Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7165750" data-attributes="member: 996">Yeah, they're both very high DPR, and pretty tanky...&nbsp;Why bother?&nbsp; The bulk of the game is levels 4-12.&nbsp; &nbsp;Presumably the Paladin would have, too, by such a high level.&nbsp; But the point is, they're both powerhouses.&nbsp; They're DPR classes.&nbsp; They're also both pretty tanky, with second-best d10 HD, and heavy armor proficiency, and some enhancement to saves (the paladin pretty far ahead on that).&nbsp; The BM and Pally both also have a bit of flexibility in combat, the BM via maneuvers, the Pally via using slots to cast.&nbsp; Spells are arguably a lot more versatility (combat &amp; non-combat, offense/defense/support, simply far more of them than the BM has maneuvers, etc), but the Paladin /trades/ smite damage for a different spell, while the BM usually keeps the CS damage, just with a different rider.&nbsp; But, at that point, we've prettymuch covered everything the BM can do, and we still haven't gotten into some of the Paladin's iconic features.&nbsp; &nbsp;And there's why 17th level.&nbsp; Third attack &amp; second action surge.&nbsp;[MENTION=57494]Xeviat[/MENTION] has commented before on how 'uneven' (or was it 'tiered?') Extra Attack makes melee-type progression.&nbsp; Pick the right break-points and you can manipulate the data a bit, I suppose.But the bottom line is that the Paladin doesn't take away the Fighter's &quot;Best at Fighting (with weapons, without magic)&quot; since he's really only about as good at DPR and general toughness as the fighter, and that with some magic into the mix.&nbsp; The Paladin does get a whole lot more on top of that combat prowess, though, while the fighter gets very little.&nbsp; That would be a red flag in a system that aimed for mechanical balance, but for 5e DM-imposed balance, it just calls for a little caution.It also means that cutting the paladin from the game on conceptual grounds isn't exactly hurting anything on the balance side.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp;Wow.&nbsp; Honorable.&nbsp; Sorry, everything you said was spot-on, even this was perfectly cogent, it just struck me as ironic.&nbsp;Those sound mutually exclusive. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp;&nbsp; ...Oh, you did mean 'balanced' as in well-rounded/broadly-contributing, rather than as in 'not overpowered?'&nbsp;I'd been waiting for that.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7165750, member: 996"] Yeah, they're both very high DPR, and pretty tanky... Why bother? The bulk of the game is levels 4-12. Presumably the Paladin would have, too, by such a high level. But the point is, they're both powerhouses. They're DPR classes. They're also both pretty tanky, with second-best d10 HD, and heavy armor proficiency, and some enhancement to saves (the paladin pretty far ahead on that). The BM and Pally both also have a bit of flexibility in combat, the BM via maneuvers, the Pally via using slots to cast. Spells are arguably a lot more versatility (combat & non-combat, offense/defense/support, simply far more of them than the BM has maneuvers, etc), but the Paladin /trades/ smite damage for a different spell, while the BM usually keeps the CS damage, just with a different rider. But, at that point, we've prettymuch covered everything the BM can do, and we still haven't gotten into some of the Paladin's iconic features. And there's why 17th level. Third attack & second action surge. [MENTION=57494]Xeviat[/MENTION] has commented before on how 'uneven' (or was it 'tiered?') Extra Attack makes melee-type progression. Pick the right break-points and you can manipulate the data a bit, I suppose. But the bottom line is that the Paladin doesn't take away the Fighter's "Best at Fighting (with weapons, without magic)" since he's really only about as good at DPR and general toughness as the fighter, and that with some magic into the mix. The Paladin does get a whole lot more on top of that combat prowess, though, while the fighter gets very little. That would be a red flag in a system that aimed for mechanical balance, but for 5e DM-imposed balance, it just calls for a little caution. It also means that cutting the paladin from the game on conceptual grounds isn't exactly hurting anything on the balance side. ;) Wow. Honorable. Sorry, everything you said was spot-on, even this was perfectly cogent, it just struck me as ironic. Those sound mutually exclusive. ;) ...Oh, you did mean 'balanced' as in well-rounded/broadly-contributing, rather than as in 'not overpowered?' I'd been waiting for that. ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification