D&D 5E So, thoughts on the Paladin now?

[Sitara]

Now that people have had at least a month or so to actually play and see the game played, what do you think about the Paladin? How does it compare to the rest of the classes in your opinion, and do you think this is the best iteration of the Paladin out of any edition (save 4th edition, which did have a great version of the Paladin but the edition is too different from any other to make a really accurate comparison IMO)

 

[Boarstorm]

The player of my paladin is liking the class quite a lot. His damage output isn't as high as the GWF battlemaster, but he feels like he can contribute in solid ways. Compelled Duel is a favorite, as is using his reaction to impose disadvantage on certain attack rolls against whichever other player is in the most danger at the moment.

 

[GameDoc]

The paladin in my group held his own very well in combat.

Personally, I like the concept of their powers centering on a sacred oath of some sort. It helps to further distinguish them from clerics. Even if they serve the same deity, the nature of that connection is different and speaks to different purposes.

 

[Tormyr]

The half-gnoll paladin at our table has been having a great time. He has grabbed on to all the different special concepts of the oath of the Ancients because his character's dad (the player's character in our previous adventure) was a druid who got seduced by a gnoll aasimar. The funny part: he has a charisma of 8. He has a reduced spell list (1 memorized spell at 5th level), but he uses most of his spell slots for smites. And darn it if he doesn't make practically every persuasion check. I am amazed how everyone in our party (Tiefling Wizard, Half-Gnoll Paladin, Halfling Rogue/Monk, Human Monk, Human Cleric, Dragonborn Wizard and High Elf eldritch Knight all contribute in the encounters and the adventure at large. Even the non-optimal builds like the Half-Gnoll Paladin with the Charisma of 8 are an effective part of the team.

 

[Tormyr]

as is using his reaction to impose disadvantage on certain attack rolls against whichever other player is in the most danger at the moment.

The paladin and the Protection fighting style go together thematically like peanut butter and jelly. And it is hugely satisfying: "The big bad crits you!" "Why don't you roll that d20 again?"

 

[Joe Liker]

The 5e paladin is the only paladin I've ever liked. Divorced from all that alignment nonsense (which you are free to roleplay if you think it's important), the class has a lot to offer. The three different oaths allow for a great variety of flavor.

My favorite change is that they've moved a lot of the fiddly little class features into the spell list -- it just makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[Ashaharazen]

The changes are interesting. I like playing my paladin and being able to be neutral good while doing it. If anything I don't think any of the oaths truly represent an evil paladin. So at least to me while there's no alignment restriction, it still feels like there is.

 

[Mr Fixit]

as is using his reaction to impose disadvantage on certain attack rolls against whichever other player is in the most danger at the moment.

What feature is this? I can't seem to remember.

 

[Boarstorm]

What feature is this? I can't seem to remember.

Protection fighting style

 

[Nivenus]

The changes are interesting. I like playing my paladin and being able to be neutral good while doing it. If anything I don't think any of the oaths truly represent an evil paladin. So at least to me while there's no alignment restriction, it still feels like there is.

The Oath of Vengeance paladin is explicitly non-good (recommended alignment is lawful neutral or neutral) but they still ultimately fight for the "greater good" so I see your point. I expect evil oaths will come later, in supplements. For the most part, the game out of the box is geared toward good / non-evil play (which is pretty par for the norm).