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

[Neonchameleon]

Here I have to admit I'm the opposite. I thought the idea of a Charisma-based caster was interesting when it was brought into the core or 3E; however, I have soured on Charisma-based casters a bit since they're pushing Intelligence- and Wisdom-based casters out of the game (and frankly, the saving throw and combat system and to a lesser degree the skills system has been trending to making Wisdom and especially Intelligence into dump stats - not a great thing when your core audience is nerds IMO).

I've long thought that for different thematic reasons sorcerers and warlocks should be able to flex their casting stat, choosing Cha, Int, or possibly Str at character generation (which are, of course, the three weak stats). And wisdom casters aren't even close to getting pushed out.

 

[Composer99]

So the answer to the question in the Thread Title is really, "No. It's a Really Good Multiclass Fighter Cleric".

 

[ECMO3]

Here I have to admit I'm the opposite. I thought the idea of a Charisma-based caster was interesting when it was brought into the core or 3E; however, I have soured on Charisma-based casters a bit since they're pushing Intelligence- and Wisdom-based casters out of the game (and frankly, the saving throw and combat system and to a lesser degree the skills system has been trending to making Wisdom and especially Intelligence into dump stats - not a great thing when your core audience is nerds IMO).

This is the play style and level you are playing I think. Wisdom is the most important stat if you want to be able to control your character and do what you want them to do.

The Monster Manual and spell lists are filled with things that require a Wisdom save and if you are dumping Wisdom without proficiency you will be spending a lot of time charmed or frightened which severely limit your options in combat .... or worse dominated and attacking your allies. In tier 4 you need an 18+ Wisdom or Wisdom proficiency or a high-level Paladin with a good Charisma standing next to you all the time to even be a minimally viable PC in combat.

I started playing 1-20 games with my group last year and since we started playing high levels, Wisdom proficiency has become pretty much universal at high levels (either through the feat or your starting class). In those games, it outstrips Constitution proficiency by a Wide Margin. It used to be multiclass Fighter/Casters took the Fighter class first for Concentration saves, now if it is anything other than Sorcerer or Bard they are taking the Caster first for the Wisdom save.

I also don't see Clerics or Wizards being pushed out of the game. These remain popular classes. Based on the newest DNDBeyond statistics, Wizards are the most popular caster, ahead of all the other caster classes, including Paladin. Clerics are ahead of Bards and Sorcerers.

I don't think nerds are the core audience for d&d any more, and hasn't been for probably 10 years now.

 

[Minigiant]

Here I have to admit I'm the opposite. I thought the idea of a Charisma-based caster was interesting when it was brought into the core or 3E; however, I have soured on Charisma-based casters a bit since they're pushing Intelligence- and Wisdom-based casters out of the game (and frankly, the saving throw and combat system and to a lesser degree the skills system has been trending to making Wisdom and especially Intelligence into dump stats - not a great thing when your core audience is nerds IMO).

That's only because D&D is on this "no new classes" kick.

Where are the Runepriests, Shamans, Avengers, and Oracles?

Where are the Psions, Archivists, Invokers, Gishes, and Warlords?

 

[FallenRX]

Paladins have unmatched single-target "nova" damage and are extremely overpowered at tables that don't run 6-8 encounter days. They can also self heal, heal teammates, play as both melee characters and half casters. I don't think they are weak at all under the right circumstances but they can be meh if you run as many encounters per day as the DMG recommends, which I have found to be pretty uncommon.

People say this but you can nova as a paladin and its actually not that good, its not much better then other classes and they waste resources spamming that, its kinda bad.

 

[hgjertsen]

People say this but you can nova as a paladin and its actually not that good, its not much better then other classes and they waste resources spamming that, its kinda bad.

No it really is, it's 2d8 per slot level versus Rogue's sneak attack which starts at 1d6 and can only be activated if you have an advantage on the attack roll. Lay on hands serves as a replacement for self sustain spells and paladins can also wear heavy armor, they are very, very good with divine smite. Searing Smite spell plus a smite is insane.

 

[Minigiant]

People say this but you can nova as a paladin and its actually not that good, its not much better then other classes and they waste resources spamming that, its kinda bad.

Many tables don't run the 6-8 encounters to level the DPR of a smite happy pally.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't think nerds are the core audience for d&d any more, and hasn't been for probably 10 years now.

The core audience of D&D to me is and always has been nerds (Int) and theatre kids (Cha).

Most nerds are satisfied with the wizard but some long to be smart with weapons (gish and warlord).

Paladin seems like the mix of history nerd and historical actor who wants to shout "For The/Ze King/Queen/Lady/Lord/Prince/Princess/Master/Emperor/Pope/Crown/Kingdom/Empire/Woods/Earth!" and "Die Foul (Insert Insult Here)!"and have mechanical power to do it.

 

[Neonchameleon]

That's only because D&D is on this "no new classes" kick.

What 5e is on is a "subclasses" kick - of which there are over a hundred choices. My normal description of 5e is that it will do 70% of what 3.5 does for 30% of the effort - but in the cases of classes if and when a subclass does the job it does it for 10% of the effort of a new class.

Where are the Runepriests,

You mean as distinct from (a) their thematic cousins in the Rune Knights and (b) as distinct from weird paladins and (c) as distinct from Artificers? Because I never really got the runepriest's "thing" other than as mechanics

Shamans,

This is one although oddly enough the current Beastmaster Ranger comes fairly close thematically

Avengers

There needs to be a monk subclass; there's already a paladin one.

and Oracles?

Assuming you mean the Pathfinder Oracle that's just a spontaneous (no longer needed) divine caster picking their spells off the cleric list and with medium armour and shield proficiency and a couple of mysteries. There's no real gap that needs covering here with the 5e casting rules.

Where are the Psions,

Aberrant Mind Sorcerer

Archivists,

They're an arcane/divine mix casting class that plucks new spells that are outside their normal range. Armour but no shields and a knowledge focus. Isn't this pretty much just a lore bard?

Invokers,

Divine Soul Sorcerer

Gishes,

Do you really want a list of 5e gishes? Seriously? Off the top of my head there's the Eldritch Knight fighter, the Bladesinger wizard, the Valour and Swords bards, and the Pact of the Blade and Hexblade Warlocks. Also the Battle Smith and Armourer artificers.

and Warlords?

... OK, you got me. I suppose that some would claim the Purple Dragon Knight and Battlemaster (not that either is fit for purpose).

 

[Minigiant]

What 5e is on is a "subclasses" kick - of which there are over a hundred choices. My normal description of 5e is that it will do 70% of what 3.5 does for 30% of the effort - but in the cases of classes if and when a subclass does the job it does it for 10% of the effort of a new class

More that 30% of 3e and 4e.

You mean as distinct from (a) their thematic cousins in the Rune Knights and (b) as distinct from weird paladins and (c) as distinct from Artificers? Because I never really got the runepriest's "thing" other than as mechanics

Rune Knight has 6 runes. Subclass level is 1/3 caster.

Rune Priest therefore has 18 runes.

This is one although oddly enough the current Beastmaster Ranger comes fairly close thematically

Close but not full.

The Ranger is a warrior.
The Shaman would be a caster.

There needs to be a monk subclass; there's already a paladin one

Make a full class of it. Return to the Str/Dex/Wis warrior.

Assuming you mean the Pathfinder Oracle that's just a spontaneous (no longer needed) divine caster picking their spells off the cleric list and with medium armour and shield proficiency and a couple of mysteries. There's no real gap that needs covering here with the 5e casting rules.

Thinking more of a spells known class that has a divination focus and heavily based on God and subclass choice to curate spell list.

Aberrant Mind Sorcerer

Haha no.

I want D&D Psion. Not a Mind Sorcerer.

They're an arcane/divine mix casting class that plucks new spells that are outside their normal range. Armour but no shields and a knowledge focus. Isn't this pretty much just a lore bard?

Spellbook?

Divine Soul Sorcerer

Close but no cigar and wrong prime scores.

Do you really want a list of 5e gishes? Seriously? Off the top of my head there's the Eldritch Knight fighter, the Bladesinger wizard, the Valour and Swords bards, and the Pact of the Blade and Hexblade Warlocks. Also the Battle Smith and Armourer artificers

Half caster warrior like Ranger or Paladin..

Not third caster fighter. Not Full Caster with a sword
Half casting Arcane Warrior

OK, you got me. I suppose that some would claim the Purple Dragon Knight and Battlemaster (not that either is fit for purpose).

So like 30% the power.

5e shoves every cool idea into subclasses.

Subclasses are 1/3 the power of full classes in what they do.

It abuses the low tolerance of design some D&D has and how they don't see potential full power of ideas.