5e Paladin and Ranger design ideas

1.  DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

A. Balanced vs. "Unbalanced" classes


Starting in 3e, the Paladin and Ranger became "balanced" against the Fighter.  As a result, they became specialized warriors.  Racial (and for the Ranger, alignment) restrictions were removed as part of the racial balancing that replaced the old demi-human level limits as a balance mechanic.

Prior to 3e, the Paladin and Ranger were better than Fighters, restricted only by racial, alignment, code of conduct, and high stat requirements.  The fighter had a slightly better multiple attack progression and better access to specialization, but overall the Paladin and Ranger were superior both in terms of passive and active ability options.

Personally, the 'unbalanced' 1e/2e Paladin and Ranger were fine with me, assuming that (a) reasonable character generation is used and (b) the class restrictions are enforced.  If you have one exceptional ability score, placing it in Charisma (for a Paladin) forces you to sacrifice melee ability (discounting 4e for a moment), whereas the fighter just slaps that high score in Strength.  Thus, the stat requirements essentially provide their own balance, assuming that the PCs are not swimming in 18s.

Flavor-wise, I also like the idea of these classes being "fighter-plus."  I like that Launcelot is not less of a fighter simply because he is a Paladin.

B. Class, Sub-Class, Prestige Class, or Specialty

The other consideration whether the Paladin and Ranger are available classes at level one (as their own class or as a Fighter variant) or if they must be earned at a later level (as explored in 3e Unearthed Arcana, much like the 1e Bard).  Under current 5e mechanics, "earning" Paladinhood/Rangerhood could be accomplished at mid-level (level 5/6, say) by spending a Fighting Style or acquiring a new Specialty.

C. Assumptions re: 5e Design Team 

I'm going to assume that Paladin and Ranger will be designed as "balanced," separate, 3e/4e-style classes.  I am admittedly using many 3e concepts.
   
2. PALADIN AND RANGER DESIGN CONCEPT UNDER CURRENT ASSUMPTIONS

A. Paladin

Key Abilities: Strength, Constitution, and Charisma (Ability Adjustment: +1 to Strength, Constitution, or Charisma)
Starting Hit Points/Hit Die: 1d10
Proficiencies: All weapons, armor, and shields

Suggested Backgrounds: Knight or Priest
Suggested Specialties: Acolyte, Guardian, Healer, Survivor 

Hit Die and Weapon Attack Progression: As Fighter

Level   Class Abilities
1         Detect Evil, Divine Power
2         Divine Grace
3         Divine Health
4         Divine Magic
5         Cure Disease, Mount

I would use the 3e Paladin abilities here, with a few tweaks:
* Divine Power is a mashup of Smite Evil and Lay on Hands.  Essentially, the Paladin gets a pool of Divine Power equal to his class level x charisma modifier, and recharges between short rests using the 5e Hit Die mechanic.  Divine Power can be used to add to hit and/or damage against foes (half-effect against non-evil foes), or as an action may be channeled into a touch to heal wounds or damage undead.  Alternatively, Divine Power could be represented by a dice pool, but I personally prefer using Charisma as a measure of the Paladin's connection with his God or Higher Power.
* Divine Grace: +1 to all saves (+2 may be too high with flatter DCs in 5e)
* Divine Magic: Paladin gets access to truncated spell list (similar to 3e) that includes Turn Undead, with roughly half the spells/day, spell level, and Magical Attack progression of an equivalent level cleric.  Paladin spell DCs are based on the Paladin's Charisma.
   
Discussion: 

The Paladin loses the Fighter's Expertise and Fighting Style and in return gets some passive defensive abilities, utility abilities, some divine spellcasting, and offensive burst damage capability against evil foes.  This seems a fair trade, particularly given that most Fighters will put their best statistic in Strength, providing an every-battle edge to the base Fighter.  This preserves the Paladin as an evil-fighting specialist and defensive warrior. 

B. Ranger

Key Abilities: Strength, Dexterity, Wisdom (may add +1 to any of these)
Starting Hit Points/Hit Die: d10
Proficiencies: All weapons, shields, light armor, medium armor

Suggested Backgrounds: Bounty Hunter, Commoner, Soldier, Spy
Suggested Specialties: Archer, Dual Wielder, Healer, Survivor, Jack-of-all-Trades

Hit Die and Weapon Attack Progression:  as Fighter

Level   Class Ability
1         Skill Mastery, Favored Enemy I, Survival
2         Wild Empathy 
3         Endurance
4         Animal Companion, Divine Magic
5         Favored Enemy II  
   
Ability Descriptions:
* Skill Mastery: As per 5e Rogue, but only +2 per skill   
* Favored Enemy I: +1 to hit, +1d6 damage to one enemy type
* Favored Enemy II: add another favored enemy type, prior favored enemy increases to +2 to hit, +2d6 damage 
* Survival: Gain the Survival skill.  If your Background also grants Survival, you may choose another skill or take an additional +2 to any Survival skill check (which stacks with Skill Mastery)
* Wild Empathy: Gain the Animal Handling skill.  If you already have Animal handling, you gain an additional +2 to any Animal Handling skill check (which stacks with Skill Mastery)
* Endurance: As per 3e, but a +2 bonus to stamina-related checks and saves
* Animal Companion: As per 3e
* Divine Magic: Ranger gets access to truncated druid-like spell list (similar to 3e), with roughly half the spells/day, spell level, and Magical Attack progression of an equivalent level cleric.  Ranger spell DCs are based on the Ranger's Wisdom.  
   
Discussion:

With the loss of Expertise and Fighting Style, the Ranger gains additional skills and skill effectiveness, minor spellcasting, an animal companion, and heightened effectiveness against favored enemies.  This makes the 5e Ranger more of an asset during exploration phases of the game and a supplemental warrior in combat, depending on Specialty selected.  The Ranger is harder to balance against the Fighter than the Paladin, as there are many non-combat Ranger abilities that simply have no Fighter counterpart.

I intentionally chose not to include 3e-flavor ranger fighting styles as (a) those are now replicated in Specialties and (b) they would raise Ranger combat ability to the level of a Fighter -- and beyond, against a favored enemy.  Arguably, Expertise preserves the Fighter's edge on an every-fight basis, however.  I can see this both ways, but giving Rangers Fighter-equivalent Fighting Styles would be overpowered -- clearly, Expertise is not as powerful on its own as the plethora of other Ranger abilities above.

3. CONCLUSION

I personally prefer an "unbalanced" Paladin and Ranger, with Fighter abilities plus other stuff and stat requirements (and possibly having them as 'prestige class'/specialty options not available at creation) but that appears unlikely based on current design assumptions.  I hope you find my proposed 'balanced' 5e designs compelling.   
 
Personally, the 'unbalanced' 1e/2e Paladin and Ranger were fine with me, assuming that (a) reasonable character generation is used and (b) the class restrictions are enforced.  If you have one exceptional ability score, placing it in Charisma (for a Paladin) forces you to sacrifice melee ability (discounting 4e for a moment), whereas the fighter just slaps that high score in Strength.  Thus, the stat requirements essentially provide their own balance, assuming that the PCs are not swimming in 18s.    



Consider this thought a level 1 paladin is a member of an organization they buy him his equipment..  but he tithes on his earnings ... however he also gains periodic blessings or boons. These boons and blessings are not free to an extent some are bound up in oaths sure but those oaths are often trivial (like Sampsons dont cut your hair) or CuhCulaines (dont eat dog) or even pretty normal to the character concept (like defend the innocent ummm duh says galahad) the real cost of them is tied up in attunement the keeping only so many items for himself is not an oath its actually a repercussion of his essense being tied up in boons.  In effect the Paladin has a path defined by divine boons and blessings. One of them might be like Lancelots strength of 10 men and under the hood be remarkably like the girdle of giant strength. 

He is still a fighter plus... and that plus is not something others dont get just a plus of a specific style or trope.

 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

 
Personally, the 'unbalanced' 1e/2e Paladin and Ranger were fine with me, assuming that (a) reasonable character generation is used and (b) the class restrictions are enforced.  If you have one exceptional ability score, placing it in Charisma (for a Paladin) forces you to sacrifice melee ability (discounting 4e for a moment), whereas the fighter just slaps that high score in Strength.  Thus, the stat requirements essentially provide their own balance, assuming that the PCs are not swimming in 18s.    



Consider this thought a level 1 paladin is a member of an organization they buy him his equipment..  but he tithes on his earnings ... however he also gains periodic blessings or boons. These boons and blessings are not free to an extent some are bound up in oaths sure but those oaths are often trivial (like Sampsons dont cut your hair) or CuhCulaines (dont eat dog) or even pretty normal to the character concept (like defend the innocent ummm duh says galahad) the real cost of them is tied up in attunement the keeping only so many items for himself is not an oath its actually a repercussion of his essense being tied up in boons.  In effect the Paladin has a path defined by divine boons and blessings. One of them might be like Lancelots strength of 10 men and under the hood be remarkably like the girdle of giant strength. 

He is still a fighter plus... and that plus is not something others dont get just a plus of a specific style or trope.

 



I'd be open to different boons as you suggest ... sort of like Paladin "domains," if you will.  I was trying specifically to port over a 1e/3e Paladin to 5e, but as you point out there are different possible benefits of being a holy warrior and different game mechanics to deliver them.  I also like your comment on attunement, which is a facet of 5e I didn't address in my OP re: traditional D&D Paladin wealth/item limits.

My point also was, simply, that I would support a "fighter-plus" design ethic with stat requirements, but I recognize that this is not the current design paradigm and that I am probably in the minority within the customer base. 
From a design perspective the paladin is almost unplayable in game that doesn't focus on badguy smiting until level 5 when the mount starts stealing the show thanks to its higher strength, speed, natural attack count, and natural armor (using 3e as a guideline though I suppose horses in 5e may be less OP than in 3rd). Your primary offensive capabilities are worthless against a wide array of common foes and the paladin lacks any other interesting offensive options until spell casting kicks in.

However that's all forgivable because for some reason many people operate under the notion that paladins are supposed to be the worst class in the game for people who actually want to uphold justice.

I'm less forgiving of the attrociously outdated favored enemy ability and entirely too dangeorus animal companion write up on the ranger.

The orzel method for favored enemies is infinetely superior both from a design and story telling perspective than any amount of attack/damage bonus vs a specific group of enemies. This method requires a bit more work on the designer's end but essentially entails that each favored enemy option is represented by general abilities that can apply vs. anyone using the traditional tactics of the favored enemy. So a kobold hunter gains bonuses against traps and abilities dedicated to helping them against small agile foes who like to abuse a numbers advantage, while a drow slayer would become resistant to poison and learn tricks dedicated to dealing with drow ambush and raider tactics.

The 3e animal companion was one of the most problematic issues in the game specifically because it used stats designed for monsters and allowed easy access to a broad array of beasties with multiple natural attacks, natural armor, and insane physical ability scores.

Companion creatures need to be designed and written according to their own formulae, they can't outshine a player, but need to remain viable and useful at all levels. This is why the 4e method was to try (i said try) to make the animal companion powerful enough that they could justify using the PC's action count rather than running a gimped beast or completely throwing the action economy out the window. This didn't always work, but it's a lot better than the 3e approach of "don't even try to balance anything".

I know people don't believe me when I say this but: class balance is important not just to keep the various fanboys and girls of the various classes happy, but so that new players don't just look at the game and say "Meh, I can just set a mutants and masterminds game in the middle ages and I wont have to deal with these sloppy mechanics" or "Why would anyone ever play anything besides druids or wizards?" or "Wow that's just stupid, i don't want anything to do with this backarsewards game."

I got into dnd when 3rd edition was just coming out, and it was pretty much the only RPG the game stores in my area carried that didn't have a whitewolf sticker on it.

Nowadays though I see M&M, Dragon Age, and even the occasional Cthulhutech title, all competing for space in the rpg section. To say nothing of the alternative options found online such as Tephra, or d20 legend.

I love DnD, but I refuse to be blind to the flaws and sacred cows that inhabit the game. Even my precious 4e is far from perfect. If the game is to continue to be the flagship of the both the tabletop culture and industry it must adapt and strive to be better than it has been in the past. That means that actual thought and foresight must go into the game, and these write ups just don't show any.
Thank you for taking the time to reply.  My writeup was an attempt at Paladin and Ranger based on my present understanding of the Designer's goals, although I have since learned that (per Mearls) companions may be dealt with in other ways.

RE: my Paladin, I agree that it is underpowered (offensively, anyway) to the Fighter in most encounters, but that was a deliberate trade-off in the interest of balance.  The Paladin has a greater variety of combat actions and enhanced defensive/support abilities.

RE: my Ranger, I admit that I did not explore the companion issue at all.  As far as favored enemy goes, I am intrigued by your enemy-specific benefits that apply globally.  I like your suggestion tremendously and would appreciate a link to orzel. 
That greater variety of combat actions doesn't actually kick in until level 4. BEcause even with smite and healing, you come out behind a fighter in total options of how to spend your round. IF you want a defensive focus that's fine, but try to make it more engaging and active, spamming normal attacks waiting around for someone to need a heal or someone with an evil alignment to pop up is boring.

Link to the basis of the orzel method:

community.wizards.com/orzel/blog/2012/06...
Thanks, Rampant.  I should have read more threads before posting.
Threads read isn't really the issue. Though it may have helped.

The real problem is that in 3e abilities oriented towards weapon combat were either boring, underpowered, or both (until To9S). So using 3e as the basis for any weapon oriented class is often gonna result in something pretty lame.
I approved of that favored enemy mechanic when I first seen it... and it is very cool fighting style  specialization... kind of not sure it has to be just a ranger thing.

Just as the oath bound blessings/boons nor benefits to membership need be bound to purely a galahad flavor
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

I thought of this once however... just about every martial character needs ability/techniques to fight against fliers and big things and similar because eventually well that is part of the genre. If my knockdown assault only works against human sized creatures till I take a giant fighter feat ... eventually I suspect that feat becomes a feat tax.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

I think nerfing the size restrictions on the fighter abilities would be a good step, or at the very least providing abilities that are useful on or geared towards use on larger creatures.

For the paladin what really needs to happen is the smiting needs to become alignment blind and allow the paladin to inflict status effects or otherwise do something besides just handing out a pittance of extra damage a few times per day. 
From a design perspective the paladin is almost unplayable

At the very least, though, there's no obtrusive alignment gimmicks.  It's a start.

What Paladin needs to do, is steal as many Warlord/Marshal gimmicks as possible.

I never had a problem with paladins. Especially with regards to the alignment restrictions, and conduct. In 1/2nd edition paladins had awesome abilities and high attribute requirements, so they were rare. They also as a balanceing factor had to tithe 10% of their income and were only allowed a limited amount of magic items. So yeah, unless you were a dink when it came to running alignments there ussually were no problems unless of course the paladin acts in a unbecoming manner.
In regards to the horse, it is not that special. As a GM it is in your right to run the horse as a NPC, if need be read up on horse behavior, introduce the greatest enemy of horses, descending stairs. The horse really is only useful above ground and mounted, and it is as vulnerable to death as any other horse, also at some point the regular fighter will get a better mount either a wyvern or a griffon or a hippogriff, even a young dragon is a possibility. Paladin is stuck with his magic steed from level 4.
In 1/2nd edition paladins had awesome abilities and high attribute requirements, so they were rare.  They also as a balanceing factor had to tithe 10% of their income and were only allowed a limited amount of magic items.

That didn't balance anything.

The attribute requirements rewarded outlier stat rolls with even more awesome, making Mr. Average even more hopeless.

I would like to see Paladin as a prestige class...

That would solve any issues with paladins being balanced against fighters at lvl 1, it would also explain/enhance the difference between a war cleric and a paladin.
Paladin is just a redundant class in a system that's grown into multiclassing and a rainbow of clerics.
A MC'd fighter/cleric or one of the fruity clerics all by itself may end up just as useful as a paladin (or even better), without having to deal with all the paladin flavor-baggage.
Trust me, even the high stats and abities did not make up for enforcing the alignment requirements and tithe and item restrictions. A similar fighter in 2nd is a better combatant, they get greater weapon mastery, can recruit any alignment in henchmen, and when they build their stronghold, its their stronghold to do as they please. Paladins still have to listen and obey clerigy. The thing that balanced old school D&D wasn't just the rules, but the roleplaying as well.
Trust me, even the high stats and abities did not make up for enforcing the alignment requirements and tithe and item restrictions. A similar fighter in 2nd is a better combatant, they get greater weapon mastery, can recruit any alignment in henchmen, and when they build their stronghold, its their stronghold to do as they please. Paladins still have to listen and obey clerigy. The thing that balanced old school D&D wasn't just the rules, but the roleplaying as well.
Regardless of whether the class has the alignment and code restrictions it needs good broadly applicable powers and features so it's not boring to play or limited to a purely reactive role.
The thing that balanced old school D&D wasn't just the rules, but the roleplaying as well.


Baladnced old school is a contradiction in terms.

The 1e paladin was simply fighter and then some... I still like its flavor but think I want to build my paladin on that chassis  - The 1e ranger was a fighter and then some..

I want the fighter in 5e to be a fighter and then some too - specialties and backgrounds are a clue in that direction.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Orzel does not approve of your ranger. But that is another thing.

To me, the ranger and paladin as being a rarer fighter+ in the earlier editions was more a result of the limitations of those editions. With no real skill system and few core features, alignment and ability requirement with slower XP growth were used as balancers.

With those restrictions stripped, there was little effort put into describing what the D&D paladin and ranger were and how they differed from others. This causedthe confusion found now.

To me:
The fighter is the warrior who masters weapons combat. All of their class training goes to the weapon arts and nothing else.

The ranger is a warrior out of necessity. The ranger's focus is on their favored enemy or environment. That gets more of their time. But rangers do get in fights and will need to defend themselves.

The paladin is blessed warrior and sword of belief. They fight against the enemies of their belief system and are resistant to them.

My thoughts on this class writeup.

No companions are class features. Instead the companion modules would grant paladins the option of celestial mounts and rangers the option of animal companion.

2) I like Divine Power. I like the paladin being able to heal or damage on a point to point basis outside of spells. Also the defensive class features. A paladin should be the toughest to bring down normally. Save bonuses, resistances, and possibly immunities. I can see a basic "do this, reroll a saving throw" class feature.

3) As for ranger, rangers are not rogues/fighters. They are survivors and adapters. I have 2 blog posts on them that describe my views. Especially on favored enemy.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Sure generally rangers are very much frontier fighters defending civilization from the monsterous hoards. but at some level that is like being a specialist in being a fighter who does what the adventurer fighter does... ie its being a D&D fignter not a kings guard. Compare a knight errant to the one who runs the castle.

How is the ranger different than fighter adventurer?

This gets back to my assertion that every fighter will need methods for coping and adapting there fighting to work against large creatures.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

@Garthanos

Rangers are frontier warriors not frontier fighters.

The nonexistant warrior class is now the base of weapons combatants. The fighter has evolved to be a better warrior. The ranger is the warrior plus nature and hunting abilities. The paladin is the warrior plus some strong divine aspect.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

There are no generalists - only specialists disguised as default options.
@Garthanos Rangers are frontier warriors not frontier fighters.


Nit picking I do like the word warrior, I dont know that we are getting a real benefit.

The classic Knight I learned about in high school was a horseman and a hunter trained in archery and hawking and mayhaps even the use of hounds.

Before the thief the fighter had sneaking, before the ranger they had tracking, before the paladin they were the knight.

Does the existance of the Paladin.. mean my fighter cant take oaths and join an order and aquire divine boons and blessings.

Does the existance of the Ranger mean my fighter cant learn nature skills and be able to deal with giants and similar things - the nerfing and requiring of feats for fighter abilities in 3e sounds largely to be because the assumptions were no.

I want things to be in terms of specializations... not sure what the Warrior specialized as Warrior means so much.


 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

The issue is the way we see the classes.

The way I imagine characters is like a schedule.

3 hours of Class Training
1 hour of Background and Racial Training
1 hour of Specialty training

So your dual wielder knight fighter is doing 3 hours of combat practice a week in his off time compared to a warriors,ranger's, and paladin's 1 ½. Those classes cut into their combat training time for other stuff.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

The issue is the way we see the classes. The way I imagine characters is like a schedule. 3 hours of Class Training 1 hour of Background and Racial Training 1 hour of Specialty training So your dual wielder knight fighter is doing 3 hours of combat practice a week in his off time compared to a warriors,ranger's, and paladin's 1 ½. Those classes cut into their combat training time for other stuff.



OR all three got weapon awesome of whatever flavor .. but they split on


  • animal empathy and improved hunting animals

  • general empathy and and religious hierarchy

  • heraldry and diplomatics aka politics

  • and still another fighter got streetwise and savvy with man traps.


  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

All you saying rangers, paladins,and fighter are equal in combat prowess?

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

I appreciate your well formatted and thoughtful post.

Paladin:
Seems pretty similar to previous versions (which I know was intended).
I do like the Paladin's Divine Power ability. I first thought The number of DP points may end up being too low at high levels. Then I realized you said it recharges after short rests. That's awesome.

Ranger:
I'm gonna defer to Orzel for the Ranger stuff. He speaks great wisdoms.

Please introduce yourself to the new D&D 5e forums in this very friendly thread started by Pukunui!

 

Make 5e Saving Throws better using Ramzour's Six Ability Save System!

 

Giving classes iconic abilities that don't break the game: Ramzour's Class Defining Ability system.

Rules for a simple non-XP based leveling up system, using the Proficiency Bonus

 

Paladin is just a redundant class



They did mention the Paladin (and Druid) in the Magic Item doc, so looks like they're in. 

And no, for me, the fiend smiting, god smiled upon, blessed, beautiful, exemplar of Lawful Goodness is not a cleric. 
All you saying rangers, paladins,and fighter are equal in combat prowess?



Potentially... Do I build Lancelot as a fighter with divine boons/blessings or as a palidan?
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Galahad was the one with all the gary stu powers from god.
Then it like I said before. Think of it like a schedule.

It Lancelot doing:
3 hours of combat practice and 1/2 hour of prayer= Fighter/acolyte
1 1/2 hours of combat practice, 1/2 hour prayer, 1 hour meditation, 1/2 hour other= Paladin
3 hours of prayer and meditation, 1/2 hour of combat training=War cleric

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

I think we have more important issues than the precise calibration of the paladin's warrior to priest ratio.

Namely figuring out basic abilities for the pally that aren't just gimpy versions of things fighters and clerics already do, and making them interesting to play. 
Galahad was the one with all the gary stu powers from god.



Actually Galahuden was ahem a johny come lately (with next to no stories about him).. after the christian retelliers of the story decided Lancelots ethics where too pagan for the morality play they were after ;p  - Lancelot dug chicks out of boiling water, there was atleast one healing touch incident, and his first miracle was sticking his arm in thorn briars only to have the plants turn there thorns aside. In fact some of his miracles might be signs of his being raised by the Lady of the Lake (ie witchy woman who also fixed or provided excaliber). He was also a bit of a berserk with the strength of 10 men defeated multiple knights while naked and unarmed and so on. Lancelot was one of the few knights to live to a ripe old age as well.



  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Yeah. Lancelot had some defensive hax.

That brings me to where I think paladins should have a Divine Power like ability that heals or deals damage.

Then they could have an passive ability where X/day they can make another saving throw against an effect or make the attacker reroll an attack.

Like the 4E halfling racial.

To me, the paladin is the Unstoppable. You must drain a great deal of resources or spend a lot of time to wear them down. Their faith and blessings keeps a paladin going true many trials or complications.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Paladin is just a redundant class



They did mention the Paladin (and Druid) in the Magic Item doc, so looks like they're in.

Doesn't make it any less redundant.

And no, for me, the fiend smiting, god smiled upon, blessed, beautiful, exemplar of Lawful Goodness is not a cleric. 

You are absolutely right.  You've actually just described the awfully sterotyped Mountie
IMAGE(http://images.wikia.com/darth/images/e/ee/Mountie.gif)

You do not need any class or book's permission to do that.  Even a rogue can be played Lawful Stupid all damn day.

What makes paladins different from any other Lawful Psycho is that there is some super divine being actively layering plot armor over them X times a day.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Paladin is just a redundant class



They did mention the Paladin (and Druid) in the Magic Item doc, so looks like they're in.

Doesn't make it any less redundant.

And no, for me, the fiend smiting, god smiled upon, blessed, beautiful, exemplar of Lawful Goodness is not a cleric. 

You are absolutely right.  You've actually just described the awfully sterotyped Mountie


You do not need any class or book's permission to do that.  Even a rogue can be played Lawful Stupid all damn day.






-Of course it does!


-Neat, I wanna move there! 
All I can hope for is that the Paladin isn't based off of Alignment for his powers and that they take Orzel's idea of Favored Enemies. If they DON'T take Orzel's idea, then it's pretty much required of Orzel to compile a HUGE list of monsters and their applications to the game as a fan-product Tongue Out.


As for the redundancy of classes, while technically you only need the big 4, it makes for a pretty boring game (IMO) to only have these 4 represent the entire breadth of a Fantasy setting's characters. I think it's a fair assessment that Paladins, Druids, Ranger, etc.... are going to maintain unique classes with their own defining role and mechanics. The question is, can they make them work without overpowering the game or completely undermining their usefulness (a Cleric/Fighter was far superior to a paladin in 3E, for example).
All I can hope for is that the Paladin isn't based off of Alignment




I sure hope the Paladin is pure awesome Lawful Goodness it is (not this weak compromise).