Essentials Paladin (Sentinel) is up

[AngryMojo]

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Essentials: Paladin)

Looks like he gets a defender aura, and chooses a virtue like clerics choose a domain.

It also looks like the Sentinel tag is a typo, every other location it's referred to as cavalier.

 

[Jools]

Yes, the Sentinel is the name of the Druid build that was previewed last time. Its a copy and paste typo.

 

[FireLance]

Paladins who are empowered by virtues?

Paladins with the virtue of Sacrifice as Lawful Good only?

I approve.

 

[samursus]

I am loving each new Essentials class that comes up, and this one is no different. I also love having the original 4e characters (O4e?). To me, this is D&D heaven.

IF they can keep the Essentials builds relatively balanced with the original builds, that is. Too soon to tell for me.

Interesting that the Sacrifice build has the ol' LG requirement, but the Valor build can be LG, G or U.

Really curious about the other powers listed. I think HotFK is gonna be a must buy for me.

PS: Oh yeah, and the Valor At-Will with a Miss Effect.....very cool!

 

[Anathos]

Paladins with Alignment restrictions? I don't think they could be more blatant that Essentials is meant to pull in the 3.5/Pathfinder crowd. Good job standing up for the principle of alignment being unconnected to mechanics WotC.

 

[renau1g]

I just wish they wouldn't have had to change a whole whack of stuff to make some things of Essentials not broken (like Melee training), but on the whole I can't wait for my CB to be updated to see them more easily...Maybe November?

Strike of Hope looks good, but might scale poorly as the THP's don't increase too much, maybe 1 -2 points/tier.

Vengeful Strike is an MBA with a conditional damage bonus and a miss effect. Not bad.

Anathos - if you don't like that restriction, don't use it. It's not necessarily the 3.x crowd, because IIRC paladin's always had to be LG going way back to at least 2e (my first edition). They have been pretty clear that they are trying to market to non-current 4e gamers as a major push of Essentials, so I don't really get the implied evil-underhanded WotC vibe from your post.

 

[The Human Target]

Paladins with Alignment restrictions? I don't think they could be more blatant that Essentials is meant to pull in the 3.5/Pathfinder crowd. Good job standing up for the principle of alignment being unconnected to mechanics WotC.

I am all for knocking on Essentials for many reasons, but this isn't one.

4E Paladins are already restricted to sharing the exact alignment of the god they chose to serve.

This new Pally has no more or less mechanical connection to alignment (at least from this preview material) than it did an hour ago.

 

[renau1g]

Here's the Compendium Entry:
PALADINS AND DEITIES
As fervent crusaders in their chosen cause, paladins must choose a deity. Paladins choose a specific faith to serve, as well as an alignment. You must choose an alignment identical to the alignment of your patron deity; a paladin of a good deity must be good, a paladin of a lawful good deity must be lawful good, and a paladin of an unaligned deity must be unaligned. Evil and chaotic evil paladins do exist in the world, but they are almost always villains, not player characters.

 

[Anathos]

I am all for knocking on Essentials for many reasons, but this isn't one.

4E Paladins are already restricted to sharing the exact alignment of the god they chose to serve.

This new Pally has no more or less mechanical connection to alignment (at least from this preview material) than it did an hour ago.

Normal Paladins don't have to STAY the same alignment as their god, and the only mechanical difference between a Paladin the serves an Evil god and a Good one is which Channel Divinity feat they're eligible for. I suspect that the Cavalier will work the same way the Warpriest does, with the choice of virtue determining a bunch of powers gained, making alignment a mechanical consideration.

 

[Jack99]

Paladins with Alignment restrictions? I don't think they could be more blatant that Essentials is meant to pull in the 3.5/Pathfinder crowd. Good job standing up for the principle of alignment being unconnected to mechanics WotC.

I don't think its the hundreds of thousands 3.5/Pathfinder players, as much as the 25 millions lapsed players of former editions.

On topic: I honestly didn't think I would find a use for Essentials, but as it is now, I am ditching 4e core asap. Essentials is what 4e should have been from the start.