Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SableWyvern" data-source="post: 4345672" data-attributes="member: 1008">Well, it would be a bad call, no doubt. The problem is, as a defender, a paladin is supposed to have multiple enemies around him a fair proportion of the time. And a feat that you can't use because you're doing what your supposed to be doing doesn't seem like a particularly useful gift from your god.I don't think you're comparing apples to apples here. Of course, a ranged character that gets stuck in melee needs to make some difficult tactical choices. A melee character, on the other hand, shouldn't find important powers useless to him in melee.If Armour of Bahamat wasn't the only Channel Divinity feat available to clerics and paladins of Bahamat, I'd just assume, &quot;this feat isn't designed for melee characters.&quot; But it is the only Channel Divinity feat availabe to paladins of Bahamat, and as such, it should be useful to a paladin of Bahamut.Soaking two to three times or more the damage you're potentially saving another character from (and, depending on the final damage roll, you might end up not saving them from any damage at all) is rarely going to be useful to you or the party as a whole.When I ran my first 4E session last weekend, the paladin use AoB two or three times in five fights, and I didn't realise at the time it was meant to draw OAs. The power was useful, but certainly didn't turn the course of battle or anything so dramatic. I am quite convinced, in each instance where he used AoB, if he had been attracting OAs, his best course of action would have been not to use it, and allow the effected PC to just suck it up and take the crit. If he had been in a position where he could use it safely, that would of meant he was well out of position, and many battles would have gone much, much worse for the PCs.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="SableWyvern, post: 4345672, member: 1008"] Well, it would be a bad call, no doubt. The problem is, as a defender, a paladin is [i]supposed[/i] to have multiple enemies around him a fair proportion of the time. And a feat that you can't use because you're doing what your supposed to be doing doesn't seem like a particularly useful gift from your god. I don't think you're comparing apples to apples here. Of course, a ranged character that gets stuck in melee needs to make some difficult tactical choices. A melee character, on the other hand, shouldn't find important powers useless to him in melee. If Armour of Bahamat wasn't the only Channel Divinity feat available to clerics and paladins of Bahamat, I'd just assume, "this feat isn't designed for melee characters." But it [i]is[/i] the only Channel Divinity feat availabe to paladins of Bahamat, and as such, it should be useful to a paladin of Bahamut. Soaking two to three times or more the damage you're potentially saving another character from (and, depending on the final damage roll, you might end up not saving them from [i]any[/i] damage at all) is rarely going to be useful to you or the party as a whole. When I ran my first 4E session last weekend, the paladin use AoB two or three times in five fights, and I didn't realise at the time it was meant to draw OAs. The power was useful, but certainly didn't turn the course of battle or anything so dramatic. I am quite convinced, in each instance where he used AoB, if he had been attracting OAs, his best course of action would have been not to use it, and allow the effected PC to just suck it up and take the crit. If he had been in a position where he could use it safely, that would of meant he was well out of position, and many battles would have gone much, much worse for the PCs. [/QUOTE]

Verification