Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 7218487" data-attributes="member: 7006">Or...If there isn't another paladin in the party, then it doesn't matter whether a ranged paladin is better or worse than a melee paladin.All that matters is whether this ranged paladin is too much better than other characters in the particular party in which he's found, mainly the ones who might also be running an archery build.&nbsp; Because then, yeah... if the ranged paladin greatly outshines the archery ranger or archery rogue, then the player of either of those two builds might find their contribution is being overshadowed.&nbsp; But that's a true possibility of any combination of character classes that overlap, whether or not you introduce or allow a ranged paladin.A party that includes 3 melee characters, a wizard, and a ranged paladin will find little to no issue that the DM has allowed the paladin PC to work at range.&nbsp; Yes, the ranged PC will do a lot of damage if they smite a lot-- just like the ranged rogue who would do a lot of damage due to Hiding advantage and sneak attack.&nbsp; And if we accept and work around ranged rogues as DMs... to think we'd be incapable of doing the same around a ranged paladin is to not give ourselves enough credit.So to dismiss the ranged paladin out of hand because of this theoretical &quot;ladder&quot; of potential class power that some players have created in their minds is kind of silly if you ask me.&nbsp; Like anything else... there are a ton of ways a PC will be over- or underpowered, whether or not you believe in some universal &quot;default&quot; power level of all classes and builds.&nbsp; If your PC's story works in this way, and you want to try this new class combo out... then do so.&nbsp; Just like you would any UA playtest class thing.&nbsp; And if the DM finds he needs to either reduce or up the power depending on how it plays, then they can do so as they go along.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 7218487, member: 7006"] Or... If there isn't another paladin in the party, then it [I]doesn't matter[/I] whether a ranged paladin is better or worse than a melee paladin. All that matters is whether this ranged paladin is too much better than other characters in the particular party in which he's found, mainly the ones who might also be running an archery build. Because then, yeah... if the ranged paladin greatly outshines the archery ranger or archery rogue, then the player of either of those two builds might find their contribution is being overshadowed. But that's a true possibility of any combination of character classes that overlap, whether or not you introduce or allow a ranged paladin. A party that includes 3 melee characters, a wizard, and a ranged paladin will find little to no issue that the DM has allowed the paladin PC to work at range. Yes, the ranged PC will do a lot of damage if they smite a lot-- just like the ranged rogue who would do a lot of damage due to Hiding advantage and sneak attack. And if we accept and work around ranged rogues as DMs... to think we'd be incapable of doing the same around a ranged paladin is to not give ourselves enough credit. So to dismiss the ranged paladin out of hand because of this theoretical "ladder" of potential class power that some players have created in their minds is kind of silly if you ask me. Like anything else... there are a ton of ways a PC will be over- or underpowered, whether or not you believe in some universal "default" power level of all classes and builds. If your PC's story works in this way, and you want to try this new class combo out... then do so. Just like you would any UA playtest class thing. And if the DM finds he needs to either reduce or up the power depending on how it plays, then they can do so as they go along. [/QUOTE]

Verification