How bad is the paladin going to be without armor in combat?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

You see, this is where I disagree. 4e explicitly choose the (STR+3)L route: WotC decided that the AC splits of previous editions were too large to handle and so artificially boosted the wizard's AC by factoring in INT. The basic sin you are complaining about has already been committed, so you might as well take advantage of it.

You seem to misunderstand me. I am certainly not complaining about the fact that Wizards or Rogues in light or no armor have a high AC while the Paladin without them does not. I am complaining that people don't accept that if you take away the tools of a class, they expect the system to compensate for the lack of it. The Rogue or the Wizard don't use the "plate armor" tool, so taking it away shouldn't worry them.

Now, the right fix isn't to artificially boost the paladin's AC when he doesn't wear armor, the right fix is for the paladin to *always have armor on*. 4e is a very artificial game where fluff and crunch don't mesh well. Accept that the game is meant to be played where paladins (and fighters etc...) can sire progeny while fully armored (or is magically given time to fully gear himself at need). It is like an FF game, where *no matter what* is happening in the cut scenes, if a fight gets triggered, you have all your stuff equipped.

How does the fluff not meet the crunch in this case?
Let's see what happens if you take away the Paladins Heavy Armor:
Crunch: The Paladin AC is reduced.
Fluff: The Paladin is not as good protected as usual.

 

[Regicide]

Those examples are as weak as a baby's fart. Let me explain.

Every rogue I ever saw played was able to use wands, your counter example is nonsensical.

Complaining that weapon crystals aren't core only is likewise silly.

Traps are perfectly useable. Even something as simple as setting up a rust cube or a tripwire. Golems have horrible reflex. Nice that you can't breath at how silly something effective and simple is, but whatever.

Constructs immune to magic? Some are. But those level 1 grease scrolls can be pretty effective.

 

[Kraydak]

You seem to misunderstand me. I am certainly not complaining about the fact that Wizards or Rogues in light or no armor have a high AC while the Paladin without them does not. I am complaining that people don't accept that if you take away the tools of a class, they expect the system to compensate for the lack of it. The Rogue or the Wizard don't use the "plate armor" tool, so taking it away shouldn't worry them.

The wizard (in previous editions) didn't have the *AC* tool. So WotC decided to give them one, without sweating the fluff. That whole INT to AC is WotC saying that people should have competitive ACs, fluff justifiable or no. The system is *already* compensating some people for not having tools, so it seems unfair to punish other people for not having their tools at hand.

How does the fluff not meet the crunch in this case?
Let's see what happens if you take away the Paladins Heavy Armor:
Crunch: The Paladin AC is reduced.
Fluff: The Paladin is not as good protected as usual.

Fluff: the wizard doesn't wear armor, nor does he have the skills or speed to avoid incoming blows.
Crunch: the resulting AC would cause balance problems, so let us give the wizard INT to AC.

This is 4e, fluff can (and should) be ignored because the system already ignores it all over the place. Look, an *NPC* with the paladin's *role* would have a good AC, regardless of gear (because for NPCs, gear is entirely cosmetic). So treat the paladin's armor in a similar way to treating avatar choices in CRPG. What you see on the screen *isn't* what you get in the crunch.

Crunch balance is better served by leaving the paladin with his armor. Fluff consistency is already completely and utterly hopeless, and its brokenness gets brought into relief by removing the paladin's armor.

 

[tintagel]

Every rogue I ever saw played was able to use wands, your counter example is nonsensical.

Complaining that weapon crystals aren't core only is likewise silly.

Traps are perfectly useable. Even something as simple as setting up a rust cube or a tripwire. Golems have horrible reflex. Nice that you can't breath at how silly something effective and simple is, but whatever.

Constructs immune to magic? Some are. But those level 1 grease scrolls can be pretty effective.

You could be a contortionist at how much you are stretching... Perhaps if you put that same amount of gold and effort into 4E characters, you would solve the Paladin Has No Armor for One Night Crisis.

We have had only one rogue use wands, and he had a 16 charisma. Other rogue builds found it too costly, unreliable, and frankly were happy to have the wizard do it for them. By this same logic, 4E paladins can multiclass or take Rituals.

Traps take TIME to craft. Read your PHB on crafting times. A simple sword takes Days.... This isn't WoW and you aren't playing your Survival Hunter.

Crystals are optional and often overpowered to begin with. Once you open up splatbooks 6 years into the development of an edition as the reason why a previous edition is better - you get into grey territory. A DM could jsut make crystals in 4E that give a +6 armor bonus right? You didn't have crystals 3 months into 3rd Edition.

Look, it's pointless to debate because you aren't looking at the Tons of examples that even WOTC developers gave about previous editions being UNFUN with characters being able to do nothing. 1st level Wizards shouldn't have to rely on crossbows. THAT's gimped.

You also seem to forget that the Paladin still has plenty of options in this scenario - more than a Wizard vs. a Golem or barbarian vs. an ooze.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

This is 4e, fluff can (and should) be ignored because the system already ignores it all over the place. Look, an *NPC* with the paladin's *role* would have a good AC, regardless of gear (because for NPCs, gear is entirely cosmetic). So treat the paladin's armor in a similar way to treating avatar choices in CRPG. What you see on the screen *isn't* what you get in the crunch.

But the Paladin also gets his INT Bonus to AC. There is no fluff or mechanical consistency here. It is not as if only the Wizard had this bonus to AC. Everyone gets it when not wearing heavy armor. The Paladin is not as smart as the Wizard, therefore he relies on heavy armor to defend himself.

 

[Regicide]

You also seem to forget that the Paladin still has plenty of options in this scenario - more than a Wizard vs. a Golem or barbarian vs. an ooze.

Our wizards have never had problems with anything, and barbarians can do just fine as well. The paladin in this situation however has exactly one option, and that is to cower behind the wizard and let them play the role of the defender or be a punching bag that sucks up tons of resources.

 

[Stalker0]

Fluff: the wizard doesn't wear armor, nor does he have the skills or speed to avoid incoming blows.

Actually the fluff is more like this: The wizard is a genius who can predict his opponent's moves, allowing him to dodge with uncanny ability.

I think the int bonus to AC can make sense flavorwise.

If a rules system says that int adds to AC because it allows tactical decision making and ability to predict moves, I can buy that. If the system says you can't add int to AC because your ability to predict doesn't help your defenses that much...I can buy that to.

In this case, the system uses a mechanic that helps to balance the classes, and uses a rationale that does make sense, so I'll accept it, use it, and enjoy the game.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Our wizards have never had problems with anything, and barbarians can do just fine as well. The paladin in this situation however has exactly one option, and that is to cower behind the wizard and let them play the role of the defender or be a punching bag that sucks up tons of resources.

Let's keep our facts straight- it was the same in every other edition of D&D.

In 4e the paladin loses 8 AC without his plate mail.

In 3.x the paladin loses 8 AC without his plate mail (and they were pretty much in the same boat Dex-wise, since Plate had a +1 max dex bonus, which means that most paladins didn't have a Dex higher than 13).

In 2nd ed the paladin lost close to the same amount of armor (IIRC Plate was AC 3, which equates to +7 AC for those of you not old enough to remember Thac0). He might have a high Dex since Plate didn't limit Dex-based AC, but that would pretty much mean you were a super-twink since you needed a minimum of 14 or maybe 16 Dex to get an AC bonus, and the prerequisites for playing a Paladin were insane (I'm pretty sure you needed a minimum of a 17 Charisma, as well as three other mid-to-high range stats).

OD&D was pretty much the same as 2nd ed with respect to armor, but I don't remember if paladins existed in this edition...

As you can see, taking away plate mail from a character (who can and does wear it) in D&D has always resulted in a 35-40% greater chance of being hit. Excluding moments when the system might get a bit wonky (times when you had a 95% chance of being hit with or without armor, and times when you had a 5% chance of being hit with or without armor) loss of plate mail has always resulted in a 35-40% increase in damage to the Plate-wearer (sometimes more, if you were playing at levels where magic plate mail was accessible).

If the DM was feeling merciful, those paladins could (and did) survive and contribute. If he felt like being rutheless, they'd probably be useless and end up dead.

Same now as it was then.

 

[tintagel]

Our wizards have never had problems with anything, and barbarians can do just fine as well. The paladin in this situation however has exactly one option, and that is to cower behind the wizard and let them play the role of the defender or be a punching bag that sucks up tons of resources.

Now your'e just talkin Doublespeak...

"War is peace, Freedom is slavery, Ignorance is strength."
"We've always been at war with Eastasia!"

 

[Regicide]

Same now as it was then.

Except now the wizard DOESN'T lose his AC and if the DM lowers the encounter difficulty to pamper the paladin, the wizard turns into Mr. Unhittable and tromps on all the bad guys like Godzilla crushing a fishing town.

So not the same now as it was then.