How would you fix the Paladin's Mark?

[Majoru Oakheart]

Anyone know what the text was changed TO? I was told they had fixed it two weeks before the con but it didn't make it to the character sheets.

I know at least one player I met was running around with the new text written on there by Rob Heinsoo(I believe, it might have been one of the other WOTC people). I think some other people were told by them but I never did hear what the official correction was.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

However we did ask Chris if we marked a monster and them put up a wall of fire would the creature try to go through the fire to get to the Paladin. He said yes it would, it would do whatever it could to try to get to the Paladin, as long as he could see him.

This answer makes no sense.

If the target must do whatever he can to attack the paladin, there is no need whatsoever to give him a penalty of -2 to attack someone else and inflict 1D8 of damage on top of it. This situation will never happen if the monster would rather jump through a wall of fire than attack somebody else!

---

The mark seems fine as is. Either the monster attacks the Paladin (which is what the paladin wants), perform non attack actions (Assuming you mostly targets brutes instead of leader, it's a good thing) or he attacks somebody else but pay the price (Which is also fine).

It's all good. In all scenarios, the mark has helped the Paladin fulfill his role as a defender.

Even the notion of the paladin running away is no big deal, even if it's silly. In most parties, the Paladin will be the toughest melee fighter (He's the defender, after all). If he doesn't want to stand in front and slug it out, the party will suffer. He won't be that threatening attacking from range + Mark. I'd swap a paladin using such tactics for a ranger or a warlock using better ranged attacks + quarry or curse anyday.

 

[FireLance]

Either Mearls or Heinsoo mentioned at one of our tables that they thought the 8 damage thing was a misprint, and that it was supposed to be d8...which puts it in line with other powers we saw.

8 hp damage may have been based on an underlying formula of 5 + Charisma bonus damage. If the base 5 hp damage seems too high, it could be changed to 3 or even a 1d6, but I think the paladin's Charisma bonus (or some other level-scaling variable) ought to be in there so that it will increase with level.

 

[Zelc]

At the end of your (the Paladin's/Fighter's/Marker's) turn, if you are not in melee range of your marked creature, that creature is no longer marked by you.

That work?

 

[Iron Sky]

I would change it to this:

Divine Challenge
At Will - Divine, Radiant
Minor Action - Close Burst 5
Target: One Creature in burst
Effect: You mark the target. The target remains marked until the end of your next turn or until you mark another target.
If a creature makes an attack that doesn't include you as a target, it takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls and takes 1d8+Cha Radiant damage.

Still pretty powerful, still does a bunch of damage to the target, but consumes a minor action every other turn(at least). It also doesn't put any sort of compulsion on the target or the paladin, he just has to stay close enough to it(5 squares is within at least charging range of almost everything) to re-mark it every other round.

 

[FireLance]

As I mentioned earlier, I think I'd be happy enough if WotC just added a "Sustain Attack" clause to the paladin's Divine Challenge. Based on the current rule for Divine Challenge, the paladin has to use a minor action and be within 5 squares of his target to mark it. If the paladin attacks his mark in the next round (even with a ranged weapon or a prayer) the Challenge is maintained automatically. If he does not attack his mark, he must still be within 5 squares and spend a minor action to re-issue his challenge.

This broadens the archetype of the paladin slightly - paladins of trickster gods, for example, could make use of the tactic of challenging an enemy and leading him on a merry chase around the battlefield, remaining just close enough to re-issue the challenge every round, while more straightforward, challenge and duke it out with the mark in melee paladins can maintain the challenge for free and use their minor action for Lay on Hands and Channel Divinity.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I would change it thus:

1. The marked creature takes a -2 penalty to attack things other than the Paladin.
2. If the marked creature attacks a creature/player with an attack that could have targetted the Paladin , it takes 8 damage.
3. If the marked creature moves out of a space threatened by the paladin, it takes 8 damage.


This removes the possibility of mark and run. If the paladin runs, the creature can simply beat on something else with melee attacks with a -2 penalty. The paladin's mark works well with ranged and area attacks though, which burn the creature unless they target the paladin. #3 was added so a creature can't just shift out of the squares threatened by the paladin and attack something else. The fighter can stop movement with an AoO, so I think 8 damage plus an AoO is still balanced.