D&D 5E Are Paladins Merely Mediocre Multiclass Fighter/Clerics?

[Minigiant]

I've always felt that after primal, divine was the power source most suited for a class in each ability score

Strength: Demigods or Runepriests or Crusaders
Dexterity: Avengers (changed to Dex based)
Constitution: Oracles
Intelligence: Archivists
Wisdom: Clerics
Charisma: Paladins

Which makes sense as D&D's gods and divine sources have various domains. A Church of knowledge would have Oracles who get direct message for gods and Archivists who translate and transcribe the messages. A war god would pump out Clerics and Paladins. Whereas a divine order of secret justice and freedom would have a family of Demigods lead an holy sect of Avengers.

 

[jayoungr]

And now it has left me wondering if paladins are really that great of a choice from a purely game mechanics perspective if your goal is play an effective, frontlines, holy warrior.

In the early days of 5E, paladin was considered the best all-around class, hands down. Borderline OP. What's changed since then? (Serious question, as I don't really follow the what-class-is-best rankings.)

 

[Minigiant]

In the early days of 5E, paladin was considered the best all-around class, hands down. Borderline OP. What's changed since then? (Serious question, as I don't really follow the what-class-is-best rankings.)

Wizard.
It still is top tier..
2nd best class in the game.

 

[ECMO3]

In the early days of 5E, paladin was considered the best all-around class, hands down. Borderline OP. What's changed since then? (Serious question, as I don't really follow the what-class-is-best rankings.)

caveats: with no multiclassing, talking all 3 pillars and assuming equal and close to average ability scores and purposeful optimization in a published wotc campaign that goes to at least level 6 and is played begining to end ...

if you make all of those assuptions wizard will be the most powerful class for more of the campaign than any other class.

They wont be the most powerful class through all the campaibn though because at different levels different classes shine. They also wont be the best at any specific pillar if they optimize to be good at all 3 pillars or if they choose not to optimize at all.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I've always felt that after primal, divine was the power source most suited for a class in each ability score

Strength: Demigods or Runepriests or Crusaders
Dexterity: Avengers (changed to Dex based)
Constitution: Oracles
Intelligence: Archivists
Wisdom: Clerics
Charisma: Paladins

Which makes sense as D&D's gods and divine sources have various domains. A Church of knowledge would have Oracles who get direct message for gods and Archivists who translate and transcribe the messages. A war god would pump out Clerics and Paladins. Whereas a divine order of secret justice and freedom would have a family of Demigods lead an holy sect of Avengers.

Alternatively, pair the stats up so each class gets two.

Cleric: Con/Wis. They're defensive fighters, not offensive ones, and shepherds, not heralds.
Avenger: Int/Dex. A divine assassin must outwit and outpace her opponents.
Paladin: Str/Cha. They are putting evil to the sword and raising the holy battle banners.

Nice and clean, no need to insert a ton of new classes, with options to explore the two different sides (e.g. I could see a Holmesian divine "detective" subclass for Avenger focused on Int, observation, and skills more than on killinating things.) Obviously some Clerics might still want Strength and Paladins will probably still want Con, but their class features won't be predicated too much on the other stats.

As for the thread question...no, I don't think the 5e Paladin is weak, no I don't think it would be better to play a Cleric/Fighter MC (you're delaying spells anyway if you do that!) I must sadly agree that the 5e Paladin does not have much identity to it. This is yet another thing I pushed back against during the Next playtest and was roundly criticized for saying it (on another forum.) That doesn't mean the Paladin couldn't have had more identity. We just never got to see what that would have looked like.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I think it is a big assumption that everyone is using that optional rule from Tasha’s.

Getting advantage from hiding using Cunning action is possible at range, or dual-wielding in melee will give similar numbers.

In the early days of 5E, paladin was considered the best all-around class, hands down. Borderline OP. What's changed since then? (Serious question, as I don't really follow the what-class-is-best rankings.)

Not as powerful in raw power, but it has always been regarded as the best class to have in your party.

As has been pointed out, you need some melee-capability in a party, and Paladin is one of the toughest classes, does damage pretty much as good as any non-heavily-optimised character. Aura is a unique ability that is great for a party, Lay on hands provides solid in-combat healing without cutting in to the damage-dealing resources. Plus some good spells and a skill selection that makes it reasonably easy for a Paladin to be effective at some out of combat stuff.

If you want raw personal power and effectiveness at many different things, potentially at the expense of the rest of the party, you can't really beat wizard. If you want to be the best class for the party, as well as being no slouch when it comes to power, Paladin is close to the top of that.

In terms of what has changed, I think that there has been a shift in the attitudes about the adventuring day from "Well, you should just run more encounters." to the understanding that most groups don't play that way, and may have difficulties doing so. Therefore people are adopting a more realistic adventuring day when it comes to looking at how well a class performs.

 

[le Redoutable]

the way you do it @EzekielRaiden , there won't be any dump stat

 

[le Redoutable]

Alternatively, pair the stats up so each class gets two.

Cleric: Con/Wis. They're defensive fighters, not offensive ones, and shepherds, not heralds.
Avenger: Int/Dex. A divine assassin must outwit and outpace her opponents.
Paladin: Str/Cha. They are putting evil to the sword and raising the holy battle banners.

Nice and clean, no need to insert a ton of new classes, with options to explore the two different sides (e.g. I could see a Holmesian divine "detective" subclass for Avenger focused on Int, observation, and skills more than on killinating things.) Obviously some Clerics might still want Strength and Paladins will probably still want Con, but their class features won't be predicated too much on the other stats.

As for the thread question...no, I don't think the 5e Paladin is weak, no I don't think it would be better to play a Cleric/Fighter MC (you're delaying spells anyway if you do that!) I must sadly agree that the 5e Paladin does not have much identity to it. This is yet another thing I pushed back against during the Next playtest and was roundly criticized for saying it (on another forum.) That doesn't mean the Paladin couldn't have had more identity. We just never got to see what that would have looked like.

but for me, Paladin is already a multiclass , like
Cleric ( Con x Cha )
Pilot ( Int x Dex )
Brute ( Str x Wis )
( ... well, something like that lol )

edit : with Brute = Tank ( of Corsa )

 

[Arnie_Wan_Kenobi]

I think both the 5E ranger and the 5E paladin suffer from similar issues in that they are both casters with a strong melee focus who have barely any identity beyond being slightly magical fighters with abilities cribbed from other classes. If it were up to me and I were the badwrongfun .evil guy designing 6th edition, I would axe both of them and keep Paladin as a subclass for Fighter or maybe Cleric, and Ranger as a subclass for Fighter or Druid

I haven't made it far jnto the thread, but the idea of ranger-as-martial-focused-druid is intriguing food for thought.

 

[Arnie_Wan_Kenobi]

Compare and contrast the Rangers design, where the theme and mechanics of the class aren't particularly strong, and the only thing keeping the class afloat are (some) of it's subclasses. Thematically, they are some kind of Fighter/Rogue/Druid...thing*. Mechanically, they have weak situational bonuses and their primary source of additional damage is tied to a spell that requires concentration.

Hunters Mark should be a class ability.

Yes, I know there are reasons why it's not, but frankly all of them ring hollow to me.