Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Is the Paladin class poorly designed?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Nahat Anoj" data-source="post: 4652533" data-attributes="member: 25075"><p>I know it probably won't be changed officially, which is why I've done it unofficially. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> I wouldn't mind a 4.5 that does that changing, though. I think with DDI it's easier than it was in previous years - people with DDI don't have to get all the books again to be "current."</p><p></p><p>As an aside but related to this, I hope 5e is completely electronic, for this reason. Sure, you have to subscribe, but when "patches" are released you can get them updated automatically. No having to sift through the website or tons of different book printings. Indeed, when a new edition comes out, you wouldn't even need to get new books - it would all be updated online.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, I think rangers, paladins, warlocks, and clerics play well enough as-is. The primary reason for me is that it's a general class theme issue. IMO, classes should have one signature ability that unites the class and gives it a clear concept. Wizards are smart, fighters are strong, etc. To me, the ranger feels like two classes mashed into one.</p><p></p><p>There are other reasons, too. One primary attack stat for rangers (and all other classes) reinforces the theme that humans can be good in any class they choose. Another is that it makes character creation much more straightforward but loses no tactical complexity in play. IMO, this is a boon to both veterans and newbies who just want to get on with the game.</p><p></p><p>The real problem IMO with Dex-primary rangers is that if the ranger is Dex primary, not only do they have one attack stat to increase, they also have great AC and Ref. Thus they are incredibly efficient when it comes to building character, doing lots of damage quite cheaply. It would be like a rogue but with much less limitations in the weapons it can use. So I think, to keep things in line with rogues, Dex primary rangers will need some kind of incentive to use low damage weapons over big damage ones (eg, dual wielding bastard swords).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Nahat Anoj, post: 4652533, member: 25075"] I know it probably won't be changed officially, which is why I've done it unofficially. :) I wouldn't mind a 4.5 that does that changing, though. I think with DDI it's easier than it was in previous years - people with DDI don't have to get all the books again to be "current." As an aside but related to this, I hope 5e is completely electronic, for this reason. Sure, you have to subscribe, but when "patches" are released you can get them updated automatically. No having to sift through the website or tons of different book printings. Indeed, when a new edition comes out, you wouldn't even need to get new books - it would all be updated online. Well, I think rangers, paladins, warlocks, and clerics play well enough as-is. The primary reason for me is that it's a general class theme issue. IMO, classes should have one signature ability that unites the class and gives it a clear concept. Wizards are smart, fighters are strong, etc. To me, the ranger feels like two classes mashed into one. There are other reasons, too. One primary attack stat for rangers (and all other classes) reinforces the theme that humans can be good in any class they choose. Another is that it makes character creation much more straightforward but loses no tactical complexity in play. IMO, this is a boon to both veterans and newbies who just want to get on with the game. The real problem IMO with Dex-primary rangers is that if the ranger is Dex primary, not only do they have one attack stat to increase, they also have great AC and Ref. Thus they are incredibly efficient when it comes to building character, doing lots of damage quite cheaply. It would be like a rogue but with much less limitations in the weapons it can use. So I think, to keep things in line with rogues, Dex primary rangers will need some kind of incentive to use low damage weapons over big damage ones (eg, dual wielding bastard swords). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Is the Paladin class poorly designed?
Top