 per shot, their 35 HP means in 3-4 hits they go down.

Vs the Ghasts:
The Paladin utterly wrecks the Ghasts. They just don't stand a chance against him. Once the shield is raised their +9 can only hit him on a natural 20. Natural 18 if they flank him. Meanwhile he can utterly destroy them as they only have 45 HP which the Paladin can punch through in 2-3 hits. Their AC is only 18 so the Paladin isn't going to miss often with a +13, he hits on a 5, 10, and 15 respectively (though you aren't throwing out 3 attacks usually) the only speed bump is the stench.

Vs the Wights:
The Wights are the most dangerous foe here because of enervation. The Paladin is only going to have a Fort Save of +13 to hit the DC which isn't that high. Typically the Paladin has to roll below a 5 to fail. Of course the wights can't hit the Paladin unless they roll a natural 19 with the shield raised so...

Vs the Poltergeists:
The Poltergeist suffers similar problems to a lot of the other creatures. The Paladin's 29 AC is a nightmare. Even with a (lower) TAC of 27 it is still hard to hit them. The Paladin has the tools and the talent to handle these.

Vs the Zombie Shamblers:
This is a LOL fight. They can't hit the Paladin and his sword is going to cut through them like a hot knife through butter killing them in 1 attack.

Vs the Greater Shadows:
Okay, this is where the Paladin is going to feel the pain. These guys have a VERY high attack bonus. They can hit the Paladin (rather easily) and they hurt. However the Paladin has 6 Spell Points. By this point the Paladin should have 2-3 remaining easily. This is the perfect time to unload. Drop a Channel Positive into one of them as an alpha strike for 7d8+4 damage (average 35 damage) or tag team with the Clerics for an alpha nuke. Otherwise you'll have to try to melee them down and that can take a while.

When we tested this, we did a combination mega-nuke on them. The Paladin (myself) hit them with a heightened Channel Positive and then so did the Clerics. That blew one of the Shadows apart before it even got a turn. The second one I smacked it and the Clerics did the same thing as round 1. Easy peasy lemon squeasy.

-----

The Brain Collector got ganged up on.

We had a Monk, 2 Clerics, and a Paladin. That thing went down like a sack of potatoes.

The First Round I went all in. I had 2 spell points remaining.

The Brain Collector went before I did and moved up to me to attack. It hit me once, missed the second attack. I was okay but the Fort Save was close.

Then we went to town.

The Brain Collector tried to hit us with Confusion but it didn't work. Then it was our turn. Our Monk went before I did, going into Wolf Stance then getting into flank position before making a Flurry of Blows against it. I dropped 1 action to raise my shield, then I moved in, finally I attacked it. We did some damage, but it was still standing. Our Clerics took care of the Zombies.

The second round, we took some hits but were okay. When it was our turn the Monk pulled out Wolf Drag and dropped it prone. Then flurried it to connect with one hit. Then I laid into it. One action to raise my shield, and one action to use one of my remaining 2 spell points, I empowered my weapon and swung... CRITICAL HIT. I had a +14 to hit on this attack and the opponent's AC was 2 lower due to being prone. I rolled a 19.

This was a huge hit: 6d8+8+2d6 was NASTY as it came down to around 45 damage. One of its brains popped and then it was toast-a-la ghost. Its spellcasting was fragged, it was weaker, it had to waste an action getting up from being prone, it was not in a good place.

Before it acted our clerics propped myself and the monk up topping off our HP.

After that it was one more round of battle and the Brain Collector died.

So... Yeah... Paladins need help, no lie about that, but they aren't as inept as you are laying out here. Remember we're not going to get help from the devs by exaggurrating.


Flaming is an ability you can only choose if you have the radiant blade spirit which is a level 10 feat.

And again I am not sure if paladins needs help. The scenario involving undead has been a roflstomp for my paladin.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Im really enjoying retributive strike, it has been vastly more useful than the fighters attack of opportunity, but I do think it locks the class into a very specific niche.

I’d really like to see a choice of Paladin styles, a bit like Sorcerers choose bloodline. So a 1st you’d choose a God or Theology and that choice would change retributive strike and a few other class powers to something else that fits the theme..


Paladin is one of my favorite PF 1E classes. Between them and bards, I don't know which I enjoy more. But paladins are tons of fun.
Haven't played a 2E one yet, tho.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I played a paladin in Somberfell Hall and it worked pretty well, and was really straightforward.

Somberfell Hall:

I took Attack of Opportunity as my level 6 feat and went with a guisarme. Got a lot of extra attacks out of it as almost all enemies have to close into melee with the PCs.

There was really no need to cover huge amounts of ground, we just put all the civilians into one room and guarded the entrance. Monsters had to go through us to get to them and they didn't succeed.

Paladin of Iomedae, taking Weapon Surge from the domain and using Intimidate to debuff enemy AC (as per errata 1.2) works quite well. Basically, build with the idea that you'll make one or at most two attacks per round, but use the other actions to position yourself and improve chances to hit.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ascalaphus wrote:

I played a paladin in Somberfell Hall and it worked pretty well, and was really straightforward.

** spoiler omitted **

Paladin of Iomedae, taking Weapon Surge from the domain and using Intimidate to debuff enemy AC (as per errata 1.2) works quite well. Basically, build with the idea that you'll make one or at most two attacks per round, but use the other actions to position yourself and improve chances to hit.

While everything in this post is true, it's my hope that the paladins capacity to function isn't stringent on it's need to borrow the class features of the cleric.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:

If the Paladin remains a class, I agree with not nerfing it but instead fixing it, and in general with bringing every class up to the level of the cleric.

Move the Righteous Ally ability to first level. For the weapon version, strip out the critical specialization bonus as a default ability and make it a feat upgrade. For the shield version, specify either that you choose a new shield each day (like the weapon version has text for) or that a busted shield ally reforms each morning. For the companion version, no changes, this just lets them get a companion at 1st like the druid and Ranger.

You get a spell point power based on which Ally you chose. Paladins who chose the other two allies can still pick up this power with their 1st level feat, gaining more spell points in the process. Weapon ally grants Smite, which maybe can spend a spell point to increase weapon potency by +1 but the extra damage is good and positive. Shield ally can grant a better Retributitive Strike, which because it will now cost a spell point can be beefed up so it grants a free Step (making it easier to actually use) and doesn't take an attack penalty. Companion ally can grant Lay on Hands.

Like bard and druid, pallies who feat into another "path's" first level power can keep taking more feats later based on that power. This is obvious, it increases customization generally.

Paladins have a ton of reaction-based abilities and need some way to get extra reactions. Maybe it's a static +1 reaction/turn, maybe it's baked into the feat trees for each reaction-using ability as a bonus benefit, maybe it's a spell point power that lets you spend 1 spell point to use an extra Paladin reaction. However it happens, there needs to be some way to do this.

I don't really care about whether Paladins get a "Smite" or not, since I don't think that's a main issue for paladins for me, but I do like this notion as a good way to make the paladin a bit more interesting. I think making these spell point abilities will put a bit more pressure on later Powers, since I think there's a bit of a push-pull relationship in Spell points, where the only way to get extra spell points is to pick other powers, even if you don't actually want those powers for themselves, but if they come up with a solution that makes investing into powers more effective (if even only something like a feat that grants X spell points), this would be probably my preferred take.


master_marshmallow wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:

I played a paladin in Somberfell Hall and it worked pretty well, and was really straightforward.

** spoiler omitted **

Paladin of Iomedae, taking Weapon Surge from the domain and using Intimidate to debuff enemy AC (as per errata 1.2) works quite well. Basically, build with the idea that you'll make one or at most two attacks per round, but use the other actions to position yourself and improve chances to hit.

While everything in this post is true, it's my hope that the paladins capacity to function isn't stringent on it's need to borrow the class features of the cleric.

nah, our paladin didn't have Heal or a domain (he would pick up travel domain later on with the human feat, went for Abadar to also grab increased damage on his crossbow) and he did great. Shield ally, hospice+warded, human adopted (gnome) so that he could pick up the flickmace proficiency at level 3 (one handed reach soooo good for him, even if the scenario had the party kinda spread out), fleet, etc

he was kinda sorry that he used his "shield warden" class feat only once, but he mainly got that feat so that he could later on pick up the level 10 feat that allows retributive strike when he blocks damage from an ally (only way to get off 2 "reactions" as a pally).


Quoted from myself in another thread:

As a means of tanking that doesn't involve Aggro mechanics, Retributive Strike does a good job. Enemies don't want a free hit on them (that comes with a debuff), so they hit the Paladin instead.

I do, however, have some pretty significant issues with Retributive Strike being the Paladin's primary class feature.

- It is only effective countermeasure against particular threats, and even then isn't clearly defined.
RT's trigger is "A creature within your reach hits an ally or friendly creature." Does it trigger on ranged attacks? What about spells that deal damage? What about harmful effects that don't require an attack roll?

Then there's the issue that Retributive Strike always requires the Paladin to be within reach of the opponent, and never upgrades from this requirement. For melee, a creature can easily move to the opposite side of a creature and strike. Ranged attacks (including most spells) can easily circumvent this requirement. Where's the mid-level option to be able to at least move up to our speed before making a Retributive Strike? Also, what's a ranged weapon build Paladin to do?

- Retributive Strike is a class feature you want to never have to use. It's the threat of being walloped that makes an enemy reconsider attacking your allies and try to attack you instead. However, what happens when the enemy does just this? The vast majority of the Paladin's offensive class features revolve around Retributive Strike. Which means that, if the enemy attacks the Paladin instead (AKA Paladin is doing his job tanking) then the Paladin is deprived of using his class features that actually help defeat his foes!

This leads to the exceedingly wonky state that a Paladin wants to get in position to protect his allies but then have enemies attack his allies over him so that he can actually use his abilities to defeat them. Having anti-tanking be the optimal strategy for your tank seems extremely counterintuitive.

On a similar note, Aura of Justice seems like a monumental pain to actually use. Allies need to be all huddled around both you and the enemy, and need to be able to use a melee weapon worth a dang, and need to not use any reactions that turn, just to have a chance that the enemy decides to attack one of them so the Paladin can make a neutered Retributive Strike and they can also try to bop the enemy. That is such a far cry from the 1E Aura of Justice (practically Paladin's most powerful class feature) it's insane.


Rules Artificer wrote:

Quoted from myself in another thread:

As a means of tanking that doesn't involve Aggro mechanics, Retributive Strike does a good job. Enemies don't want a free hit on them (that comes with a debuff), so they hit the Paladin instead.

I do, however, have some pretty significant issues with Retributive Strike being the Paladin's primary class feature.

- It is only effective countermeasure against particular threats, and even then isn't clearly defined.
RT's trigger is "A creature within your reach hits an ally or friendly creature." Does it trigger on ranged attacks? What about spells that deal damage? What about harmful effects that don't require an attack roll?

Then there's the issue that Retributive Strike always requires the Paladin to be within reach of the opponent, and never upgrades from this requirement. For melee, a creature can easily move to the opposite side of a creature and strike. Ranged attacks (including most spells) can easily circumvent this requirement. Where's the mid-level option to be able to at least move up to our speed before making a Retributive Strike? Also, what's a ranged weapon build Paladin to do?

- Retributive Strike is a class feature you want to never have to use. It's the threat of being walloped that makes an enemy reconsider attacking your allies and try to attack you instead. However, what happens when the enemy does just this? The vast majority of the Paladin's offensive class features revolve around Retributive Strike. Which means that, if the enemy attacks the Paladin instead (AKA Paladin is doing his job tanking) then the Paladin is deprived of using his class features that actually help defeat his foes!

This leads to the exceedingly wonky state that a Paladin wants to get in position to protect his allies but then have enemies attack his allies over him so that he can actually use his abilities to defeat them. Having anti-tanking be the optimal strategy for your tank seems extremely counterintuitive.

On a similar note, Aura of Justice seems...

I would think anything that targets AC/TAC counts as hit, ranged attack or no. Paladins can not be done as Gunladins or even effective Shootladins as of right now - the way is melee, melee is the way.

And you do want to never use it, but since it is subject to the Multiple Attack Penalty, in my group the Paladin almost always tried to hit with a -12 to the roll - even with the proficiency bonuses, that makes it almost impossible to hit, and you can only ever attempt it ONCE per turn. This makes it laughable as a tanking tool, unless the GM humors you.


CXM wrote:
Rules Artificer wrote:

Quoted from myself in another thread:

As a means of tanking that doesn't involve Aggro mechanics, Retributive Strike does a good job. Enemies don't want a free hit on them (that comes with a debuff), so they hit the Paladin instead.

I do, however, have some pretty significant issues with Retributive Strike being the Paladin's primary class feature.

- It is only effective countermeasure against particular threats, and even then isn't clearly defined.
RT's trigger is "A creature within your reach hits an ally or friendly creature." Does it trigger on ranged attacks? What about spells that deal damage? What about harmful effects that don't require an attack roll?

Then there's the issue that Retributive Strike always requires the Paladin to be within reach of the opponent, and never upgrades from this requirement. For melee, a creature can easily move to the opposite side of a creature and strike. Ranged attacks (including most spells) can easily circumvent this requirement. Where's the mid-level option to be able to at least move up to our speed before making a Retributive Strike? Also, what's a ranged weapon build Paladin to do?

- Retributive Strike is a class feature you want to never have to use. It's the threat of being walloped that makes an enemy reconsider attacking your allies and try to attack you instead. However, what happens when the enemy does just this? The vast majority of the Paladin's offensive class features revolve around Retributive Strike. Which means that, if the enemy attacks the Paladin instead (AKA Paladin is doing his job tanking) then the Paladin is deprived of using his class features that actually help defeat his foes!

This leads to the exceedingly wonky state that a Paladin wants to get in position to protect his allies but then have enemies attack his allies over him so that he can actually use his abilities to defeat them. Having anti-tanking be the optimal strategy for your tank seems extremely counterintuitive.

On a

...

You're wrong on the MAP issue.

Attacks outside your turn are not affected by MAP unless they specifically say so (I think only ready action does so). Neither for you, nor your allies.

Quote:

MULTIPLE ATTACK PENALTY

If you attack more than once on the same turn, your
attacks after the first take a penalty called a multiple
attack penalty. Your second attack takes a –5 penalty, and
any subsequent attacks take a –10 penalty. This penalty is
untyped and is cumulative with all other penalties.
The penalty doesn’t apply to attacks you take when it
isn’t your turn (such as attacks made as part of a reaction),

though these attacks often have their own penalty. You
can choose a weapon with the agile trait to reduce your
multiple attack penalty (see page 182).

So, retribution is at -2,not -12,making it way better than a 2nd attack.


shroudb wrote:
CXM wrote:
Rules Artificer wrote:

Quoted from myself in another thread:

As a means of tanking that doesn't involve Aggro mechanics, Retributive Strike does a good job. Enemies don't want a free hit on them (that comes with a debuff), so they hit the Paladin instead.(...)

I would think anything that targets AC/TAC counts as hit, ranged attack or no. Paladins can not be done as Gunladins or even effective Shootladins as of right now - the way is melee, melee is the way.

And you do want to never use it, but since it is subject to the Multiple Attack Penalty, in my group the Paladin almost always tried to hit with a -12 to the roll - even with the proficiency bonuses, that makes it almost impossible to hit, and you can only ever attempt it ONCE per turn. This makes it laughable as a tanking tool, unless the GM humors you.

...

You're wrong on the MAP issue.

Attacks outside your turn are not affected by MAP unless they specifically say so (I think only ready action does so). Neither for you, nor your allies.
Quote:

MULTIPLE ATTACK PENALTY
If you attack more than once on the same turn, your
attacks after the first take a penalty called a multiple
attack penalty. Your second attack takes a –5 penalty, and
any subsequent attacks take a –10 penalty. This penalty is
untyped and is cumulative with all other penalties.
The penalty doesn’t apply to attacks you take when it
isn’t your turn (such as attacks made as part of a reaction),
though these attacks often have their own penalty. You
can choose a weapon with the agile trait to reduce your
multiple attack penalty (see page 182).

So, retribution is at -2,not -12,making it way better than a 2nd attack.

Somebody please explain to me why this obscure rule is to be found somewhere, is not directly referenced in any way in AOO feats (but they are mentioned as not suffering from MAP), and why if AOOs mention not being subject to MAP, the Retributive Strike makes no such distinction.

The lack of any reference that it doesn't apply and such references present two pages later in AOO feat made the GM rule in this way (most people don't remember every rule ever at the top of their head)...


Quote:

p.178 Section Weapons:

MULTIPLE ATTACK PENALTY
... as quoted above
Quote:

p. 305 Section Encounter Mode:

Multiple Attack Penalty
Attacks are particularly strenuous and become less and
less effective the more you use them during a single turn.
The second time you use an attack action (anything with
the attack trait) during your turn, you take a –5 penalty
to your attack roll. On your third attack (and any
subsequent attacks if you have a way to take more) you
take a –10 penalty. This penalty is called your multiple
attack penalty. The multiple attack penalty applies only
on your turn and resets at the end of your turn. Attacks
you can make outside of your turn might include their
own penalties.

Any reaction is not subject to MAP, as your MAP is reset on the end of your turn. The Ready Attack Action is the only exception thus it is written in the rules. I assume that retributive strike does not include it as it has been changed shortly before the playtest release, some feats still quote the original rules (Loyal Warhorse) that said, it seems to be an oversight there or in the AoO paragraph.

However as the general rule is MAP does not apply outside of your turn, AoO does not need the extra line of text.


CXM wrote:
shroudb wrote:
CXM wrote:
Rules Artificer wrote:

Quoted from myself in another thread:

As a means of tanking that doesn't involve Aggro mechanics, Retributive Strike does a good job. Enemies don't want a free hit on them (that comes with a debuff), so they hit the Paladin instead.(...)

I would think anything that targets AC/TAC counts as hit, ranged attack or no. Paladins can not be done as Gunladins or even effective Shootladins as of right now - the way is melee, melee is the way.

And you do want to never use it, but since it is subject to the Multiple Attack Penalty, in my group the Paladin almost always tried to hit with a -12 to the roll - even with the proficiency bonuses, that makes it almost impossible to hit, and you can only ever attempt it ONCE per turn. This makes it laughable as a tanking tool, unless the GM humors you.

...

You're wrong on the MAP issue.

Attacks outside your turn are not affected by MAP unless they specifically say so (I think only ready action does so). Neither for you, nor your allies.
Quote:

MULTIPLE ATTACK PENALTY
If you attack more than once on the same turn, your
attacks after the first take a penalty called a multiple
attack penalty. Your second attack takes a –5 penalty, and
any subsequent attacks take a –10 penalty. This penalty is
untyped and is cumulative with all other penalties.
The penalty doesn’t apply to attacks you take when it
isn’t your turn (such as attacks made as part of a reaction),
though these attacks often have their own penalty. You
can choose a weapon with the agile trait to reduce your
multiple attack penalty (see page 182).

So, retribution is at -2,not -12,making it way better than a 2nd attack.

Somebody please explain to me why this obscure rule is to be found somewhere, is not directly referenced in any way in AOO feats (but they are mentioned as not suffering from MAP), and why if AOOs mention not being subject to MAP, the Retributive...

it's not that obscured.

i mean, it's right there where you learn what MAP is in the first place, right after the paragraph that says what attacks are.


So, with the changes made to Blade of Justice an archer paladin (so a Figher/Ranger with Paladin Dedication) could get a decent amount of damage, as you probably won't have to spend more actions on it. Earliest you can get it is 12th level, or you play paladin and live with missing +2/+1 to hit since you can't pick Dexterity as class ability boost ... completely ignoring the issue that the paladin has no class feats supporting archery.

If Retributive Strike would function with ranged weapons that'd also help, I guess. Maybe one could make it work with a returning weapon ...

51 to 67 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Player Rules / Classes / Paladin: Bring Back Smite Evil All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Classes