|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now listen, this is gonna be more of a rant then anything and i have no delusion in thinking people are gonna agree with me on this right? But i feel i can confidently say that Paladins are the weakest of the 4th level casters to the point where i feel most full martials can outperform a paladin, where as they would likely struggle against the others(Assuming optimization of course) Let me explain why.
Ok so we got 5 4th level casters
The Paladin
The Bloodrager
The Ranger
The Child of A&A
and while technically not a spellcaster, unchained monk can emulate various spells so we'll add that too.
And no i am not including the Medium cause that thing is incredibly wonky in terms of how it works and im not that versed in psychic casters, but if i had to make a rough assumption. I would say its about on the same level as the Bloodrager or the unchained monk even without archmage or hierophant. Speaking of which,
The bloodrager and the unchained monk. I'll get these 2 out of the way since they are the easiest to explain. They are the best...Bar none With the Unchained monk easily being classified as tier 3 and the bloodrager not too far behind it. Bonus feats for both, good damage for both, the Unchained monk is probably one of the fastest classes in the game with access to move action teleport and bloodrager being basically just a better version of the barbarian in all but damage....unless you decide to go symbol striker and have fun with frostbite spellstrike, basically trading feats for raw damage output.(This will be important later)
Next you got the ranger, on its own the ranger is kind of all over the place with very situational abilities that don't really blend together making it kind of a meh class....that is until you look at the guide archetype which imo fixes ALL the problems the ranger has. More reliable damage boosts in the form of rangers focus, rangers luck with forces rerolls, a worthy replacement for evasion and inspired movement which for all intents and purposes is a once per day pounce with zero movement restrictions, resulting in this archetype being a straight out buff for the class and the one you should always play unless you have something very specific in mind
Finally the child of A&A and i know this one is going to be my most controversial one, as many people write it off for 2 main reasons the need for a swift action to cast spells while wearing armor(and since arcane strike is basically required for this archtype to function thats an understandable issue) and the lack of 2 handed martial weapons and for the longest time i was in the same catagory. It just seemed unsalvagable.
But then i remembered something that the child of A&A is at its core a fighter and thus has access to fighter feats and fighter feats on a spellcaster of any kind is really powerful. Just look at the warpriest or the kensai, not to mention you still get 3 free feats that let you get whatever combat feats you qualify for. Regardless both of these are non issues since A You'll likely never be using spells in combat and often resort to long lasting spells like mage armor and the like. and for 2 handed weapons oversized weapons are a thing and a large longsword is equivalent to a greatsword at a -2 penalty to attack. Is it Ideal? No but it's functional, Would you pick this over the other 3? Probably not but it's something to look into if you're running a low power campaign and wanted something kind of cute.
So with all this said, what do all of these have in common? Bonus feats and/or easy access to reliable damage modifiers as well as flexibility when it comes to Style Choices, alignment requirements and general roleplay. The Paladin has none of these.
Let's start with alignments
Every other class has relatively flexible alignment requirements with Umonk requiring you to be some form of lawful, and the other 3 being any alignment you want. Paladin requires you to be lawful good. Not only does this limit what gods you worship(Unless someone knows away to be a paladin of cayden cailean) but it forces you to be very rigid and uncompromising in your views and approaches to things. Maybe not full on lawful stupid but enough that certain options will likely be off the table for you.
Next Reliable damage, Bloodragers have bloodrage, Guide Rangers have rangers focus, Umonks have Flurry of blows which add up to an absurd amount of damage if all the hits connect, and Paladins have....smite evil? I'll be honest i don't like this ability as it makes it so you only get bonus damage against evil opponents, no on paper it doesn't sound so bad as fighting evil enemies is pretty much a given. But there is one type of enemy that's prevalent enough that it should be worth worrying about. Constructs. Constructs for the most part cannot be evil, and thus smite evil will not work. So if you run a paladin in a campaign thats heavy on constructs....you're kinda screwed.
An alternative to this is getting channeling force or energy channel(If you went sacred servent) But both of those only apply for 3 hits, and im fairly certain you being a full BAB class want more attacks then that. Finally the last one goes without saying, a lack of bonus feats. This severely limits what combat styles you can take, leaving only Archery(If you go divine hunter), Two Handed or Mounted(Which imo is just an extention of Two handed)
So Just Two handed and Archery are your only options as a Paladin, all of this makes paladin generally a binary character to play compared to the others. Now the paladin has ONE saving grace, that being divine grace and makes paladin the only 4th level class where placing a heavy focus on their casting stat is actually a good idea. Still even for how good that it, imo it's honestly not worth the headache of dealing with the nightmare that tends to be building around this class. And the clincher to all of this? Remember when i said the bloodrager was basically a better version of the barbarian? Well The paladin has the opposite problem, being made borderline obsolete by the warpriest.
If the warpriest is on the table there is absolutely zero reason for you to ever EVER run a paladin, its just not worth the trouble. Anything you can think of you would run with a paladin, the warpriest can do it and better....with MAYBE the exception of pure tanking, and none of the other 4 are exactly lacking in the beef department either. Anyway that's my rant, I'm looking forward to being told why I'm wrong.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
High Str Paladins with two handed weapons and Boots of Speed are BBEG killers. Most BBEGs are Evil, not Good or Neutral, so Smite is pretty dang strong throughout the entirety of a campaign.
Even without Smite, Paladins can put out some serious hurty hurt with just a Haste buff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This may surprise you, but I agree with you.
AntiPaladins/Paladins are not only just 4th level casters, but they also come with the extra baggage of alignment restrictions on top of already limited spell access. To add insult to injury, they are HD-3 for CL. Very few of the archetypes do anything to change or even influence spellcasting in any significant way...
Bloodragers get full Caster Level, and sometimes Bloodline Powers help their magics. No alignment restrictions and a better list to begin with. Archetypes/Bloodlines offer decent variety in spellcasting potential.
Ranger is interesting when it comes to spellcasting... they don't need it, for one. Ranger class features do not support spellcasting... ex: Favored Enemy does not affect spell DC's... yet they have spells that support class features... ex: Instant Enemy. They have archetypes that get more spells earlier, and even Druid spells, but seemingly no other encouragement to actually use spells. There are some feats that expand the spells available to Rangers, which is nice... I guess... Fey Spell Versatility on a Woodland Skirmisher with Magical Knack? Meh.
Mediums are awesome... Knacks, what?! I mean, way to raise the bar bringing 0-level at will spells to the kids' table. Here we are, all the 4th level casters, sitting quietly trying to avoid eye contact with the 6th and 9th level casters sitting at the grown-up table... and Medium shows up with Knacks, makes us all look like freaking babies. Seriously though, out of literally everyone that has access to magic, 4/9 casters NEED 0-level at will spells more than anyone else. You could arguably delete Cantrips and Orisons from everyone else EXCEPT 4/9 casters... you guys get real magic, buzz off.
I'm actually in the process of combining all 4/9 spell lists, and I will just give that whole list to all 4/9 casters at my tables. Including the Medium's Knacks for everyone. All 4/9 casters will use the divine (Paladin/Ranger) spells per day, and the Medium's spells known (if applicable). Obviously, spells specific to interacting with class features will only be available to the classes with those features... but 90% of the 4/9 spell lists are about to become universal across all 4/9 spell lists at my tables.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IMO if your not playing a 4 level casting class because the casting power is not powerful enough then I think you may have missed the entire purpose of what the spells are supposed to be doing with those classes.
Paladins, Rangers etc are classes that are (in my personal play experience) pretty good as they are and have some minor spell powers to put them a little bit better. But I don't play with power gaming optimisers (they have me for that) so for the most part average power works just fine in our games.
Obviously this varies heavily from group to group. But if your playing a paladin in a campaign with lots of undead, dragons and evil outsiders, you will definiltey not be lacking in firepower.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why play a paladin?
I wouldn't. Lol.
I can make a holy warrior concept character without all the baggage, so why bother with all the baggage of being a Paladin?
One thing we can all probably agree on, though... it is NOT a Paladin's spellcasting prowess that may draw one to that abomidable class.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why play a paladin?I wouldn't. Lol.
I can make a holy warrior concept character without all the baggage, so why bother with all the baggage of being a Paladin?
One thing we can all probably agree on, though... it is NOT a Paladin's spellcasting prowess that may draw one to that abomidable class.
Because the baggage could be fun to RP and as a play challenge to some people.
I read so much anti paladin rhetoric on these boards in some posts and it makes me think that a lot of people have no idea how to properly play one or deal with one. In my own experience over 35 years of gaming is that Paladins are nowhere nears as broken or onerous to play/play with as the boards make it seem.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why play a paladin?I wouldn't. Lol.
I can make a holy warrior concept character without all the baggage, so why bother with all the baggage of being a Paladin?
One thing we can all probably agree on, though... it is NOT a Paladin's spellcasting prowess that may draw one to that abomidable class.
Because the baggage could be fun to RP and as a play challenge to some people.
I read so much anti paladin rhetoric on these boards in some posts and it makes me think that a lot of people have no idea how to properly play one or deal with one. In my own experience over 35 years of gaming is that Paladins are nowhere nears as broken or onerous to play/play with as the boards make it seem.
Trust me i have spent months fooling around with the paladin, and its not the fact that its bad or weak or unusable, it's that getting it to the position it needs to be where it can truly shine.....often isn't worth it when pairing it up against other options.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the warpriest is on the table there is absolutely zero reason for you to ever EVER run a paladin, its just not worth the trouble. Anything you can think of you would run with a paladin, the warpriest can do it and better....with MAYBE the exception of pure tanking, and none of the other 4 are exactly lacking in the beef department either. Anyway that's my rant, I'm looking forward to being told why I'm wrong.
You are severely underestimating just how tanky a paladin is. If there is one thing those other 4 classes have in common it is their weak will save. A paladin has both a Good will save progression and their actual primary stat added directly to saving throws. Being able to shrug off will saves that normally puts you out of the fight is very important to continue contributing.
And being beefy is more than just having a d10 hit dice. Ranger doesn't get any in-class boost to AC and is restricted to Medium Armor. Normal bloodrager is pretty much locked into Str playstyle, bloodrage applies a penalty to AC (while being susceptible to Barbarian sudden death syndrome), and is also restricted to Medium Armor.
You can of course build them to become beefy or get AC into the stratosphere, but as it is they are lacking in the beef department. The paladin on the other hand gets Lay on Hands. Which is condition removal in addition to healing actual chunks of your HP if you invest in it (Fey Foundling, Tiefling FCB, Bracers of the Merciful Knight). And allows you to full-attack while doing so.
You are entitled to your opinion that it is the "worst" because of roleplay baggage and a lack of bonus feats restricting potential playstyles. But I strongly disagree with the claim that is the "weakest".
I would under no circumstances choose to play a Child of A&A in place of a Paladin. I doubt that this archetype can ever outperform a Paladin. I would even go as far as saying that I would rather play a 10th level Paladin that never uses Smite Evil than a 14th level Child of A&A.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you are playing a Paladin for mechanical reasons, it seems the entire point is already lost. Paladins are story pieces, they are SUPPOSED to be the stereotypical difficult to work with super strict sheriff @$$hole do-right.
Absolutely nothing about the Paladin class is essential for me to play an adept warrior zealot character. Nothing. I can achieve those concepts using NPC classes, if I desire.
Divine Bond(ed) Mount...? Cool, but it can't be a Unicorn or a Pegasus or a Dragon? Hard pass.
Smite Evil? I can't believe I am saying this, but I think I would honestly rather have Sneak Attack. Lol.
What's the Paladin class have left... good saves? Shaman's Apprentice Half-Orc with Sacred Tattoos and Fate's Favored will probably have to do... I can multiclass to pick up saves, there's feats, and items...
Some auras? If I wanted to support my party, I'd be a Bard.
Those spells, though, am I right? It's gotta be the Paladin's amazing spellcasting that makes the Paladin a Paladin. Lol.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't play paladins or rangers for the spellcasting; in fact, the paladin and ranger I've played the longest had archetypes that gave up spellcasting, because it seemed easier and more fun to use and track the abilities I received in place of them (hunter's tricks for the skirmisher ranger, defensive stance for the stonelord paladin). Both classes are prepared casters, which means debating how to use my limited spell slots, so I decided that I'd rather have a set repertoire of useful tactical abilities. I also wanted to avoid falling into the trap of comparing my spellcasting to that of the 6/9 and 9/9 casters in the party, because that wasn't the focus of either class anyway.
Tactically, I agree with the posters above that the paladin is the party tank, not the DPS. Good armor, good saves, and swift lay on hands to heal yourself make it hard to beat down a paladin, and his auras help bolster allies. The stonelord I played lost divine grace, but had the dwarven hardy trait to make up some of that, and the defensive stance that replaces spellcasting dramatically boosts AC. (You'll want fatigue as your first mercy so that you can drop out of the stance, move, and re-enter the stance ASAP, because enemies rarely stand still for long.)
I personally tend to play the paladin class as a steadfast defender of those weaker than they are, with enough worldliness to know that being a self-righteous prick (as far too many paladins are) rarely accomplishes anything useful. Instead, I prefer to play up the character's compassion and empathy, saving the bombastic sermons for those who pledged themselves to a god's service but then strayed into grievous error. That makes it more fun for me, and for everyone else at the table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to disagree that paladins are a week class. For offensive ability they also have Divine Bond (Weapon). While getting a mount is fairly decent the ability to enhance a weapon is a lot better. Boosting the enchantment bonus of the weapon not only gives the paladin an additional + to hit and damage it also allows him to overcome DR. If I am not mistaken all Golems have DR X/adamantine. By 9th level most characters should have around a +2 weapon. A 9th level paladin can increase his weapon bonus to +4 which is high enough to deal with adamantine DR. How many other classes can do that? The can also use the Divine bound to add abilities to a weapon. Keen is one of the abilities they can add and that can increase the damage considerably.
Paladins are also a Full BAB class that has proficiency in martial weapons. All they really need is a two handed weapon and power attack to deal a decent amount of damage. They can also use heavy armor which means they don’t lose too much AC when doing so. Bloodragers and Rangers are usually limited to medium armor so they are a lot more vulnerable when using a two handed weapon, or they are investing in DEX which lowers their damage compared to the paladin.
The real strength of the paladin is not in his offensive ability, but rather in his defenses. With two good saves and the ability to add CHA to all saves paladins have the absolute best saves in the game. They also gain immunity to a lot of attacks. They also get one of the few worthwhile in combat healing in the game. Lay on Hands also removes several conditions which make it even harder to keep the paladin down. Combine all this with heavy armor proficiency and you end up with the last character to go down. Because of his defenses a paladin is often able to pull of things that leave other classes dead.
Even without smite evil a paladin has a lot going for them. And when you are able to use smite evil their damage goes through the roof.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's so much to unpack in that opening post that my brain just blue screen of death'd.
Presumably if you are considering bringing a Paladin, your party is Good-aligned so discussing alignment is pointless here.
Child of A&A sucks not because it can't use two handed weapons, but because it loses Weapon Training so it can't use all the totally awesome Advanced Weapon Training options. You may as well play a Bloodrager if you want spells.
Unchained Monk is not a 4 caster. It does 1 thing and does 1 thing well and that's hit things. It's the highest rated Tier 4 class alongside Gunslinger.
Bloodrager is not better than Barbarian unless you allow Primalist. Many DMs don't. Bloodrager is a great comparison. It does slightly more damage than a Paladin against everything, but is substantially less tanky. Once a Paladin smites though, a Paladin is a far far better damage dealer and all the extremely dangerous enemies in the game tend to be evil. Constructs or not, a Paladin is still only dealing slightly less damage than a Bloodrager in that instance. In fact, the Paladin might still be bypassing the DR of Constructs with his Holy Bond Weapon where the Bloodrager might still have to contend with it.
Ranger, extremely solid. Good defenses, decent damage, lots of utility spells and can change them day-to-day. Guide Ranger is only an okay archetype. In any game but a beer and pretzel game where the DM has no idea what he's doing next, Favored Enemy is an excellent feature. Even then, Guide Ranger is only okay. If you want a REALLY good archetype, Freebooter is fantastic since it amps the entire party's damage.
So Paladins...some required learning for all the cool things Paladins can do.
Virtuous Bravo for all your Dex based wonderful Paladin needs.
Inspire Courage Paladins, for all your "Smite Evil kinda sucks because you can't do it all day" needs.
Sacred Servant, for all your "Just an extremely good archetype" needs.
Empyreal Knight, for all your "Summon Monster is worth losing Divine Grace" needs.
Enlightened Paladin, for all your "Unarmed Strike Paladin" needs. Also has Smite "That Guy" abilities.
Oath of Vengeance, for all your "Huh, channel energy kind of sucks. I'd rather be able to Smite Evil 10 more times a day" needs.
Out of the gate, Paladins get some extremely good spells the moment they gain their spellcasting. Lesser Restoration, Bless Weapon, and Divine Favor. Paladin can also Detect Evil from the getgo making some scenarios very easy.
Warpriests can be great. The Arsenal Chaplain in particular is extremely potent. Warpriests wish they were anywhere near as tanky as Paladins.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anyway that's my rant, I'm looking forward to being told why I'm wrong.
I haven't had time to read through people's responses yet, but my guess is that you'll have 100 people telling you specific reasons why you're wrong.
So instead I'm going to tell you why your comparisons are inconsistent, and because of that your entire premise is wrong.
You've rated the Ranger above the Paladin, but the Ranger is being propped up entirely by 1 archetype. The Child of Acavna is also a class being held up entirely by a single archetype. If you allow archetypes for those, then you have to allow archetypes for the Paladin as well.
Want to be good against Constructs? - Stonelord.
Want to use a different combat-style? - Virtuous Bravo.
Want bonus feats? - Tempered Champion.
You've also held the Paladin to a higher standard in some of your categories. How many Bloodragers do you see using varied combat styles? A Child of Acavna with a reach Weapon? It's doable sure, but it requires investment and/or system mastey - just as it would with a Paladin.
If you're going to compare these classes then you at least have to use the same metrics. There are ways to make a concept work if you look into the options available.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paladin are super powerful class. I just ignore the spell casting aspect. Ignoring all archtypes and doing a vanilla paladin (which does not suggest the existence of the kinky paladin jk):
-Better saves then most classes based of CHA.
-free enchants to a weapon to add special properties or a +1-5 to by pass most DR.
-lay of hands and mercy’s are great.
-immune to disease and other auras benefits.
Every time I’ve played a paladin I tend to not care about spell list.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paladins are story pieces, they are SUPPOSED to be the stereotypical difficult to work with super strict sheriff @$$hole do-right.
Absolutely nothing about the Paladin class is essential for me to play an adept warrior zealot character. Nothing. I can achieve those concepts using NPC classes, if I desire.
And here is where we VASTLY disagree. Sure Paladins CAN be the 'difficult to work with super strict sheriff @$$hole do-right' but that just means that player has bought into the lawful stupid hype and has not actually given any creative thought into playing a Paladin.
All you really need to do to play a paladin is have honor, not be a dick, and try your best to do the right thing as often as possible.
If the party is constantly butting heads with that then maybe the party is full of the stereotypical murder hobos that so darken our hobby.
There are myriad ways to play a Paladin without being inflexible, super strict or a jerk if you just try. Also assuming the rest of the party is not full or selfish, childish, contrarian players/characters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bloodrager is a great comparison. It does slightly more damage than a Paladin against everything, but is substantially less tanky. Once a Paladin smites though, a Paladin is a far far better damage dealer and all the extremely dangerous enemies in the game tend to be evil.
I want to address this because it's come up a bit and I don't think anyone's seeing the full picture
Bloodrage VS Paladin.
Bloodragers will obviously deal more damage than a Paladin against most enemies, but a Smiting Paladin's attack and damage bonuses will noticeably out-do Bloodrager from level ~5 onwards ...
... Until RAGING BRUTALITY.
This is somewhere in the vicinity of +15 damage on top of Greater Bloodrage. At level 13 the Bloodrager can get +3 to hit and ~+19.5 damage a few times per day, which is comparable to a Paladin . Paladin at this level gets 5 Smites per day, so more than enough for all the enemies worth expending resources on .
So you end up with similar damage output vs important enemies, but the Bloodrager will win out against hoards of smaller enemies. Against hoards of smaller enemies the Paladin can largely mitigate this with a Divine Bonded Weapon, making that distinction less important .
So the Bloodrager is easier to use , and really does have phenomenal damage numbers. The Paladin has to manage resources a little more thoughtfully, and can bring the damage when needed, but doesn't have the same monstrous damage all day.
The other classes have similar options, but I'm less familar with them. A Ranger's +6/+6 Favoured Enemy is definitely strong in the right campaign. A Monk's Flury, plus Stunning Fist into Medusa's Wrath is obviously going to deal a nice chunk of damage. I've never even seej a Child of Acavna played, so I won't comment on that one.
These classes have a lot of utility but they're different types of utility . Comparing them on damage numbers alone seems reductive.
Smite Evil? I can't believe I am saying this, but I think I would honestly rather have Sneak Attack. Lol.
Now VoodistMonk: Compare Smite to Sneak Attack. Tell me you'd really rather have Sneak Attack than Greater Rage and Raging Brutality against 5 enemies per day.
The problem with Sneak Attack is that it's hard to get a full-attack with Sneak Attack, since you have to set it up. That's a total non-issue with Smite Evil.
The "problem" with Smite Evil is that it's not always on. You get no bonuses vs average enemies, but you get huge bonuses vs boss enemies. If I'm honest, that seems like the correct way to go.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm, yes... don't mind me. I was just talking out my @$$... I have an unfounded, and completely unreasonable hatred of the Paladin (and Rogue) class(es).
And I thought we were actually just comparing the spellcasting of the 4/9 casters... so I was off in my approach from the start.
Bloodrager, though... you mentioned Raging Brutality, which is obviously taken @ 13... probably why you mentioned Greater Bloodrage along with it. Reckless Rage is like a mini version of Raging Brutality that can be had much earlier, and still stacks with Raging Brutality. Not that Bloodragers are known for having an abundance of feats, but Arcane Strike/Blooded Arcane Strike is pretty sweet... allows you to multiply Arcane Strike Damage with Vital Strike... more feats, but none of the baggage of being a Paladin. Lol.
Human (because feats are precious)
... heart of the fey
1. Power Attack
1. Furious Focus
3. Reckless Rage
4. Eschew Materials
5. Arcane Strike
6. bloodline feat
7. Blooded Arcane Strike
9. bloodline feat
9. Gorum's Swordmanship
11. Vital Strike
12. bloodline feat
13. Raging Brutality
Some Bloodlines offer fun feats like Improved Bull Rush, setting you up for things like Rhino Charge. Iron will is in a lot of Bloodline feat lists. There are options...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm, yes... don't mind me. I was just talking out my @$$... I have an unfounded, and completely unreasonable hatred of the Paladin (and Rogue) class(es).
And I thought we were actually just comparing the spellcasting of the 4/9 casters... so I was off in my approach from the start.
I mean if you don't like their flavour then yeah, don't play them.
The spellcasting ... It's better than it looks on paper, but I do think the -3 caster is a pretty significant nerf. Paizo apparently agrees since they didn't continue that tradition past the core rulebook.
Bloodrager, though... you mentioned Raging Brutality, which is obviously taken @ 13... probably why you mentioned Greater Bloodrage along with it. Reckless Rage is like a mini version of Raging Brutality that can be had much earlier, and still stacks with Raging Brutality. Not that Bloodragers are known for having an abundance of feats, but Arcane Strike/Blooded Arcane Strike is pretty sweet... allows you to multiply Arcane Strike Damage with Vital Strike... more feats, but none of the baggage of being a Paladin. Lol.
Yeah Raging Brutality is amazing. Coupled with Blooded Arcane Strike you have a huge damage boost. Assuming 16 CON and a +6 Belt, you take Raging Vitality, Raging Brutality, Arcane Strike and Blooded Arcane Strike and you're looking at +4 to hit and +27 damage at level 20. It does take 4 feats though. Bloodragers get 5 bonus feats, but you choose from a very small list, so that's almost a wash in terms of feats spent to get there.
Reckless Rage seems ok, but it doesn't seem as impactful as the others. It doesn't scale, and it's kind-of overkill. I honestly don't think you need Raging Brutality on a Bloodrager but ~+15 damage per hit is certainly enough to make that appealing. Reckless Rage just doesn't seem to compare, and I'd rather spend my feats elsewhere.
Anyway, back to the Paladin: They can't do it all day but they get similar numbers just by exisiting against bosses. Bloodragers are very good at their job, but they have a slightly different job to Paladins, and when push comes to shove a Paladin can usually accomplish that job when it's needed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My favorite Paladins are usually Hospitaler archetyped, more focused on getting Ultimate Mercy, and actually doing Paladin stuff. Sure, Smite is still there when you need it... you just aren't necessarily going to find yourself "needing" it as much as someone building an Oath of Vengeance murderhobo.
Oath of the People's Council, though. That's a Paladin I actually want on my team. The typical Flagbearer/Banner of Ancient Kings shenanigans with a Longspear... Combat Reflexes, Weapon Focus, Weapon Trick, and Discordant Voice.
Holy Tactician is another Paladin I would gladly have on my team. Can even double down and VMC Cavalier... pick up a Challenge, an Order, and real Tactician with more teamwork feats.
Sacred Servant VMC Cleric is pretty cool... spontaneous casting your Cure spells frees up what you need to prepare. Allows you to double up on Domains and Channel, too. Use either, or both, the Birthmark and/or Holy Tattoo trait(s) so YOU are your own holy symbol for your Divine Bond.
Preparing spells is for the weak... be the epitome of strength, a Kobold Pearl Seeker Paladin VMC Sorcerer with the Draconic Bloodline, take the Scaled Disciple feat, and go into Dragon Disciple. Rawr. Lol.
I have an NPC Paladin... Tortured Crusader VMC Barbarian... his name is Virgil, and he is a Goblin. Virgil uses a Burchering Axe. Virgil gets the Fatigued Mercy the same level he gets Rage. He uses Vital Strike/Furious Finish/Internal Fortitude and a Flawed Scarlet and Green Cabochon Ioun Stone.
Heavenly Radiance Aasimar Warrior of the Holy Light gestalt with Lantern Lighter Ranger...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So Just Two handed and Archery are your only options as a Paladin
Hrm, I can totally imagine a paladin with a shield. More AC means less damage to be healed, so you can cover your own wounds in even tougher encounters. Smite evil, divine favor, magic weapon and divine bond (weapon) don't care whether you wield your weapon in two hands. While two-handed can be combined with a shield via Unhindering Shield feat, this feat has its drawbacks (effectively level 7, prerequisite feat, buckler only, needs some shield enhancement).
Two-weapon fighting is a bit of a stretch, due to few feats and limited ability score points. But if you are dedicated enough to pull it off, your damage spikes with smite evil become even more brutal. Some buffs work on both weapons, too. Can be combined with the shield approach, at the expense of further feats and reduced crits from the shield hand.
And if you pick up natural attacks from racial abilities or items, you can apply your various bonuses to them. Opposed to TWF you don't have to worry about accuracy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... Until RAGING BRUTALITY.
This is somewhere in the vicinity of +15 damage on top of Greater Bloodrage. At level 13 the Bloodrager can get +3 to hit and ~+19.5 damage a few times per day, which is comparable to a Paladin . Paladin at this level gets 5 Smites per day, so more than enough for all the enemies worth expending resources on .
+15 dmg? That seems unlikely at lv 13. I figure most bloodragers would have a +6/+7 con mod while raging at that level, which would give 9/10 extra dmg.
I've personally not found Raging Brutality that attractive since the rage round drain is rather huge. If you use it twice then you've spent the equivalent of Extra Rage. It's probably worth having as a burst option but it feels like Arcane Strike would give you more benefit in the long round. Or building up to Hurtful.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing prevents a paladin from focusing on DEX instead of STR. I have built a DEX based paladin of Sarenrae that used Dervish Dance to get DEX to damage. He had a 13 STR so he could get power attack. Because of the high DEX he was actually pretty decent with a bow even without putting any feats into archery. He might not have gotten the extra attacks or damage of a dedicated archer but had a pretty good chance to hit. Smit Evil and Divine Bond Weapon can be used with any weapon so that helped when he need to use a bow. That came as a nasty surprise to more than one boss who thought he could just stay of melee range of the paladin.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
+15 dmg? That seems unlikely at lv 13. I figure most bloodragers would have a +6/+7 con mod while raging at that level, which would give 9/10 extra dmg.... Until RAGING BRUTALITY.
This is somewhere in the vicinity of +15 damage on top of Greater Bloodrage. At level 13 the Bloodrager can get +3 to hit and ~+19.5 damage a few times per day, which is comparable to a Paladin . Paladin at this level gets 5 Smites per day, so more than enough for all the enemies worth expending resources on .
Well you need 15 CON for Raging vitality. If you're going 15 you might as well go 16 . Then with Raging Vitality and Greater Bloodrage you're looking at +8 CON, for a total of 24. I assume by level 13 you'd have +2 CON from items for a total of 26 CON . So with the +50% damage for wielding a 2-handed weapon you're actually looking at ~+12 damage per hit from Raging Brutality.
In my original post I had "+12 to +18" and then went on to explain that it would increase as you level up and blah blah blah, but I realised the post was getting too long and this thread isn't about Bloodragers anyway. So I took the average of "+12 to +18" and called it +15.
You're probably right though: Since the example ended up being about level 13 I should have kept it at +12.
I've personally not found Raging Brutality that attractive since the rage round drain is rather huge. If you use it twice then you've spent the equivalent of Extra Rage. It's probably worth having as a burst option but it feels like Arcane Strike would give you more benefit in the long round. Or Hurtful.
I was actually using Raging Brutality precisely because of it's limited duration. It's a huge damage spike that you only use a few times per day - just like a certain other class feature that's been mentioned in this thread. And just like Smite Evil, Raging Brutality isn't really meant to be used every round - it's used on rounds where you really need to kill everything in reach RIGHT NOW!
My reasoning for Smite Evil being so good works just as well for Raging Brutality: "You get no bonuses vs average enemies, but you get huge bonuses vs boss enemies. If I'm honest, that seems like the correct way to go.".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well you need 15 CON for Raging vitality. If you're going 15 you might as well go 16 .
Differing experiences, I guess. I'd find it hard to afford 16 Con as a Bloodrager since they can't dump Cha. Doesn't help that I prefer building them MAD since they have great spells for AoOs. But either way it is a noticeable dmg increase.
I think the reason why paladin spellcasting is not spectacular isn't the greatest isn't the limited levels, it's the spellcasting stat. Paladins are inherently MAD; they've got tanky class abilities, but they're also expected to be martial so you're either focusing on Str or Dex with a minor in Con, then you also need Cha for casting and Divine Grace.
You've got it backwards. The Paladin has just two ability scores they care about since they replace both Con and Wis with Charisma. They fare way better with low PB compared to any other full-BAB alternative. If you had Con/Wis 14 and Charisma 10, it would be more efficient to lower them both to 10 and invest all of it into Charisma 16.
You don't need Wis because of the Good save progression and Divine Grace.
You don't need Con because of Divine Grace and Lay on Hands.
The difference between 14-14-10 (Con-Wis-Cha) and 10-10-16 is that the Charisma stat line has a better Will/Fort save by +1 and can use Lay on Hands three additional times. Which without any additional investment would be 10,5 extra effective HP at level 2 while the 14 Con would only give you +4 hp.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If... that's a big IF... I ever wanted to play a Paladin, it would be because I had a concept involving a holy warrior that was completely devote to their faith to the point of being dependent on it [their faith]. A zealot. An addict.
The only reason they are a warrior in the first place is because it brings them closer to their god... it's their fix. They got an itch they need to Smite, I mean scratch. They will go through great lengths to get accolades from their god... that praise, that power...
I need it. Without the grace of my god, I am nothing. Nothing can stop me from making my god proud of me. I will not, I cannot, fail my god. I will walk on the backs of all before me as I climb to heaven...
Oh yeah, in PF1 the Paladin class has mechanical stuff, too... I am sure I can figure out how to use some of it with my concept... but I am never going to pick Paladin for mechanical anything... ever.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If... that's a big IF... I ever wanted to play a Paladin, it would be because I had a concept involving a holy warrior that was completely devote to their faith to the point of being dependent on it [their faith]. A zealot. An addict.
The only reason they are a warrior in the first place is because it brings them closer to their god... it's their fix. They got an itch they need to Smite, I mean scratch. They will go through great lengths to get accolades from their god... that praise, that power...
I need it. Without the grace of my god, I am nothing. Nothing can stop me from making my god proud of me. I will not, I cannot, fail my god. I will walk on the backs of all before me as I climb to heaven...
Oh yeah, in PF1 the Paladin class has mechanical stuff, too... I am sure I can figure out how to use some of it with my concept... but I am never going to pick Paladin for mechanical anything... ever.
That basically sums up why i could never realistically play a paladin, my mindset is much too nuanced for something so blatently binary
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, any argument against the paladin fails in the face of Aura of Justice.
Aura of Justice is like a +5/+13, or so, right?
I will put my Bard's +9/+9 up against that all day long, good sir.
I know, Bard's are 6/9 casters and are not really part of this discussion... but Aura of Justice isn't any better, or worse, than your basic Bard buffs at that level. And Bards can still cast Haste to multiply their own buffs benefits.
What makes Aura of Justice amazing, is that the murderhobo is finally helping everyone else in the party. Lol.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, it's a smite full attack to every party member that can fit within 10ft of the paladin. On top of the bards bonus and haste.Honestly, any argument against the paladin fails in the face of Aura of Justice.Aura of Justice is like a +5/+13, or so, right?
But then you, admittably, have to be within 10' of the Paladin... and they tend to stink.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As does soap... for whatever reason, though, Paladins (and I almost hate to generalize) seem to have forgotten that purity of heart does not equal purity of body or personal aroma...
Jasmine over there will clean here armor and clean her sword and clean her soul of every transgression no matter how trivial... but she won't clean her @$$, or her donkey...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's what Prestidigitation is for.
Paladins don't get that... because their spellcasting sucks as bad as their heigene, remember?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, so, let's reverse it. The main thrust of paladin dislike appears to be that their offense is too low in comparison to other casters with 4 spell levels. Do I have that right?
No, it's that they smell bad.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cleanliness is next to Godliness. Anyway, the Bloodrager isn't going to smell any better.
DPR is all very well until Dominate Person pops up, and then your Bloodrager isn't quite so popular.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, so, let's reverse it. The main thrust of paladin dislike appears to be that their offense is too low in comparison to other casters with 4 spell levels. Do I have that right?
I think the beef people have with Paladin is the perceived lack of build and roleplay diversity. In most campaigns paladins are not lacking offense when it matters and are in fact the main damage dealers at that point.
OP seemed more hung up on the lack of bonus feats as the reason for the Paladin's low build diversity. But the large majority of Bloodragers are pigeonholed into Two-handed Str builds and the granted bonus feats are given from small, restricted lists that usually don't advance whatever playstyle you've chosen. Bloodragers are even more restricted in their build diversity than Paladins.
So the actual issue is the roleplay restriction. But if you can't portray LG in more than one specific way then that's on you, not the class. And if you don't believe your character would fit as LG then you don't make them a Paladin. Simple as that.
Then, what's the fix?
Do you need more damage, or better accuracy, or both? What's the number they have to hit? How many rounds of such combat bonuses would it take to declare the paladin playable?
Eh. Paladins have it good. Take Additional Traits at lv 7 to grab Magical Knack and Fate's Favored. Pearls of Power are cheap enough to cast Divine Favor for every encounter in a day. If you've chosen the mount as your Divine Bond you can even hold the charge on the spell to avoid using a standard action at the start of combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So the actual issue is the roleplay restriction. But if you can't portray LG in more than one specific way then that's on you, not the class. And if you don't believe your character would fit as LG then you don't make them a Paladin. Simple as that.
This pretty much sums up my opinion on the matter. Personally, I've never really seen a Paladin under perform in their role. I often go out of my way to blatantly find some ways of mimicking their abilities because they are just that good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If... that's a big IF... I ever wanted to play a Paladin, it would be because I had a concept involving a holy warrior that was completely devote to their faith to the point of being dependent on it [their faith]. A zealot. An addict.That basically sums up why i could never realistically play a paladin, my mindset is much too nuanced for something so blatently binary
No offense, but both of these are pretty blatant proofs that the opposite is true. If you can't play an alignment without resorting to "I AM TEH LAW!!" then that seems to show a pretty distinct lack of nuance.
I honestly think this is the only problem that needs* to be addressed - the roleplay aspects of the Paladin and how that affects your enjoyment of the game.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paladin is the cruise control class: you don't need to tweak anything, take any particular feat, buy a specific widget for them...
You just lean back and enjoy the ride. :)
Spells? bad at them? who cares... these are just slots to grant you free healing when the fight's over... pallies don't even need the spells to be honest... they steamroll over most bosses if you're smart enough to save a smite evil for the end... :P
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I played a Paladin in 5e... played a Lawful Good Kobold Cleric/UnMonk gestalt in Pathfinder... alignment is just another thing, like a Drawback. It is fun to have something to roleplay.
My 5e Paladin was a murderhobo, but I played him true to his alignment. His goodness often provided personal conflict with his desire to butcher the wicked. It was a lot of fun, honestly.
Hbob, my gestalt LG Kobold, was completely dedicated to helping the party in any way he could... a support character focused on Aid Another. By far my favorite DnD character I have ever played.
My problem is not with the Paladin class, or even with how people treat the Paladin class as nothing more than a bag of tricks rather than an idea... it's this stupid filter I view the world through that somehow allows me to assume others share similar ideals to myself. Lol.
The Paladin class is exactly what it was designed to be. Nothing else Paladins like a Paladin. Period. People are allowed to view the class in whatever light they want. People can build Paladins that don't roleplay any single religious aspect of the class. I actually don't care that much, I promise.
For story pieces, Paladins are awesome plot guides... that was what I used my 5e Paladin as. He was a GMPC in a homebrew 5e campaign I was running. Sabriel's convictions were tied directly to the main storyline... finishing his part in the "main quest" was literally the most correct course of action to uphold his faith. He often had to put murderhobo'ing the wicked on hold in order to play his part, and I tried to make it as obvious as possible when Sabriel would rather be chopping $#!+ up instead of whatever he was obligated to do by his undying faith.
Sabriel was also a palace-raised half-angel... he was a trained soldier, and court guardian. He was disciplined in all things, and permitted absolutely zero foolishness (at first). The sort of person that wasted no extra movement doing literally anything... mechanical precision from years of holding himself to a higher standard. His appearance and equipment were spotless and perfect, always. He was an absolute prick (at first), but it had nothing to do with his alignment or class.