Unhappy Pally - Righteous Rage + Vicious Weapon

[Nail]

I don't know, sorcerors can use strength for damage on magic attacks, and bards can use charisma on bow attacks. It seems like anything is fair game nowadays

True!

You could also do it another route - drop Wisdom, and make paladins Charisma-based for all attacks and use Str or Con for secondaries, say.

Sure. Personally, I think Pallys should be Str, Wis, Chr though. Wis makes sense....although, and Stalker0 points out, that's hardly a limitation now-a-days.

To stick with (PH 2) design principles, a Paladin should have an "A" structure, with a few general abilities, and a few build-specific abilities. Looking at the current (PH 1) palladin, I don't see the requisite pieces we could re-skin. We've just got DC, L-o-H, Implement, and Channel Divinity.

Boy did Pallys get shafted!

I think any way you cut this, if you want to redesign the palladin for your game you're going to have to add a few class features. Otherwise there's precious little difference betwee a Str/Cha build and a Str/Wis build. YMMV.

 

[Storminator]

True!

Sure. Personally, I think Pallys should be Str, Wis, Chr though. Wis makes sense....although, and Stalker0 points out, that's hardly a limitation now-a-days.

To stick with (PH 2) design principles, a Paladin should have an "A" structure, with a few general abilities, and a few build-specific abilities. Looking at the current (PH 1) palladin, I don't see the requisite pieces we could re-skin. We've just got DC, L-o-H, Implement, and Channel Divinity.

Boy did Pallys get shafted!

I think any way you cut this, if you want to redesign the palladin for your game you're going to have to add a few class features. Otherwise there's precious little difference betwee a Str/Cha build and a Str/Wis build. YMMV.

I think the DC is sort of Retributive, and the LoH is Protective. Base DC on Cha, and LoH on Wis, and add another ability for each stat? Or perhaps you could beef up the Channel Divinity.

I suppose you could make Retributive and Protective official build choices, and add in various bonuses here and there based on build.

*Shrug* in any case, you should let the player retool his PC.

PS

 

[evilbob]

I will also chime in and say our group has a poor paladin player who has had to come to terms with a badly designed class over several levels as well.

"Not being a striker" is not a problem; the class is a defender with leader tendencies, and our player does that well. The issue is that unlike what is directly implied in the PHB: Str is pretty much a trap for paladins, and dragonborn paladins are not very optimized (since their breath weapon is honestly quite awful, especially thanks to Expertise feats). Add to that a double-feat tax for Expertise and keeping up with two weapons, and at the end of the day you're left with a pretty poor class design that thankfully hasn't been repeated since.

I like Plane Sailing's idea above, except I would make Cha primary and ignore Str completely. Palys already have all the defensive proficiencies they need; they can try to boost Con a bit if they want the extra +1 AC but otherwise starting with an 8 in Str is the best way to start a paladin. Ignore the bad advice in the PHB - it will only lead you astray.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Excellent idea.

..but you'd still have to do something with Divine Challenge and Lay On Hands.

I'd just consider that a feature of the secondary ability (like the warlord having to use Int or Cha to fuel his main class features)

You could also do it another route - drop Wisdom, and make paladins Charisma-based for all attacks and use Str or Con for secondaries, say.

Certainly in my campaign I do the paladin as 'Charisma based with Str or Wis for secondaries', but I mentioned the Str option here as it appeared that the PC was designed as a Str paladin.

There are plenty of PHB1 classes which revolve around Str, so I like the idea of having another one which is Cha based (and thematically works with the traditional paladin too, as well as maximising the divine wotsit stuff (which I don't really like, but what could it realistically be replaced with?))

Cheers

 

[frankthedm]

We have 2x Rogues, a warlock and a warden

I suspect he might be jealous of the rogues damage output.

He put most of his eggs in the STR basket for melee mollywhopping while in a class that uses multiple ability scores. He'll probably be happier as a barbarian or avenger.

- Thou art not a Striker. Nor art thou a minor in the Striker's art (that wouldst be thy godless counterpart, the Fighter). That dost NOT mean thou should ignore thy damage-dealing completely, since thou dost want to establish thyself as a credible threat. But if thou art looking solely at optimizing DPR at the expense of other important things like defending, debilitating and healing, thou might want to recheck thy priorities, or maybe look at another class.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

So, apropos of nothing, is anyone else sold on Crusader's Weapons for Paladins? (And avengers, and battle clerics?)

I mean, it has to be a mace or hammer, but seriously. It's like a Bard's songblades - an all-in-one weapon+implement combo. What's more, the properties are pretty amazing... Free radiant damage whenever I'd like? Yes, please.

-O

My Warforged Cleric of Kord just fell in love. I just wish I hadn't picked up the Bastard Sword now.

Oh well, I can still get myself a Sunblade instead.

 

[Obryn]

My Warforged Cleric of Kord just fell in love. I just wish I hadn't picked up the Bastard Sword now.

Oh well, I can still get myself a Sunblade instead.

Sunblades are pretty incredible, too. I'm consistently surprised at how much better Radiant damage is than pretty much everything else, so far... You miss out on the use-as-an-implement property, but 4e clerics can pretty much thrive without a magic holy symbol at all, given the right power choices.

-O

 

[Nail]

..but you'd still have to do something with Divine Challenge and Lay On Hands.

I'd just consider that a feature of the secondary ability (like the warlord having to use Int or Cha to fuel his main class features)

IMO, that's pretty thin gruel you're doling out. Other classes get much more for their class features.

Poor pally!

YMMV.

 

[Nytmare]

Finally, I find the case for Core-only to be much weaker in 4e than in 3.5. I used to run a core+any 1 splat per char campaign in 3.5 and I've gotta say, in 4e "anything goes including dragaon magazine" is way more balanced than core only in 3.5, let alone core+1splat in 3.5. Not that there aren't things I find problematic, but they're few and far between.

That's weird, I used to do the same thing (core and 1 splat) and just had this same conversation with one of my players, who wanted to go back to that system. 4E doesn't feel "sloppy" to me per se, but with each new slew of material, it definitely feels like the system, as a whole, is filling out.

 

[Herschel]

Here's what I'd do:

First: Talk to him, maybe re-explain the roles in 4e. If all he cares about is damage, he's looking at it completely wrong. If the only way he'll have fun is doing large damage, the party is in trouble and needs new players if the rogues are already like that. He's a leader, defender and healer. He has three roles to cover and a lot of options for fun and usefulness.

Second: Just say no to Tempus, but let him re-tool the character within the core rules. See if that may make him happier.

Third: If all he still cares about is not doing as much damage, see if one of the rogues will switch characters.

Fourth: If all else fails, BOOT TO THE HEAD!