The Rebalanced Paladin! (Thread 2)

933 posts / 0 new
Last post
Current Version: v0.81

IMAGE(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c73/OneWinged4ngel/Knight.jpg)
Jason A. Engle

The paladin is the epitome of the holy knight in shining armor. A beacon of heroic Good. Yet in the core books... it seems like there's no reason to bother with her past level 6, especially since the Cleric can do what she does just as well (Actually, better). However, this shall be the case no longer!

It should be said that if you're the sort of person who thinks core material is all perfect and good and balanced, that Fighters can stand side by side with Wizards at level 20 and such nonsense, this is not the fix for you. However, if you do see the need for rectifying balance and making the paladin a worthwhile class right up to high levels with greater power, versatility, *and* flavor, then you may well have found the solution you've been looking for!

This variant is mostly the same as the base paladin at lower levels, since the paladin is pretty much fine there. It continues to increase the power of Lay on Hands and allow it to use up some of its healing points to cure various other ailments (and just throwing out the Remove Disease ability). It changes smite/day into smite/encounter, since the high level paladin *should* be so badass that she smites all day. It gives the paladin switchable auras to support the party. It also rebuilds the paladin's spell list and gives her more spells per day. At level 5, it allows the paladin to choose from a variety different specializations instead of just getting a special mount (which is now part of the mounted specialization), allowing for a variety of different and unique styles. Further, the paladin has access to a new type of feat, the "Smite Feat," which allows the paladin to expend smite attempts in order to create a variety of other effects, enabling her to use her smite evil ability to cover a variety of versatile circumstances and perform various maneuvers.

The paladin is now a more powerful force in melee (and not just a couple rounds per day!), who uplifts her comrades with her heroic and divine prescence, and an effective backup healer.

This class is still not on the power level of well-played full spellcasters (Particularly at higher levels), and it is not intended to be. However, it *is* relevant at higher levels, and is meant to be balanced against the classes generally regarded as well built and balanced, such as the Rogue, Warblade, Psychic Warrior, decent prestige classes, or... monsters of the appropriate CR. It's meant to be in the upper-middle range of class balance.

Finally, this is a work in progress, and more material will be added in the future.

And without further ado... I offer you...

The Paladin
Hit Die: d10
BAB: Full
Saves: Good Fort, Bad Reflex, Bad Will
Skill Points at 1st level: (2+int modifier) x4
Skill Points at each additional Level: 2 + Int Modifier
Class Skills: The paladin’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Concentration (Con), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Handle Animal (Cha), Heal (Wis), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (History) (Int), Knowledge (nobility and royalty) (Int), Knowledge (religion) (Int), Knowledge (the planes) (Int), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), and Sense Motive (Wis).

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Paladins are proficient with all simple and martial weapons, with all types of armor (heavy, medium, and light), and with shields (except tower shields).

[b]The Paladin Hit Die: d10 <br /> Base <br /> Attack Fort Ref Will <br /> Level Bonus Save Save Save Special [/b]<br /> 1st +1 +2 +0 +0 Aura of Good, Detect Evil, Smite Evil 1/encounter<br /> 2nd +2 +3 +0 +0 Divine Grace, Lay on Hands<br /> 3rd +3 +3 +1 +1 Aura of Courage, Divine Health, Hero's Courage<br /> 4th +4 +4 +1 +1 Turn Undead<br /> 5th +5 +4 +1 +1 Smite Evil 2/encounter, specialization<br /> 6th +6/+1 +5 +2 +2 Panacean Touch<br /> 7th +7/+2 +5 +2 +2 Bonus Feat<br /> 8th +8/+3 +6 +2 +2 Aura of Devotion<br /> 9th +9/+4 +6 +3 +3 Revitalizing Touch<br /> 10th +10/+5 +7 +3 +3 Smite Evil 3/encounter<br /> 11th +11/+6/+1 +7 +3 +3 Vigilance<br /> 12th +12/+7/+2 +8 +4 +4 Refreshing Touch<br /> 13th +13/+8/+3 +8 +4 +4 Aura of Resolve<br /> 14th +14/+9/+4 +9 +4 +4 Bonus Feat<br /> 15th +15/+10/+5 +9 +5 +5 Smite Evil 4/Encounter<br /> 16th +16/+11/+6/+1 +10 +5 +5 Break Enchantment<br /> 17th +17/+12/+7/+2 +10 +5 +5 Constant Vigilance<br /> 18th +18/+13/+8/+3 +11 +6 +6 Aura of Faith<br /> 19th +19/+14/+9/+4 +11 +6 +6 Energizing Touch<br /> 20th +20/+15/+10/+5 +12 +6 +6 Smite Evil 5/Encounter, A Hero Never Falls

Aura of Good (Ex)
The power of a paladin’s aura of good (see the detect good spell) is equal to her paladin level. It is not a switchable aura.

Detect Evil (Sp)
At will, a paladin can use detect evil, as the spell.

Smite Evil (Su)
Once per encounter, a paladin may attempt to smite evil with one normal melee attack. She adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack roll and deals 1 extra point of damage per paladin level. This damage is not multiplied on a critical, or by any other multiplier that would not count "bonus dice." If the paladin accidentally smites a creature that is not evil, the smite has no effect, but the ability is still used up for that encounter.

At 5th level, and at every five levels thereafter, the paladin may smite evil one additional time per encounter, as indicated on Table: The Paladin, to a maximum of five times per encounter at 20th level. An encounter is considered over when you do no strenuous action for 5 minutes or more.

Divine Grace (Su)
At 2nd level, a paladin gains a bonus equal to her Charisma bonus (if any) on all saving throws, up to a maximum of her class level.

Lay on Hands (Su)
Beginning at 2nd level, a paladin with a Charisma score of 12 or higher can heal wounds (her own or those of others) by touch. She gains a pool of healing, which allows her to heal a total number of hit points of damage equal to her paladin level
[size=4]Feedback for the Rebalanced Paladin[/size]

Feedback

First off, wonderful revision!
GaffeR

First of all, this is the best fix for any class I have seen on these forums.
-danisheraser

I am IMPRESSED! This is one of the best balanced classes I've ever seen and meshes seamlessly with it's flavour.
-Obsidian_Jaerc

I just want you guys to know that I am playing a paladin using you guys' version, and it's just awesome. Paladins are actually fun to play now!
-Xavorin

OWA, I declare you the lord of all badassness.
-Lord_Gareth

Consider this yoinked
-Thwyvylyn

I like this rebuild; it gives a maligned class a much-needed boost in power.
-CryoSilver

...you have fixed the original Paladin to what it should be... I would love to play this Paladin. Holy, healy, and the protector of the innocent.
-Aramek

This thread totally warrants the explanation point in its title.
-Optimator

Three cheers to you, gentlemen!!!!
-Carnivorous_Bean

The abilities themselves are great, and seem to give a great boost to a class that needed it.
-igotsmeakabob!!

Per-encounter abilities! Nice touch!!
-sigma999

Wow, great job.
-Antarx

Love it love it love it. A player of mine has seen it and also loves it.
-Evil DM Mk3

I really really like this.
-Riodrian

I find the rebalanced paladin quite perfect
-Aryxbez

A lot cooler then the standard one. The lvl 20 ability in particular is awesome(the image actually gave me goosebumps!)
-Einvaldurinn_mikli

I plan on using it in my campaign.
-HamHam

Love the class... Your paladin is balanced and lacks any apparent 'jumping out points' that the original paladin was riddled with.
-Banantalis_the_Green

I'm really excited to play this Paladin now.
-Optimator

For some reason I feel like playing a Paladin...
-Prince Indirian

Good job.
One for OneWinged4ngel
One for Seerow
-Otto the Bugbear

You've just brought the paladin back to his old, heroic glory. I cannot thank you enough, Angel.
-theotherdraxen

THIS IS HELLA GOOD!!!
-Marcotic

This paladin rocks!
-EyelessBlonde

I absolutely love it! I would run this over the normal Pally any day of the week.
-Repeekluos

This variant is fantastic and I'm going to use it in my campaign.
-Arturius1

I to your very excellent work.
-oXavorin

OWA, I applaud you. Paladins are HEROES once more.
-Lord_Gareth

For OneWinged4ngel and Seerow: a each. This is by far the best fix for any class ever, and I have finally found a class I enjoy playing. The paladin was one of the classes needing a fix, and you two have done a masterful job. This link will be going in my sig, for sure!
-Xavorin

WOW! This is everything I wanted in a Paladin that was just never there. This is totaly perfect in every way.
-MaceLeonheart

Fao OneWinged4ngel our fallen paladin (level 6) has just got his powers back. As a prezzie I gave him your reworked paladin. Convinced the DM to let him have it and he and I would just like to say thanks for your hard work. (He’s well chuffed! – his exact words were – I actually feel like a paladin now!)
-Grogmir

First, let me say that I am thoroughly impressed with your paladin remix. I don't say this often. It looks and feels exactly like it should, while simultaneously solving essentially any issue anyone could take with the class. Spectacular job, both of you! (If you want, you can quote me on that.)
-Tempest Stormwind

And much more...

IMAGE(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c73/OneWinged4ngel/ValleyOfKings.jpg)


___

This class has been a collaborative effort between Seerow and I, so he deserves credit as well.

Additionally, I'd like to thank everyone whose input and feedback went into the development of this class.

I encourage you all to be honest and straightforward in critiques. Be brutal, because I want this to be as damn near perfect as I can make it.
(Reserved for the Blackguard)
(Reserved)
3rd Party / Expanded Material:

Spellbreaker Specialization
Divine Consular Specialization
Devout Sagitar Specialization
Abu-Seifein Specialization
Inquisitorial Edict specialization
Draxen on Balance (FAQ)
Chimaera2000 on Balance (Paladin vs Crusader)
ObsidianJaerc on Playtesting
Chimaera2000's Variant Aggressive Specialization
Guardian Angel
Rebalanced Paladin in pdf form!
Rebalanced Paladin Epic Progression
Before you have a knee jerk reaction that the new LoH is too much, read this. NEW!
___

Stuff will be added here as I see it come up, or if you bring it to my attention and ask for it to be added. The things listed in this section are mostly supplemental material made for the Rebalanced Paladin designed by people other than Seerow and I, and are not "officially" endorsed. Questions about 3rd party material should be directed to the individual creators, not to me or Seerow, and we don't really do anything to enforce balance or whatever with them.
Why a new thread?

Alright, basically... this needed a new thread. The first thread was getting onto 700 replies, and was getting overly large and unwieldy. On top of that, most of the thread is outdated (as most of the replies refer to OLDER versions of the Rebalanced Paladin), and the sheer size of it was sorta discouraging for new people to post and contribute new ideas and feedback. Additionally, it didn't have any reserved posts at the start... and I ran out of space to post stuff.

At this point, the Rebalanced Paladin is, for the most part, done. At this point, it looks like I'm just going to be adding more feats, updating the spell list with supplements, doing some minor tweaks, that sort of thing. I really need the extra space though, because I'm going to come out with things like some adjusted PrCs, and the Blackguard.

The old thread can be found here: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=729837

Yet again, for the most part only recent posts and this first page are relevant, and you don't really need to read the large number of other posts.

What's to come soon:
Some minor adjustments (Holy Wrath, Cover, Turn Undead, skills, and vigilance), possibly replacing Charging Smite, and adding the Blackguard.

-Signed,
IMAGE(http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u211/SatinFist/Sephiroth.gif)
Why not have Vindication grant Ghost Touch and a form of bane to all incorporeal targets attacked for the encounter for 1 use of Smite Evil?
Hey Onewing here is a modified version of Vindication that includes a modified version of that enhancement I suggested.

Vindication [Smite]
By channelling holy energy into your weapon, it can cross the nexus between planes to harm incorpreal foes and even drag them into the material plane.
Prerequisite: Cha 13, Smite Evil 1/encounter
Benefit: You may expend a Smite Evil use to give all attacks for 1 round the benefit of the Ghost Touch weapon enhancement. Once during this round apon a successful attack against an incorpreal foe you may force that opponent to make a will save (DC 10 + 1/2 paladin level + Cha) or become corpreal for 1d4+1 rounds.

Note: If using this feat while incorpreal, a successful attack can be used to force a corpreal opponent incorpreal.

I was thinking of going with something like this... pulling the person onto your plain and keeping him there for a bit. Possibly even a sort of Dimensional Anchor effect (Which would certainly make it good)
I have a lot of quarrels with the concept of only-LG-paladin. But you've done quite an impressive job (a bit overpowered, but an impressive job nontheless). Just consider revising 'Vigilance' into 'Freedom of Movement' (Travel domain granted ability).

One thing. You forgot to describe 'Aura of Protection'.
Are you still planning on adding the two weapon fighting Specialization?
I have a lot of quarrels with the concept of only-LG-paladin. But you've done quite an impressive job (a bit overpowered, but an impressive job nontheless). Just consider revising 'Vigilance' into 'Freedom of Movement' (Travel domain granted ability).

Could you please demonstrate how it is overpowered? I'm always willing to change anything that seems to be too powerful, and indeed have altered this a lot during the creation. No offense or anything, but I find that MANY claims of overpowered are... rather unsubstantiated. This is, of course, fully intended to be more powerful than core melee classes, but that's because those classes are, at least in the opinion of many, underpowered. My Pally's supposed to be more on the level with things like the Psychic Warrior or Tome of Battle Classes or the Rogue in usefulness.

One thing. You forgot to describe 'Aura of Protection'.

Thank you for catching this! That's actually a typo, and should read "Aura of Devotion." Fixed.

Are you still planning on adding the two weapon fighting Specialization?

Probably. Seerow didn't care for the idea too much, but I think that enough people have been asking for it that I will be adding it anyways.
Still only v0.77? Well, rock on.
This is very cool. I'd love to try it out in my next campaign, if you don't mind.

One thing I really like is how you've written the class. It's a lot more clear than the PHB is.
I still like this quite a bit. A few qualms remain.

Half of the damage dealt is of either Fire, Electricity, or Ice damage (Chosen at the time the feat is taken), and the other half is pure divine energy, which is not subject to energy resistance.

Cold damage, I suspect.

Honestly, I still find all the spells to be too much, on top of all the other cool stuff they get.<br /> <br /> Why the reduction in level of break enchantment and restoration?<br /> Freedom of movement seems like a buff that others should cast on the paladin. Spell immunity also seems strange for the paladin to have.<br /> <br /> Banishment doesn't seem like the paladins cup of tea. Why not simply kill the evil outsider? I am not pleased with flame strike, seeing it as the purview of clerics to call heavenly flames. Blatent evocation isn't needed for this melee character, especially given the Smite feats. The same goes for Heroes' Feast.<br /> <br /> Heal is incredibly powerful for a character who already has Lay on Hands and access to all the other Cure (mass) spells. Overkill and potentially (though I hate this word) unbalanced.<br /> <br /> I'm a bit iffy on Raise Dead. By the time paladin's get it, it would be useless to a party of that level. <br /> <br /> Righteous Might seems like overkill as well. It made up for the clerics 3/4 BAB in melee combat. When applied to the paladin it's just ungodly.<br /> <br /> True Seeing also seems a little over the top. Why the need for self-sufficiency for these buff spells? The paladin has a party to back him up. Spell Resistance has the same issue but I can see more justification for that than the other.

A very good job overall. I am much enamored of A Hero Never Falls, and like several of the smite feats although a few rub me the wrong way. I am also pleased with the per encounter smites, I am quite sure that per encounter ability are the way of the future ala ToB.

Finally I am pleased to see another fan of JAE's art work.
Great, the other thread was getting too fat anyway

Glad to here to what is to come

So The Blackguard will be a 1-20 class right?
If you're going to make Blackguard 1-20, consider adding a sidebar for trading in levels for a fallen paladin.

Also, perhaps a sidebar to explain using the other alignments. I'd suggest
Paladin: LG
Liberator: CG
Ravager: CE
Blackguard: LE

If not, that's ok. That may be a lot of extra work.
If you're going to make Blackguard 1-20, consider adding a sidebar for trading in levels for a fallen paladin.

Also, perhaps a sidebar to explain using the other alignments. I'd suggest
Paladin: LG
Liberator: CG
Ravager: CE
Blackguard: LE

If not, that's ok. That may be a lot of extra work.

Honestly, I'd probably make Blackguard "Any Evil" and for the Liberator all I'd really do is slightly adjust the spell list (Change any "lawful" spells to their "chaotic" equivelent)... but seeing as how I have next to no interest in the liberator I'll probably take forever getting around to it.

I would definitely make a note of trading in levels, however.

One thing I really like is how you've written the class. It's a lot more clear than the PHB is.

I have an unfair advantage: It's digital.

This is very cool. I'd love to try it out in my next campaign, if you don't mind.

Of course I don't mind... it was written up here for everyone's benefit, after all

I still like this quite a bit. A few qualms remain.

Cold damage, I suspect.

Ah yes, I'll fix that. Good catch. I wonder why you used code for the rest of your comments, though...

Honestly, I still find all the spells to be too much, on top of all the other cool stuff they get.

Basically, the spells Seerow and I have given the Paladin are an altogether appropriate boost in our minds, and fixes a sore problem with the paladin... being that 90% of their spell list is absolutely useless and completely irrelevant at the level they get it. For all some can say "Oooh, these spells are really nice!" it's a wholly different matter when you get to cast *2* at level *16* with a reduced caster and spell level (Which you still do). Only a few spells were actually *useful* for the paladin. Most of these were either on his first level spell list or came from supplements. Things like Righteous Fury seem to indicate that Wizards, too, felt that the paladin's spells needed an appropriate boost.

With the idea that Righteous Fury is a 3rd level spell for the paladin, the other spell choices are weighed a bit against that. Divine Power, for example, is probably a bit weaker in most cases than Righteous Fury, so it's on the 3rd level list.

Healing spells definitely needed a boost, because at the level the paladin got them they had absolutely no use and you could get more temporary hp out of Righteous Fury (along with your attack boosts) than you could heal. There was really no reason for the paladin to ever prepare a healing spell, and no one ever did. Now, they're still not one of his better spells, but at least they aren't totally useless.

Why the reduction in level of break enchantment and restoration?

So that you get them at an appropriate level. Reduction of level is a common practice, and indeed the core paladin already gets a lot of it.

As a general rule, the spell equivelences are like...

Paladin level 1: Cleric level 1-2
Paladin level 2: Cleric level 2-3
Paladin level 3: Cleric level 3-4
Paladin level 4: Cleric level 4-5

The only area where this is an issue would be in the cases of Artificers and Archivists, who could exploit such things (and already can with core)... but that's easy to fix. I suggest using the relevant house rule in my sig to avoid the issue.

Freedom of movement seems like a buff that others should cast on the paladin. Spell immunity also seems strange for the paladin to have.

While I kinda agree on Freedom of Movement, I wasn't the only one who had a say in this. *Shrug*. As for Spell Immunity, why on earth would it seem strange for the paladin to have a divine spell of protection?

Banishment doesn't seem like the paladins cup of tea. Why not simply kill the evil outsider? I am not pleased with flame strike, seeing it as the purview of clerics to call heavenly flames. Blatent evocation isn't needed for this melee character, especially given the Smite feats. The same goes for Heroes' Feast.

Then don't prepare it for your character! You don't like the flavor, don't use it. Others may like the flavor... so they will use it. Same thing goes and always has for clerics and their seemingly unlimited spell selection. For example, some might enjoy the idea of an exorcist type of paladin (Which indeed is a flavor promoted in some settings). Then again, Banishment isn't particularly good for the Paladin, because his save DCs are going to suck. Same thing for Flame Strike: It'll never work for the paladin in a way at all comparable to the way it works for the Cleric.

Heal is incredibly powerful for a character who already has Lay on Hands and access to all the other Cure (mass) spells. Overkill and potentially (though I hate this word) unbalanced.

At level 16? With very limited spells per day? And ultimately significantly less healing potential than the Cleric? How? I certainly don't get it.

I'm a bit iffy on Raise Dead. By the time paladin's get it, it would be useless to a party of that level.

Yet you think he should only have Cure Serious Wounds by that time? :p

Alright, well, Raise Dead is useful for parties without Clerics or Druids.

Righteous Might seems like overkill as well. It made up for the clerics 3/4 BAB in melee combat. When applied to the paladin it's just ungodly.

Clerics use Divine Power to... not have 3/4 BAB. And for the paladin, it's a much higher level ability than it is for the Cleric (they get it at what, level 9 vs level 14?). And you have to use your highest level spell slot, for which you'll have one or two spells a day. And you get a lower caster level, which affects what it does. And it's easier to dispel.

True Seeing also seems a little over the top. Why the need for self-sufficiency for these buff spells? The paladin has a party to back him up. Spell Resistance has the same issue but I can see more justification for that than the other.

Again, True Seeing uses up one of those precious highest level spell slots, and you get it at a very late level.

A very good job overall. I am much enamored of A Hero Never Falls, and like several of the smite feats although a few rub me the wrong way. I am also pleased with the per encounter smites, I am quite sure that per encounter ability are the way of the future ala ToB.

Thanks.

Finally I am pleased to see another fan of JAE's art work.

JAE is quite awesome.

___

By the way, if anyone's looking for an Epic progression for this, I'll say up front that I'm not going to do it, because I have minimal (read: None) experience with epic level play, and I don't intend to use Epic rules anytime soon (since all I ever hear is... well, not too positive things, and I find 20th level to be epic enough for my tastes).

Blackguard will be 1-20.

Also, I'm currently playtesting the Paladin in an Eberron campaign. Currently up to level 5.
Probably. Seerow didn't care for the idea too much, but I think that enough people have been asking for it that I will be adding it anyways.

My DM is having me go TWF with this pally. However, I make up for it by gestalting with Swordsage.
Also, perhaps a sidebar to explain using the other alignments. I'd suggest
Paladin: LG
Liberator: CG
Ravager: CE
Blackguard: LE

I use this for my campaign already. If you (OW4, that is) don't make the other 1-20 variants, no doubt someone else will come behind you and make them.

You've made the definitive fix for the Paladin. I'm just here to show support.
thought: Since admittedly, raise dead is, by the time it's available to the party, not something they'd quite want... (After all, it's a pain to have to try to get that level back, and it places you behind everyone else... well, I at least would rather my party find a cleric and pay him whatever they have to to get me back whole...)...

Why not make it the ultimate LOH expenditure? Give it a time limit on the order of hours or even minutes to work, rather than days, but no level loss, and it's not a spell.
It'd have to be pretty expensive- wipe out even a good paladin's entire LOH pool (until they get a chance to recharge- essentially killing one of their limited recharges), but this would give it more immediate utility, value, versatility, possibly silence some complaints, and as a special ability, is more in line (I think) with the paladin flavor (since he's all about the special abilities, as opposed to all about the spells).

(edit) Note: I'm picturing this barely bringing them back- to maybe 1d10 HP or something like that- otherwise it could be used as a cheap way to bring your HP-heavy barbar buddy back up to full mid-bossfight. Reviving Touch, perhaps? Either just a base cost that brings them to, say, a single hit die; or perhaps something along the lines of "You are now able to heal HP damage even beyond -10 by paying a base cost of X points of LOH + double amount of damage they last took" so someone right at -10 would take x + 20 LOH points just to bring to 0... while someone who's more of a -20HP paste than a corpse would take more...? Could bring them back fatigued, or who knows... whatever helps keep this from being abusable or overpowered, but doesn't levy any permanent drains or loss.
Good. I wait for the twf spec. :D
Next update I'll include some variants (Smite with Rolled Damage, two Lay on Hands variants), and the new version of Vindication. Maybe some other stuff, although in the aftermath of Christmas, I have a lot of other duties to attend to... (The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, of course)

I use this for my campaign already. If you (OW4, that is) don't make the other 1-20 variants, no doubt someone else will come behind you and make them.

You've made the definitive fix for the Paladin. I'm just here to show support.

Don't forget it's Seerow's fix too
I like this alot, any chance at a pdf for Dmgenie? I am terribly lazy and don't want to do this any other way :D
Don't forget it's Seerow's fix too

Eh, Seerow's just the nerdy side-kick. :P
I like this alot, any chance at a pdf for Dmgenie? I am terribly lazy and don't want to do this any other way :D

If (when) it gets completely ironed out, I can create a PDF if nobody else does (we've got the adobe PDF creator at work). While it's not likely that I can distribute it (laziness) or host it anywhere, I can email it to OW4 and he can distribute it or post it somewhere on the web.
Hearing your reasoning I've changed a few thoughts put not all.

No prob about the cold catch. The code tags were a typo. It should have been italics.

Anyway...

The reduction chart makes sense. Break enchantment however is a difference of level 9 for a Sor/Wiz and level 11 for a charismatic paladin. Not as large of a spread as usually justifies the addition to the spell list. *shrug*

FoM is still silly. Seerow, come defend it. :P

Righteous Might isn't an issue, it just seems useless for the paladin. The major benefit was bumping 3/4 BAB. Paladin don't need that and can't get much use out of the other bonuses it grants, and would be better off casting something else. So why offer it as a poor option?

Ah yes, the Exorcist of the Silver Flame and all that jazz. I guess Banishment is acceptable then.

I'm still not convinced of Flame Strike for a paladin spell. Protection, healing and buffs sure. Not fire from the sky.

Heal is just overkill. The paladin already has enough healing potential from LoH and cure spells. The paladin's main role isn't healer and though the re-balancing makes him more of one than before...Heal itself seems unnecessary.

Leave that nugget for the poor Cleric. :P

Raise Dead isn't useful even then. Instead the paladin will either use Revivification (if SC is allowed) or (more likely) the party will be paying NPCs to Resurrect/TR them. It comes to late (16th level I think) in the game to be useful option.

I understand the limitations on True Seeing, I just still don't see the reasoning for the inclusion of that buff spell. Party teamwork is a friend.

As for Epic. That's disappointing. If there is an outcry for a progression I'd be more than happy to whip one up with Seerow and OneWinged4ngel's permission. But not until both things happen.
We could always get DragonChild to host it for us. He's always talking about how he wants new material for his site.

Edit: I got simuposted. *responds to Obsidian*
FoM is still silly. Seerow, come defend it.

Sure. Explain to me why it's silly for the Paladin, and not the Cleric and I'll remove it. The Cleric is every bit the melee tank of doom the Paladin is, and they'd both use it in the same situations. I see no reason NOT to have it.

Righteous Might isn't an issue, it just seems useless for the paladin. The major benefit was bumping 3/4 BAB. Paladin don't need that and can't get much use out of the other bonuses it grants, and would be better off casting something else. So why offer it as a poor option?

You're confusing Righteous Might with Divine Power. Righteous Might is a Size Enhancing spell, that alone makes it useful.

Divine Power is still useful though. +6 enhancement bonus to Strength, and your CL in temp HP isn't bad. It also helps the multiclassed Paladin.
I'm still not convinced of Flame Strike for a paladin spell. Protection, healing and buffs sure. Not fire from the sky.

This is another case of me saying "Well, why not?" It gives the Paladin a viable ranged attack option should he want it, and the idea of a high level Paladin calling down fire from the sky is fun.

Heal is just overkill. The paladin already has enough healing potential from LoH and cure spells. The paladin's main role isn't healer and though the re-balancing makes him more of one than before...Heal itself seems unnecessary.

Why? He's getting it several levels after the Cleric, and has a lower caster level. The Cleric is in every way his superior at actually healing. But at high levels in battle healing NEEDS heal. Cure Serious Wounds simply doesn't cut it when next round your ally is going to eat 50-100 damage


Leave that nugget for the poor Cleric.

and Druid? They get it too.


As for Epic. That's disappointing. If there is an outcry for a progression I'd be more than happy to whip one up with Seerow and OneWinged4ngel's permission. But not until both things happen.

Go for it IMO. I'd attempt to do something with it, having a bit more experience than OWA, but epic feats aren't fun to mess with. Especially when you're competing with epic spellcasting.
Righteous Might isn't an issue, it just seems useless for the paladin. The major benefit was bumping 3/4 BAB. Paladin don't need that and can't get much use out of the other bonuses it grants, and would be better off casting something else. So why offer it as a poor option?

Useless for the Paladin? Righteous Might is like... one of the better spells on his list now. Are you confusing it with Divine Power? Divine Power is still useful for the Paladin, since it gives a sizable strength bonus and some bonus hp.

Heal is just overkill. The paladin already has enough healing potential from LoH and cure spells. The paladin's main role isn't healer and though the re-balancing makes him more of one than before...Heal itself seems unnecessary.

Leave that nugget for the poor Cleric. :P

Poor... cleric? Trust me, the cleric doesn't need to worry. He's still way more powerful than the paladin. Because he's the CLERIC.

Raise Dead isn't useful even then. Instead the paladin will either use Revivification (if SC is allowed) or (more likely) the party will be paying NPCs to Resurrect/TR them. It comes to late (16th level I think) in the game to be useful option.

Not all settings have raise dead so easily accessible, but yes it's not a particularly grand thing to have. And yes, Revivify will be on the list.

I understand the limitations on True Seeing, I just still don't see the reasoning for the inclusion of that buff spell. Party teamwork is a friend.

True Seeing, IMO, was appropriate for the flavor of some paladins. Revealing the truth and seeking out hidden evil and whatever. Not all paladins are the same flavor, of course, but it fits for a few I've played myself.

Just like with most of your spell objections... I've gotta ask: Why not?

As for Epic. That's disappointing. If there is an outcry for a progression I'd be more than happy to whip one up with Seerow and OneWinged4ngel's permission. But not until both things happen.

Go for it... apparently Seerow's not interested in an epic progression either, so I really don't mind if anyone takes a shot at it.
I totally beat you to that by like, 9 minutes.
I want to add a few things to Seerow's post as well, coming from my perspective...

Flame Strike: As a spell that "the other half results directly from divine power", it makes perfect sense to include it. This is one of those spells where the Paladin should NOT be firing it off at any old enemy. He should know before hand that he's using this divine damage on his evil enemies, instead of just some random castle guard. Of course, not all players will do this, but I tend to think that type of player has no business playing a character with paladin levels to begin with.

Heal: I also say "Why not?"

Consider this: The best "paladin" a character could make consisted of levels of cleric with prestige paladin and either hospitaller or fist of raziel. Why is that? Awesome casting with a very small reduction in the potency of paladin class levels. By making Heal a paladin spell at that level, he's just being granted one more option for really helping his party out.

Plus, the way this paladin works, a party certainly no longer "needs" a cleric or other dedicated healer. More options for the group always equals more fun. (One of the reasons I don't try to disuade the TWF option, even when I could never see myself using it with a paladin.)

Epic: Epic rules are seriously broken. I know that the term "broken" gets bandied about way too much on these boards, but in this one instance, attaching the word BROKEN to Epic is is completely accurate.

Epic rules should have been nothing more than the next 20 levels detailed using the same rule set already presented in core.
First off I want to extend a hand and make sure this stays friendly. I like both of you and your work. I'm just trying to polish this overall.

Note that I am still not convinced that balance requires all their nifty new stuff plus spells. And I haven't heard a reasonable justification. There is no rule 0 is cyberspace.

'Just because the Cleric has it' isn't reason to add a spell that violates the theme of the paladin.

I indeed was confusing the two. Curses. Statement retracted.

I don't find "why not" to be a valid design philosophy. Flame Strike doesn't seem to mesh with the other paladin spells.

You keeping pointing out that the Cleric is superior spell-wise to the Paladin. One is a full casting class, one is not and as such shouldn't get all the perks.

In another line of argument, will 1-2 heal spells make the difference if LoH won't? The Paladin doesn't need to replace the divine caster or fill the healer role. He plays support to those two.

Leave that nugget for the poor Cleric. :P

A joke. Hence the :P. CoD-zilla ahoy.

Go for it IMO. I'd attempt to do something with it, having a bit more experience than OWA, but epic feats aren't fun to mess with. Especially when you're competing with epic spellcasting.

Cool. It's hard but such characters can be viable (note: not equal to spellcaster) in Epic.

Otto: Playing a paladin and trying to fulfill the roles of healer/buffer as well as tank seems like a tall order. I see this paladin as I saw the older one (only better made): a support character that can pick up the slack and do it's only special things.

Not all settings have raise dead so easily accessible, but yes it's not a particularly grand thing to have. And yes, Revivify will be on the list.

Then they better grab a cleric. Because Raise Dead isn't effective at this level, when many things destroy the body. And who wants to lose a level?

As for True Seeing the "Why not" doesn't cut it. "Because such and such" is what I'm looking for instead. And if they were designed on the revealing the truth archetype, why don't they have sense invisibility and similar?
---

Otto: Regarding Epic. Would you clarify what specifically you are saying is broken? If you mean the entirety of epic rules, then you are wrong. I can demonstrate that simply by proving that one aspect of epic rules is not broken. For example, skill points continue to be the same for each class at each level in epic, since they are not considered broken as a whole pre-epic, they cannot be broken post epic.

I'm just asking you to to clarify what aspects of epic rules you are calling broken?
Otto: Regarding Epic. Would you clarify what specifically you are saying is broken? If you mean the entirety of epic rules, then you are wrong. I can demonstrate that simply by proving that one aspect of epic rules is not broken. For example, skill points continue to be the same for each class at each level in epic, since they are not considered broken as a whole pre-epic, they cannot be broken post epic.

I'm just asking you to to clarify what aspects of epic rules you are calling broken?

How about damn close to EVERYTHING?

Epic spellcasting, as in the spell seed system, is totally unworkable.
Epic spellcasting, as in the feat system, is ALSO totally unworkable, due to damaging spells becoming worthless unless you abuse them, and saves going up faster than bonuses.
Likewise, for almost every single thing that requires a save, it will either be impossible to save against, or impossible to fail a save against in due time.

Not to mention the variety of outright crappy epic feats.

The biggest problem is, every single level you add adds a whole bunch of new imbalances. At level 1, there are very few. At level 10, there are a lot. At level 20, there are enough that most people don't want to play the system anymore. At level 30, the system implodes in on itself, and is unworkable.
Otto: Playing a paladin and trying to fulfill the roles of healer/buffer as well as tank seems like a tall order. I see this paladin as I saw the older one (only better made): a support character that can pick up the slack and do it's only special things.

Not at all. That only becomes a tall order when the game dictates that the "healing" character does a bunch of healing during combat. It's almost always a better option for the healer to end combat quickly through offensive force. The more quickly that combat is over, the less resources need to be used up for healing afterward. By thinking of D&D combat in this regard, it certainly is possible for a character such as this to provide the roles that you've listed.

Otto: Regarding Epic. Would you clarify what specifically you are saying is broken? If you mean the entirety of epic rules, then you are wrong. I can demonstrate that simply by proving that one aspect of epic rules is not broken. For example, skill points continue to be the same for each class at each level in epic, since they are not considered broken as a whole pre-epic, they cannot be broken post epic.

I'm just asking you to to clarify what aspects of epic rules you are calling broken?

Start with the beginning of the book, read through to the end.

Honestly, I'm not going to get into specific circumstances for you to disprove. Making the epic rules follow an entirely different design base, instead of those established for the first 20 levels, was very poor judgement by WotC.

Here, I'll save you the rediculous exercise of "proving" that epic isn't broken via a single example that isn't: Dire Charge. There are, literally, a pile of ways to get a full attack after a charge, non-epic. That doesn't change anything. The epci rules are still very poor design.

To paraphrase a comment I've seen on these boards:
How much more powerful is a 20th level character than a 19th level character?
How much more powerful is a 21st level character than a 20th level character?

Cheers

Otto
'Just because the Cleric has it' isn't reason to add a spell that violates the theme of the paladin.

How does it violate the theme of the paladin? This is why we're asking "Why not?" To us, it doesn't seem at all contrary to the paladin's themes.

I don't find "why not" to be a valid design philosophy.

Well, some might question making statements with no justification as a critique philosophy. We've asked "Why not?" because you've not given any real reasoning for why the things you mentioned are not appropriate.

Flame Strike doesn't seem to mesh with the other paladin spells.

And others would disagree, feeling that calling the divine judgment of a god is perfectly appropriate for a high level paladin. Your tastes =/= everyone else's. Besides, some of the Smite Feats are quite similar to the flavor of Flame Strike, so you might as well question those too (For example, Holy Wrath)

You keeping pointing out that the Cleric is superior spell-wise to the Paladin. One is a full casting class, one is not and as such shouldn't get all the perks.

And the paladin... doesn't get all the perks. See, 5 extra spell levels, way more spells per day, and a better caster level counts as some major perks, last I checked.

In another line of argument, will 1-2 heal spells make the difference if LoH won't? The Paladin doesn't need to replace the divine caster or fill the healer role. He plays support to those two.

He doesn't fill the healer role as well as a cleric or druid. But he's not so incredibly sucktastic at it that he'd never EVER want to heal in a fight under any circumstances. He is certainly a secondary healer.

Then they better grab a cleric. Because Raise Dead isn't effective at this level, when many things destroy the body. And who wants to lose a level?

You seem to be playing both sides here... you complain on the one hand that the Paladin is getting new things that somehow overshadow the cleric (they don't) then complain about the need for a cleric for more effective resurrections?

Last I checked, some raising was better than none.

As for True Seeing the "Why not" doesn't cut it. "Because such and such" is what I'm looking for instead. And if they were designed on the revealing the truth archetype, why don't they have sense invisibility and similar?

The reason they don't have see invisibility should be blatantly obvious: It's a Wizard spell, and no divine caster has it. However they do have things like "Zone of Truth."

Otto: Regarding Epic. Would you clarify what specifically you are saying is broken? If you mean the entirety of epic rules, then you are wrong. I can demonstrate that simply by proving that one aspect of epic rules is not broken. For example, skill points continue to be the same for each class at each level in epic, since they are not considered broken as a whole pre-epic, they cannot be broken post epic.

I'm just asking you to to clarify what aspects of epic rules you are calling broken?

Please don't derail the thread to epic bashing/defending. It's been covered in other threads.
I don't want to hijack this thread's goodness. So I made this Epic: Discussion on Balance.

I hope to see you there.
I don't want to hijack this thread's goodness. So I made this Epic: Discussion on Balance.

I hope to see you there.

You won't, since I have no experience with epic... as I already mentioned.

What I will say, though, is that the examples I have seen represent the "unworkably broken" side.
How does it violate the theme of the paladin? This is why we're asking "Why not?" To us, it doesn't seem at all contrary to the paladin's themes.

I know well the role of defensive protector of something I've created. But not dismissing critique out of hand is also something that I fell is important. Freedom of Movement doesn't espouse martial power, healing, protection or holy buffing. Instead it has a theme and effect of generalized buffing which I don't feel falls within the realm of this mini-divine caster. That's my opinion.

Well, some might question making statements with no justification as a critique philosophy. We've asked "Why not?" because you've not given any real reasoning for why the things you mentioned are not appropriate.

I have tried to back up my statements with reasons. I apologize if I haven't made myself clear. I know what I've said is not without justification, though that I might not have made myself clear, or that you don't agree with the justification are certainly probable.

And others would disagree, feeling that calling the divine judgment of a god is perfectly appropriate for a high level paladin. Your tastes =/= everyone else's. Besides, some of the Smite Feats are quite similar to the flavor of Flame Strike, so you might as well question those too (For example, Holy Wrath)

I think I noted earlier (though it might have been the other thread) that I feel that the [Smite] feats are a valid way to represent righteous wrath from the heavens, in a melee holy-warrior appropriate way. Without giving a mid-high level evocation to the Paladin.

And the paladin... doesn't get all the perks. See, 5 extra spell levels, way more spells per day, and a better caster level counts as some major perks, last I checked.

Very true. Furthermore they shouldn't get the perks of the unique high level spells that full progression divine casters get. True Seeing, Heal, etc.

He doesn't fill the healer role as well as a cleric or druid. But he's not so incredibly sucktastic at it that he'd never EVER want to heal in a fight under any circumstances. He is certainly a secondary healer.

Do you think that giving them Heal in addition to their LoH and Cure spells is needed to make their healing not "sucktastic"? Heal isn't the sort of spell I envision for a secondary healer.

You seem to be playing both sides here... you complain on the one hand that the Paladin is getting new things that somehow overshadow the cleric (they don't) then complain about the need for a cleric for more effective resurrections?

I never said they overshadow the cleric, simply that I don't feel that they need to be a mini-cleric in addition to all their other new cool stuff. I'm not attempting to play both sides; I just don't think Raise Dead is an effecitve spell to have at the level it is granted.


Last I checked, some raising was better than none.

From a purely mechanical perspective: no. A new character that does not suffer the Raise Dead level penalty is better. Of course that is ridiculous.

The reason they don't have see invisibility should be blatantly obvious: It's a Wizard spell, and no divine caster has it. However they do have things like "Zone of Truth."

I don't find it blatantly obvious that in a thread by intelligent designers the sacred cow of arcane/divine spells might not be crossed. To make it a divine spell for the paladin is no stranger than adding the auras. I know understand the reasoning though.

Please don't derail the thread to epic bashing/defending. It's been covered in other threads.

See above. I was deflecting it already.

It's good to have an intelligent, non-hostile debate. Although the way things are going it appears that we may have to agree to disagree on a few issues.

Incidentally I am going to have a player switch to this Reblanced Paladin in a campaign I am running (with slight modification). I'll let you know how it goes.
since the near-fistfight broke out after my post, and it's since been buried by said fistfight...

What about it? What about making the paladin's life restoration ability an ability, not a spell, tied to LoH (though expensive on LoH), with harsh temporary disadvantage instead of Raise Dead's harsh and permanent level loss?

As for heal, I don't really care. I don't think they need it, but I don't think they shouldn't have it either.

On the same note: running a cleric with prestige paladin would give him much better than Raise Dead by that point, so if that's a justification for why heal is ok (someone mentioned that, I think)... then it's also a good reason to give them something more useful than raise dead.
I like that idea. Perhaps it blows 10 points of LoH/HD of the creature to be raised. Both the Paladin and target receive X negative levels for X duration.

Maybe allow additional expenditure (+100 is a number right off the top of my head) of LoH points to recreate a body, if it has been destroyed.
Remember that the Paladin never has more than his Cha x his Level at a given time though.

So for an equal HD ally, the Paladin needs a +10 Charisma bonus to revive him and that wipes out his pool completely.

And he'd -never- be able to recreate a body (unless you allowed for body recreation separately, which makes little sense)
Remember that the Paladin never has more than his Cha x his Level at a given time though.

So for an equal HD ally, the Paladin needs a +10 Charisma bonus to revive him and that wipes out his pool completely.

And he'd -never- be able to recreate a body (unless you allowed for body recreation separately, which makes little sense)

Agreed, the suggested price from Jaerc is rather ridiculous.

As for Heal... the next lowest curative spell is Cure Critical Wounds. 4d8+1 hp/level. So how much is that, at level 16 and using one of your very few precious highest level slots? It's 4d8+13, or 41 hp healed. Now say that your target has 14 Con and a d8 hit die; not very high hp. 16d8+32 = 110. So... you're curing 41 hp, which isn't going to fully restore a character without a particularly large amount of hp... and an attack at that level is definitely going to HURT more than said 41 hp. Let's say an attack does, oh, 80 hp damage (a fairly low estimate at that level). 110-80=30, 30+41=71, 71-80=-9. So you're going to waste your round (and your valuable spell slot) to heal 41 hp, and then the ally may well die the next round anyways... and you could have been doing something like "neutralizing the threat" during that time. This is only going to be moderately useful if you quicken it... and even then I'd rather use a LOWER LEVEL SPELL (Righteous Fury; Spell Compendium) to gain more temporary hp than that would heal, and an offensive bonus to boot.

Heal makes it kinda worth it to actually prepare a healing spell over such options as "Righteous Might." Remember, you can't cast heal spells spontaneously.
Perhaps I've missed something while reading/scanning through all this... However, I think a valid reason for a number of the things in question (i.e. Heal, Raise Dead, etc) is that they make the Paladin more self-sufficient and more valid in a very small group. They won't necessarily going to make or break the class in play with a group of four or five party members, but it makes solo or two-character adventures more plausible, both for characters and NPCs/game world stories. That's just my take on things, but I like that idea - it makes the lone knight against evil approach more viable.

EDIT: Just to be clear... This is just my view on the issue, take or leave it as you will.
Sign In to post comments