Fighter Vs Paladin

[Kordeth]

I clearly must be reading this wrong. I read this as saying that the second time the fighter tried to put a mark on an enemy the first mark would go away. Thus the "supersedes" text.

That entire section is talking about marks on creatures. It's not talking about how many a fighter can have at once, just that a creature cannot be subject to more than one mark at a time.

I can see how perhaps this was just trying to say that the fighter's mark could be overwritten by some other player's mark.

That's exactly what it's saying.

I can see how the paladin mark explicitly lists marking another target as dropping the first mark in addition to the supersedes language which makes me think my initial reading of the fighter mark was wrong.

Yep. Fighters can mark as many enemies as they can hit in one round.

Could anyone point me to any rules that would clarify this?

PHB p. 76: "Every time you attack an enemy, whether the attack hits or misses, you can choose to mark that target."

 

[Kraydak]

Some fighter powers are reliable

For single-target effects, Reliable is, at best, a wash compared to half-effect on miss. With multiple targets, the math may change depending on whether you read the RAW (any miss lets you keep the power) or rule that the RAI was for any hit to expend the power. I wouldn't call the latter interpretation a slam-dunk, mind.

 

[Mengu]

Why exactly should someone pick a Fighter over a Paladin?

Honestly, I'm having difficulty coming up with reasons as well. Here is an attempt. I would pick a fighter over paladin if I:

Prefer battle field control over buffs and debuffs.
Want better attack bonuses and more reliable powers.
Want to play a Human or Eladrin Defender.
Want to play a character better suited for Athletics and Endurance.
Want to avoid MAD problems

I'm afraid if I made a list of why I would pick a paladin over fighter, the list would be much longer.

 

[Yaezakura]

Armour: Fighter gets scale, Paladin gets Plate - Advantage Paladin

The Paladin has the advantage in straight AC bonus. However, Scale has no check penalty, while Plate has a -2. With the Armor Specialization feats, Scale gains 1 AC and removes its movement penalty. Plate simply gains 1 AC. I'd say they're even, if anything, and perhaps with Scale even beating out Plate. But Paladins can still use Scale, so they're even.

Defences: Fighter get +2, Paladin gets +3 - Advantage Paladin

The Fighter is really good at one defense, the Paladin is kinda good at all three. I almost wanna call this one a wash, but I suppose we can give it to the Paladin.

HP: Same
Healing Surges: Paladin gets 1 more

Same HP, Paladin has one extra healing surge, to play into his role as a Defender/Leader. That extra healing surge is meant to be used in a Lay on Hands.

Skills: Fighter gets 3, Paladin gets 4 - Advantage Paladin

Yeah, this one goes to the Paladin, even though it's basically 3.5 skills, since one is forced.

Weapon Proficiencies: Fighter gets Military Ranged over Paladin. Which nets out to be a +2 to hit with bows, unless the Paladin is an Elf and gets them for free anyway. - Advantage Fighter, maybe.

Fighter definitely wins in the weapon department. On top of having more proficiencies, he's better at wielding his weapons than the Paladin is.

Marking - Fighter has better means of marking, the Paladin mark is vastly stronger. - I call it a wash.

I wouldn't call the Paladin's mark stronger. He can have one foe marked, and deal damage to it if the enemy doesn't attack him. With a few Close Blast (say, Dragon Breath for a Dragonborn) or Close Burst 1 powers, the Fighter can mark multiple enemies. The Fighter can also easily increase his damage done by marking, with better weapons, feats, stats, and magic items. The Paladin can only increase his mark damage via stat increases. Advantage: Fighter.

Role - Fighter has better control over NPCs (I.E. Leans towards controller.) Paladin has healing and ally boosts (I.E. Leans towards leader.)

Actually, you've got their roles a bit mixed up. The Paladin is, indeed, a Defender/Leader. However, the Fighter is a Defender/Striker. And well, there's just no winning this one. They serve two different purposes. ^_^ The Paladin is better at aiding his allies, the Fighter is better at kicking enemy butt.

Powers: Damage is a wash as far as I can see. The fighter has more powers that make him seem tougher, which are pretty much negated by the Paladins ability to heal himself at will. ... Looking more closely the Paladin can do more damage and gets ranged attacks as well. - Coolness probably goes to the fighter but for usefullness I say advantage Paladin.

I have to say the Fighter wins this one hands down. The damage may seem roughly equal, but keep in mind that the Fighter is making FAR more attacks. He gets OAs when everyone else simply doesn't. He also hits more often than the Paladin thanks to his +1 attack for One/Two Handed weapons.

Why exactly should someone pick a Fighter over a Paladin? And don't say "Roleplaying", everytime someone complains they want an archer fighter or swashbuckly fighter they get pointed at the Ranger and told to imagine it has a different name, so obviously the same can be done here. So stuff it. Mechanically what does the fighter player have that the Paladin player envies?

What does the Fighter have that the Paladin envies?

A better Marking mechanic.
Better chance to hit.
Higher damage output.

They also simply play entirely differently. A Defender/Leader and Defender/Striker are two very different beasts. Some people would be attracted more to one than the other.

 

[Obryn]

Is this based on armchair speculation, or how they work in play?

-O

 

[James McMurray]

Our group's resident min-maxer switched his 1st level paladin to a fighter. In the 11th level game he's playing a paladin. Don't know what it means, but it's data.

 

[Victim]

IMO, Paladin marking sucks. They aren't very sticky, since they inflict some damage without interfering with movement. However, they have some powers to take hits for people, seem to have more buffs and heals (especially for others; the fighter does have some self heal effects). Plus they start with heavier armors. In theory, the ability to take hits or fix the damage inflicted to others is probably supposed to make up for their inability to restrict enemy movement.

As far as hitting goes, fighters have Reliable and Weapon Talent, and pallies have more non-AC attacks and Valiant Strike (for STR pallies, Valiant is always at least a +1 attack bonus).

Paladins have a harder time with their stats, especially when you look at feats. They have 2 attack stats, and use WIS for lay on hands. Plus Con for surges. And then most weapon and armor feats require either Con or Dex. So most pallies will have fewer effective power choices at each level, and probably won't be able to the feats to specialize in their gear.

Plate isn't a easy choice over scale. It's +1 AC, yes. But scale has no check penalty, and loses its speed penalty with the specialization feat. Those penalized skill checks are used to escape things like Grabs, so it is a combat penalty.

I don't think that damage is a throwaway feature on a defender. Sure, they're probably not doing the most damage. But let's look at some numbers: The warlock in our group does about 3d6+11 with Eyebite (which should be even on average with EB, since she has a feat to improve psychic damage). And my fighter does 1d8+11. So the warlock is doing about 40% more damage. That's a noticeable edge, yes, but it's not as if the fighter damage is negligible. My character's damage dealing ability is still an important contribution to the group.

While not backed up by extensive play experience, I found it easier to pick fighter powers that seemed to work together than paladin ones. When I made a pally, I was just sort of picking stuff that seemed good. But fighter powers begged to be used in combination. Fire off Come and Get It while going into Rain of Steel stance as a minor: now a bunch of enemies are marked and takes damage automatically on their turns (bye bye minions). Or how about Griffon's Wrath or Crack the Shell with a multi striking power like Rain of Blows or Dragon's Fang.

 

[Ulthwithian]

As the gamemaster of my group, and having had our first session yesterday, I can say that the Fighter exerts a presence on the battlefield that, mechanically, a Paladin doesn't. I found myself multiple times per encounter cursing the fact that the Fighter was not a Paladin, and I'm the OpForce.

The Fighter can control anyone he can hit. The Paladin can control any one person he can get near. This means that the Fighter is far superior in a 'group on group' combat and against melee attackers, while the Paladin is generally superior in dealing with a single monster (especially a solo monster) and people safe behind their own battle lines.

Trust me, the Fighter is just as good as a Paladin.

 

[hamishspence]

Combat Superiority

I got the impression this is one of the better fighter traits: helps keep enemies by him and away from everyone else.

 

[Cadfan]

Skills: Fighter gets 3, Paladin gets 4 - Advantage Paladin

The fighter's are better (imo) and don't come stuck with an armor check penalty unless the fighter has a shield, and even then, his armor check penalty is lower than that of a comparably equipped paladin.

Also, the fighter ends up at +1 to attacks.

And he's got less ability score spread. A paladin has to either go Str, Cha, or Str and Cha at one time. All three have drawbacks. A Str paladin gets a nerfed divine challenge, because its based on Cha, and misses out on some power options he might have wanted. A Cha paladin gets a good divine challenge, but sucks at charges, opportunity attacks, etc. A dual stat paladin avoids these problems but takes a slight penalty to his ability scores in order to get the dual stat setup.