D&D 5E So my Dm wants to nerf my Vengence paladin against all but chosen foes?!

[Eltab]

The Temple of Kicking Posterior blasphemes! They use their feet in contravention of the Holy Truth! Place your trust in the Temple of the Righteous Uppercut and you shall never be steered into evil.

The wise know that both Temples have only a shallow understanding of The Truth. We desire that in time they shall attain enlightenment. ;-)

 

[Corpsetaker]

Maybe the DM knows exactly what he is doing and that's the way paladins work in his game. Either give it a go, play another class, or don't play at all.

It's your choice.

 

[Ovinomancer]

The wise know that both Temples have only a shallow understanding of The Truth. We desire that in time they shall attain enlightenment. ;-)

Beware the demon peddling the Truth instead of the Holy Truth! Fall not into temptation! Come learn the best way to send such vileness back to the depths from whence it came at the Temple of the Righteous Uppercut! We have snacks!

 

[Chaosmancer]

Are a lot of people fully aware that the OP seems to only be talking about the subclass abilities?

Paladin's don't use their Channel Divinities very often, he'd still have plenty of effective spells to prepare, the only actual ability he'd lose out on on a regular basis is the the 7th level pursuit ability.


Now, I also don't think I fully agree with the DM, because your paladin under this interpretation has a hard time declaring new " Enemies" to pursue, while realistically, the same rage and fury that inspired you to pursue your first evil, may be found against other evils that you come across. This sort of thing is clearly best done as a player choice, so that the player can choose when is an appropriate time to change their stance.

 

[maraxion]

Are a lot of people fully aware that the OP seems to only be talking about the subclass abilities?

Paladin's don't use their Channel Divinities very often, he'd still have plenty of effective spells to prepare, the only actual ability he'd lose out on on a regular basis is the the 7th level pursuit ability.


Now, I also don't think I fully agree with the DM, because your paladin under this interpretation has a hard time declaring new " Enemies" to pursue, while realistically, the same rage and fury that inspired you to pursue your first evil, may be found against other evils that you come across. This sort of thing is clearly best done as a player choice, so that the player can choose when is an appropriate time to change their stance.

Quite right. What I wil be losing is the level 7 move ability(and I have the halberd feat), wov of enmity, Abjure enemy and all the Oath spells.
So Its not a deal breaker, I was more curious what people where thinking since he seemed so sure it was clear rules in phb and I couldent understand that!

Iv now later gone into talks about changing my sentinel feat with 0 speed abit aswel so it wount be as overpowered. Adjusting for size(harder to reduce bigger creatures) and splitting the Oa attack into 2 attacks one for OA damage and one for reducing(the one with minuses). So im not against fluff and rule alterations, but I like to se a good reason and in most case a rule reason if possible.

 

[Uchawi]

I would advise the DM to sit back and watch all the characters in play, before adjusting any class. That ties into levels 1 to 3 before a character further specializes. The 5E version does draw on the 4E avenger class, where the player decides who the enemy is. If he or she wants to apply additional bonuses or opportunities for specific enemies, then that is a valid discussion to add more flavor to the game. I am all about adding more options, versus taking away. But that is a personal preference and I am not the person that decides.

 

[maraxion]

I would advise the DM to sit back and watch all the characters in play, before adjusting any class. That ties into levels 1 to 3 before a character further specializes. The 5E version does draw on the 4E avenger class, where the player decides who the enemy is. If he or she wants to apply additional bonuses or opportunities for specific enemies, then that is a valid discussion to add more flavor to the game. I am all about adding more options, versus taking away. But that is a personal preference and I am not the person that decides.

I agree unless good reason or something that makes it better to play.
It seems to me that the alteration about the paladin itself is how he reads the phb and his own thoghts about how the paladin has always been. So he wants me for a special foe, and if even a friend could be that foe he needs do die. So forward withouth mercy for that special foe.

As for sentinel Its more of a balance issue. I dont think(and understand) that its fun for a dm when you have a big great monster and its suddenly locked down.
I used the ability 2 days ago for the first time against our first dragon. We where about do die in a few rounds until I finaly closed the gap(was flying in and out of sight), locked it down and smited him out. So after that I had to adjust some magic items, and the sentinal feat

We are now soon level 13, and I started as level 11 in a party that had played for a while.

 

[MarkB]

I'd advise the DM against this, not because it hurts the character, but because it will distort the game. He's basically enforcing a high level of single-mindedness on the Paladin, and while it is always good to have well-motivated characters, having one which can only reach its full potential when focused squarely upon its goal is going to make that character's motivations loom larger than the others'.

One of the big reasons for expanding paladins' horizons compared to previous editions is so that they can fit into a party without dominating its morality and motivations. Enforcing the paladin's focus upon his goals means giving a choice between having the whole party pursue those goals or making the paladin feel sidelined.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Ask him what he would do if you took one of the other vows. Neither of them have anything approximating a sworn enemy, so all of their abilities would always be available?

 

[Centurion!]

As a player, I wouldn't stand for it. I'd ask the DM to trust me to play my character, just as I trust him to adjudicate the game fairly.

I did trust him. Now i dont. He didnt.