Tweaks to Paladin Feats


Classes


With the coming of Update 1.6, came many cool mechanical changes to the Paladin. But with changes comes balancing issues. Here are two imbalanced feats that need tweaking...

1. Channel Life: This is the new MUST have feat for the Paladin. With the change to hands and casting rules, came the dominance of this feat for Paladins. Heal completely overshadows Lay on Hands, and it feels like your healing with one hand tied behind your back if you use LoH rather than Heal. That hurts. So my recommendation is to have Heal cost 2 spell points (like Healing Font domain power) or keep it the same but change the d8s to d6s for the Paladin. (the Paladin shouldn't be as good as the Cleric at Heal) Please nerf this feat guys...

2. Blade of Justice: Whatever your opinion of this feat was guys, it wasn't over powered and it wasn't underpowered. That is until Smite Evil came onto the scene... With all its 2 extra dice/persistent Good damage/share with your friends awesomeness. The previously regarded Smite Evil of 2e has been left in the dust. (at least at level 12 and beyond) I mean why use an action to mark an enemy with BoJ (for 3-6 Good damage, yay!) and then Smite, when you can Smite once and then hit again? (or any number of other possible choices) I know I'm focusing on the Defender class specifically here, but a buff to the feat won't hurt the other two either. My recommendation here is to make the feat worthwhile at later levels. So maybe at level 12 it gains additional benefits. Like say, and enhancement that invokes an effect on an enemy. (such as enfeebled or something that the other reactions don't do) or (even better) once the Paladin marks an enemy, that enemy is marked until its dead or the Paladin marks someone else. That way, Blade of Justice can be used in conjunction with other feats. Rather than compete with them.

Those are my suggestions to imbalanced feats that I see. I have to say that I love this game that you guys made, great job Paizo!


You do realize that Warded Touch applies to LoH and not Heal, right?


Draco18s wrote:
You do realize that Warded Touch applies to LoH and not Heal, right?

Warded Touch is now a thing of the past. 1.6 buffed LoHs and nerfed it at the same time. Paizo gave us Warded Touch and Hospice Knight for free. (which I wholeheartedly agree with!) But now Heal is on an equal playing field as well when it comes to Somatic Casting. So therefore, they nerfed LoHs as a side effect of this change... But it still begs the question, "does Lay on Hands provoke attacks of opportunities now?" Nowhere does it mention the removal of the manipulate trait on the document.


Actually, I just realized something about BoJ and Smite... BoJ should stack with Smite. Instead of the normal 3-6 Good damage (level and gear dependant), together they should do 5-8 Good damage. Not sure if that warrants spending the extra action on BoJ tho...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Iron_Matt17 wrote:
Draco18s wrote:
You do realize that Warded Touch applies to LoH and not Heal, right?
Warded Touch is now a thing of the past. 1.6 buffed LoHs and nerfed it at the same time. Paizo gave us Warded Touch and Hospice Knight for free.

*Relooks at 1.6*

You're right. There was still a use for Warded Touch (the inability for it to trigger reactions!) which is still with us with the changes to Somatic Casting. Which is what I was getting at.

Also means I have another feat to replace on my sheet...missed that one somehow.

(I was also using Hospice Knight for a free skill rank in medicine, which I turned into Fighter Dedication and a free skill point in Athletics, ugh)

Quote:
But it still begs the question, "does Lay on Hands provoke attacks of opportunities now?" Nowhere does it mention the removal of the manipulate trait on the document.

"Raises." It raises the question.

To beg the question means to assume the argument as true in order to prove said argument (i.e. circular reasoning). The English translation of the original Latin is not the best phrase when other uses of the word "beg" mean "to ask for" and people have turned "beg the question" into meaning "the question begs to be asked" (no, you're swapped the article and actor! For you to beg the question is very different than the question begging you!)

Grammar nitpick over. Yes, you can go find this new definition in the dictionary. That's because dictionaries reflect usage: people use it "wrongly" and now its official.

But you're right.
Somatic casting still has the manipulate trait and can still trigger reactions, which is why I thought Warded Touch was still a thing and gave a purpose to Lay on Hands over Heal (you'd heal for less, but you wouldn't get punched in the face for doing it).


I still wish they added my Divine grace
constant half class lvl to saves. ( yes that would be +10 at lvl 20, but in all fairness in pf1 the cr 18 and higher creatures that had an attack that allowed a throw to beat its attack had a high DC to do so. one of the ooze types had one of 30 iirc forest blight I think). and this was to all paladins even the ones that have not come yet.


Steelfiredragon wrote:

I still wish they added my Divine grace

constant half class lvl to saves. ( yes that would be +10 at lvl 20, but in all fairness in pf1 the cr 18 and higher creatures that had an attack that allowed a throw to beat its attack had a high DC to do so. one of the ooze types had one of 30 iirc forest blight I think). and this was to all paladins even the ones that have not come yet.

I don't think we need this any more. An ability/effect that adds to saves? Sure, I just don't think it needs to be half level as all characters already get +level to their saves.

A +10 at level 20 would be "always succeed on all saving throws, only bother rolling for the 50/50 chance of critically succeeding."

And that's too much.


to you maybe.
how about
+5 and then an aura that adds 5 to allies?


Steelfiredragon wrote:
to you maybe.

"Always succeed" is not something that should ever happen.

If you think it is, you should go play Dogs in the Vineyard where the GM's rules read as follows:

Quote:
Say 'yes' or roll dice.

Meaning that as a narrative driven game, anything the player says that they do or event that happens happens or its considered a conflict and the GM needs to pull out dice.

As an example (this was during a single-PC short backstory scene) a player who was escaping a burning building naked (because he and an NPC woman had been about to get it on*) were confronted by someone critical of they're being naked.

Player, having flubbed his way out of talking his way out of the situation said, "The burning building collapses on him."

GM thought about this for a minute and said, "You know what, sure. The scene's gone on a bit longer than planned, and this is just supposed to be character building, so sure. It collapses and kills the guy and here's the take-away..."

*DitV is heavily religious, so this falls under that whole "sex before marriage" thing. PCs in DitV are, for the lack of a better word, actual paladins in an otherwise magic-less 1800s wild-west setting.


I dont think it would be always succeed, just wont be critical fail at all.


Steelfiredragon wrote:
I dont think it would be always succeed, just wont be critical fail at all.

If you succeed on a nat-10 normally, then a +10 bonus modifier means that a nat-1 is an 11. The only way you can fail is to roll a nat-1 (because of the critical rules: a nat-20 that misses is a hit and a nat-1 that hits is a failure). Every other result on the die would be a success or crit-success.


Haha, no one has ever corrected me on my usage of "begs the question" before... I thank you.
But let's stay more on track here...
Personally, I think Divine Grace should be broadened a little to be more applicable. Either a reaction to saves for more than just spells (I find that my gm doesn't always tell me when a spell is shot at me and that saves for spells has gone down since Monster abilities are not spell-like abilities anymore) Either that or make DG a passive ability rather than a reaction.
+2 is fine in this game of "tight math", IMO. No need to change it back to the glory days of PF1...


the glory days of pf1 was passive CHA to saves which to means the paladin's saves were overpowered in the here and now.

my version only had it overpowered once you hit lvl 20, but then at lvl 20 you should be facing more otherworldly things( both planar and interplanetary) that have huge DC to save against( this is thinking down the road past beastiary 2e 1.)
I do not think its overpowered myself though. It is my opinion do not sit here and tell me how many ways and portal spells it will take me not only ot get to Sunday but also get me from Golarion to Toril to Oerth to Aseroth to DC 50 universe earth to alt earth during ww2 to wherever else.
unless you have a travel brochure otherwises its time wasted

either way DG should be passive
( though should it get changed to passive for final release and then leave it at a fixed number, make it 3 instead of 2)

edit: alot can change behind closed doors between now and final product release so....


Draco18s wrote:
Steelfiredragon wrote:
I dont think it would be always succeed, just wont be critical fail at all.
If you succeed on a nat-10 normally, then a +10 bonus modifier means that a nat-1 is an 11. The only way you can fail is to roll a nat-1 (because of the critical rules: a nat-20 that misses is a hit and a nat-1 that hits is a failure). Every other result on the die would be a success or crit-success.

then my idea could be modified to start at lvl 3 to grant a divine bonus l to saves and add 1 more to it every 3 lvls instead of half class

either way, the long road of things( past pf2e beastiary 1) either version should not be that powerful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I want to happily announce that I retract my issues with Blade of Justice. I've been testing it thoroughly the last few days, with my own tests and a session of "When the Stars Go Dark". Yes, it is very true that Smite outshines BoJ damage-wise. This would be a problem if Blade of Justice lasted only one round... But of course, it doesn't have to.
I found it was quite flavourful as an aggro type feat, and was a very effective tactic against single target enemies. (since the enemy probably won't be focusing all its attacks on the Paladin. And if so...Great!) Great job, Paizo!

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Playtest / Player Rules / Classes / Tweaks to Paladin Feats All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.