Paladin will slice the cleric, or will the cleric bash the paladin?

[LokiDR]

An odd coincidence then that it turned out to be just 5%. ;-)

Wow, that is irony.

I wonder what changes would be made if Alhandra had her horse and was able to flank some times with it. That would probably whittle that 5% down. A paladin's mount is a major class feature (much like animal companion for druid) and if discounted would make cleric look better by default.

 

[LokiDR]

If the cleric is fulfilling the barbarian's role better than the barbarian, then the cleric is certainly carrying his own weight. Who is to say that is wrong? Another PC? The DM?

I do not see why you insist that a cleric that pumps up for combat is incompetent at his tradtitional niche. Less effective, sure. But a hand full of scrolls and a wand or two can cover a lot of bases.

Money is a limited resource. Look at Jozan's equiment and you will see he already totes several scrolls. The writers felt that Jozan needed to cover many bases, not just a few. If you take that away, Jozan will be incompetent at his traditional niche, as he would not have nearly the resorces to cover those other contingencies.

And, as I have stated, this is NOT an exercised in powergaming. Paladins can be optimized too, though perhaps not as well. We are not trying to powergame, we are trying to determine, as impartially as possible, if a paladin has a chance of beating a cleric in combat. I think I have shown that the paladin does have a good chance of winning. Unless you propose to examine all possible concepts for paladins and clerics, I don't see how this can go much farther. The cleric could focus on divination, stealth, or healing. All would fair worse in combat. Does that mean those clerics are not "well designed"?

Some would say you have hit the nail on the head, though I think you state things a bit too strongly. I find the paladin has a lot of style and is an interesting roleplaying challenge. The class also can serve a useful role with respect to NPC interactions, e.g. the bard may seem friendly enough but does anyone trust him. From a strict powergaming POV I would never touch a paladin -- a clerics and cleric/fighters are vastly more effective in combat (if intended to be so).

The poster did not ask about powergamed characters. We agree a tweaked out cleric can stomp in combat. Here is my powergaming advice: always choose the primary spellcaster, and clerics are on the top of that heap.

Paladin will always focus more on combat, in general, than a cleric, because there are so many things a cleric can do. Hence, paladins should be better in combat over the range of concepts. The rules support I offer is the compareson between Iconics. Show me published characters, core rules, same level, and we can run through those numbers.

 

[Darklone]

Hmm... Actually I never liked the high power clerics (why should a preacher wear fullplate???).

Considering this, I welcome the new 3.5 changes with shortened buff duration

 

[Gizzard]

A paladin's mount is a major class feature (much like animal companion for druid) and if discounted would make cleric look better by default.

Yeah, I think that 5th level Jozan has no chance if they meet outside the dungeon. Outdoors with his horse, the Paladin simply cannot lose. Unless he falls off his super-intelligent horse while Held then he never has to actually fight the Cleric; just Lance-Lance-Lance.

But I am not sure it's fair to the Cleric to assume they meet outside. It's not a very interesting question; and dungeon is a more default mode for adventurers anyway.

I might try it and see what happens if the horse were simply another character in a dungeon melee, but I can't really imagine a scenario where that is true. I am also not sure what the best tactic is for Jozan then. Just try to kill the Paladin? That horse has 6HD if I read it right. Eek. Can the horse prevent the CdG? If so then Jozan loses out on his "free" 40% win from Holds. Eeek again.

 

[Darklone]

What about the halfling or gnome paladin with wardog??? 3rd edition finally brought the cavalry into the dungeon!

 

[LokiDR]

Even with the mount, Jozan has good chance of winning via a Hold Person. What would happen if Jozan already had a few combats that day and used his hold person spell?

Optimal even field is the only fair way to evaluate this in a simple way. Otherwise, you would need verified statistics about all those combates where the cleric has used spells and where the paladin can't use his mount. I don't have those statistics, and wouldn't want to create them, let alone know how. Alowing all the elements of the class be used is the only fair way.

 

[reapersaurus]

LokiDR, you don't understand the question.

it was asked the outcome if WELL-DESIGNED characters were pitted against each other.

You have been ... i believe the word is "disingenuous."
You are comparing a melee-character (the paladin) against a spellcaster/healer (cleric), and saying that if the cleric doesn't waste resources in keeping his non-combat role, than it's an unfair comparison.

BS.

The question/challenge is simple.
If you make characters TO FIGHT, who would win at levels 1,5,9, and 13... the cleric or the paladin.

And I guarantee you, the cleric is better in almost every respect.

The paladin only has a one shot ability (Smite, also alignment-dependant) and a bonded horse as an advantage.

Guess what, people? If you give the paladin a horse, you should give the cleric a horse, as well. Why? Well, did the horse just magically appear to the paladin? No. So even if you give the paladin a free horse, just subtract X gold pieces from the cleric and give him an unbonded horse to make it a fair fight (if you must include the horse).

The benefit of the paladin's bonded mount class feature is NOT a automatic-CR boost in every fight: it's that his horse is smarter, stronger, more armored, more agile, with better saves than a normal horse. So give the cleric a normal mount, give the pally his bonded mount, and let's rock.

The cleric wil have every advantage (almost). His spells at EVERY level will turn the fight into a laughingstock, and his domain feats will give him better combat capability. He can therefore 'afford' Divine Might more than the Paladin, and he can make his own magic items if he wants. He can also use Rhino Hide, and use a lance if he wants, just like the paladin. His GMW and Divine Favor (Divine Power, too) will always outstrip the paladin's BAB. Oh, did I mention Smite spell from R&R? It can be used on the cleric's choice of alignment, and it's 1st level (he's got a ton of 'em).
Righteous Might and Spikes will really make the fight a joke, much less the clerics healing ability owns over Lay On Hands.

At level 1, the cleric will win because he can get Divine Might (the paladin can't). He also can cast Divine Favor, Shield of Faith, and Magic Weapon.
At level 5, the cleric wins because of the previous + Magic Vestment, Spikes, and buff spells (also Dispel Magic).
At level 9, he wins because of the previous + GMW and Righteous Might and Divine Power (Monstrous Regeneration from MaoF).
At level 13, he wins due to whatever high-level spell you can abuse (Quest, Harm, MaoF stuff, DotF stuff : Righteous Wrath of the Faithful, Greater Aspect of the Diety?)

Now, IF the pally survives till 14th (most likely 15th unless 18 WIS), than his Holy Sword and Dragon Mount might do some damage, but it's too little too late.

 

[Darklone]

At level 1, the cleric will win because he can get Divine Might (the paladin can't). He also can cast Divine Favor, Shield of Faith, and Magic Weapon.

Divine Might at level 1? IMHO a cleric with high Charisma might lack strength and con in comparison to the paladin. And it depends on your interpretation of Divine Might (you know, free action and sooo...)
Additionally, when do you think should that cleric cast all these spells? I agree that clerics are usually a winner if buffed. But activating Divine Might and casting these three spells you mention will certainly only yield a dead cleric.

At level 5, the cleric wins because of the previous + Magic Vestment, Spikes, and buff spells (also Dispel Magic).

At level 5, the paladin has probably Divine Might and a mount. The cleric has buff spells with better duration than your previously mentioned ones and Hold Person. I'd say, the cleric has a slight edge here which might be gone at lvl6 and the paladins 2nd attack.

At level 9, he wins because of the previous + GMW and Righteous Might and Divine Power (Monstrous Regeneration from MaoF).

The amount of save or die spells at this level surely help the cleric a lot... though I wouldn't consider any 3rd party spells (these tend to overpower divine spellcaster - Smite is simply silly and each new spell given to any cleric gives him an edge over other spellcasters balanced for learning new spells the hard way).

At level 13, he wins due to whatever high-level spell you can abuse (Quest, Harm, MaoF stuff, DotF stuff : Righteous Wrath of the Faithful, Greater Aspect of the Diety?)

At these levels, my experience ends. And my stomach tells me that spellcasters are advantaged. Though the scythe&Power critical smackdown paladin might still win IF we include splatbooks. Once per day against one cleric only.

Now, IF the pally survives till 14th (most likely 15th unless 18 WIS), than his Holy Sword and Dragon Mount might do some damage, but it's too little too late.

You raised some good points but failed to take others into account. I agree that the paladin is not really fitted for gladiatorial PC vs PC combat. But in my experience, the groups paladins always were the last men standing and one of the ones who caused a lot of havoc.
Yet, comparing the paladin to the "most broken class in game" already tells me that he's not really underestimated

 

[LokiDR]

LokiDR, you don't understand the question.

it was asked the outcome if WELL-DESIGNED characters were pitted against each other.

Reapersaurus, I don't think you have read anything I have posted on this topic.

Greyscale said

Who will most likely be more effective, more useful, and if a battle ensued between the two, who would more likely win?

This is not the same as "who would win a combat between two tweaked out characters, one paladin, one cleric"

A cleric, in most situations, will be more effective and more useful. No one doubts that. But as the cleric is spliting his resources on all these different aspects, the paladin only really has combat.

I will ask again: is a cleric that focuses on stealth, or divination, or any other element that clerics can not "well designed" because they are not optimized for combat?

You have been ... i believe the word is "disingenuous."
You are comparing a melee-character (the paladin) against a spellcaster/healer (cleric), and saying that if the cleric doesn't waste resources in keeping his non-combat role, than it's an unfair comparison.

BS.

Prior knowledge that you are fighting X scews the combat, alot. Jozan's spell list is very reasonable for average day of adventuring. Does he know he will be fighting Alhandra? Do you generally know your oppents ahead of time in a campaign? Your reasoning is flawed.

The question/challenge is simple.
If you make characters TO FIGHT, who would win at levels 1,5,9, and 13... the cleric or the paladin.

No, he didn't. Read the original question.

And I guarantee you, the cleric is better in almost every respect.

Yes, the cleric can specialized better into any role. Haven't I already said this? Now, tell me how often he will know to specialized one way or another.

The paladin only has a one shot ability (Smite, also alignment-dependant) and a bonded horse as an advantage.

Guess what, people? If you give the paladin a horse, you should give the cleric a horse, as well. Why? Well, did the horse just magically appear to the paladin? No. So even if you give the paladin a free horse, just subtract X gold pieces from the cleric and give him an unbonded horse to make it a fair fight (if you must include the horse).

Yes, the mount did magically appear, or was gained on a quest. Does a druid pay for his animal companions?

A war horse is expensive, and not every character chooses to buy one, especially the cleric without ranks in ride. If Jozan really wanted allies to attack, he can cast summon monster. Giving Jozan a war horse (the only kind of horse that will really make a difference here) is artificial.

The benefit of the paladin's bonded mount class feature is NOT a automatic-CR boost in every fight: it's that his horse is smarter, stronger, more armored, more agile, with better saves than a normal horse. So give the cleric a normal mount, give the pally his bonded mount, and let's rock.

Ok, Jozan has a riding horse. It bolts in round one. Done.

The cleric wil have every advantage (almost). His spells at EVERY level will turn the fight into a laughingstock, and his domain feats will give him better combat capability. He can therefore 'afford' Divine Might more than the Paladin, and he can make his own magic items if he wants. He can also use Rhino Hide, and use a lance if he wants, just like the paladin. His GMW and Divine Favor (Divine Power, too) will always outstrip the paladin's BAB. Oh, did I mention Smite spell from R&R? It can be used on the cleric's choice of alignment, and it's 1st level (he's got a ton of 'em).
Righteous Might and Spikes will really make the fight a joke, much less the clerics healing ability owns over Lay On Hands.

We can throw spells/mounts/character builds all day long. That isn't evidence. The iconics are decently built characters who all have the same rule set they were balanced for. R&R? What books would make a fair compareson? What setting? What character builds?

Find 2 characters of the same level, built using the basic rules, one cleric and one paladin, and we can run the fight again.

At level 1, the cleric will win because ....

Anecdotes are not sufficient, and you are biasing your decision based on prior knowledge of the fight for the cleric or a combat build.

Now, IF the pally survives till 14th (most likely 15th unless 18 WIS), than his Holy Sword and Dragon Mount might do some damage, but it's too little too late.

Find published characters who both use core rules. Should we try this with the NPC tables out of the DMG?

The point is that a cleric is more effective and more useful in most situations. Unless the cleric focuses on combat, the paladin should be more effective in combat. In the general case, the paladin has a good chance of winning, but it is not clear cut.

 

[reapersaurus]

Hello all. A possibly incredibly ignorant question, but if you place two well designed characters, one paladin, one cleric at level
- level 1
- level 5
- level 9
- level 13

Who will most likely be more effective, more useful, and if a battle ensued between the two, who would more likely win?

Loki - I see the roblem.
You are concentrating on the last paragraph of greyscale's initial post, while I and many others are concentrating on the first paragraph.

Further, you INTERPRET that "well-designed" characters means "fitting their role well."

That's a cheat.
If YOU define the clerics role to not center on combat, and then compare said cleric to a paladin that's centered on combat, that is being disingenuous.

Find 2 characters of the same level, built using the basic rules, one cleric and one paladin, and we can run the fight again.

If you artificially restrict the comparison to only core rules, than you are further being manipulative.
Since the core rules include the best feat-string that is advantageous to the paladin (Mounted Combat/Ride-By Attack/Spirited Charge), you change the parameters of the comparison in the paladin's favor.
Further, the iconics are NOT a good comparison.
That is one person's character choices, not mine.
It's quaint and naive to limit the parameters of a argument to only use your inputs (i.e. "must use iconics").
There's nothing 'official' about their stats - just a sample build.