D&D 5E Paladin Archetypes... *meh*

[Mort]

This is where we just aren't seeing it. The Paladin class is good IMO (and has always been powerful), but the archetypes are very bland. Maybe because they did focus on the White, Green, and Blank knight?

When people want to play a class, and are turned off fromt it because none of the archetypes appeal, that is an issue!

By your other comments, your group doesn't have a problem with the flavor, but the actual power level of the archetypes?

Because, in play, the power bump seems significant.

 

[DND_Reborn]

By your other comments, your group doesn't have a problem with the flavor, but the actual power level of the archetypes?

Because, in play, the power bump seems significant.

Well, personally, even the flavor (white/green/black knight, et. al) is bland to me, and compared to other archetypes the power level seems lackluster. I could easily be mistaken or missing something, since they all seem so unappealing we haven't even tried them--which is why I wanted to ask people who have played them.

Like I said, the features are generally so meh that so far no one has cared which archetype to choose, and so far the only paladin we have seen played ended up using the homebrewed Oath of Protection I posted before.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Like I said, the features are generally so meh that so far no one has cared which archetype to choose,

That's a good thing, it indicates they are well balanced mechanically, you just choose the one whose oath matches the type of character you want to role play.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That's a good thing, it indicates they are well balanced mechanically, you just choose the one whose oath matches the type of character you want to role play.

Really? When it is so bad no one wants to play them? That doesn't seem like a good thing to me.

It is like the thread about adding more archetypes. I find about half the archetypes useless as it is, but others want even more... Most of the features are so weak, it is like asking, "Why even bother?"

I understand some people might like the "direction" the archetypes provide for flavor, etc. but I've never needed anything like that. If I want to play a "green knight", I role-play him that way. So, to me anyway, if there isn't something cool or interesting there, it is meh.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Really? When it is so bad no one wants to play them?

That's okay, then no one wants to play a paladin. Neither do I. I don't want to play a barbarian either, they are all pretty dull.

Most of the features are so weak,

The oath features are weak (really?!, have you seen what they get at level 20?!) because the core class is strong. Very strong. A DPS speadsheet was done a couple of days ago, and you know which melee class turned out to have the highest DPS? Paladin.

 

[Oofta]

The spells that a paladin has access to and whether or not they get used can make a difference as well. I know that a lot of people playing paladins will never notice a difference because every spell slot goes to enhance damage because that's what the spreadsheets tell you to do.

My Oath of The Ancients felt different because he would hit someone and restrain them, or misty step across the battlefield to get into the middle of the fight. My party really appreciated that resistance to spell damage at higher levels. That Oath of Conquest guy? Armor of Agathys and jump into the fray while at higher levels has Spiritual Weapon to help him out. Or just do the 1-2 combination of frightening your enemies and then moving close so they can't flee.

Of course if all you do is use your spells for smiting, you're not going to notice as much of a difference.

End of the day, no one can convince your PCs to play a specific class. In my experience they are reasonably effective and fun to play. Then again if no one ever plays one they'll never know.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Yeah, it's the spells that matter. The Oath of Vengeance paladin in our game generally has Hunter's Mark in play. It's dull as ditchwater but the effect on damage output over time is massive. And it could be leveraged further with PAM or Sentinel feats. Or Elven Accuracy on a dex build.

 

[Mort]

Yeah, it's the spells that matter. The Oath of Vengeance paladin in our game generally has Hunter's Mark in play. It's dull as ditchwater but the effect on damage output over time is massive. And it could be leveraged further with PAM or Sentinel feats. Or Elven Accuracy on a dex build.

Mechanics on their own don't usually scream with excitement. But they can enable exiting play.

Hunter's Mark, for example, can give a paladin a totally different flavour than typical. If the player is having fun with the difference. It'll come out in play and add to the fun of the table.

Of course, The fact that, mechanically it's quite strong - certainly doesn't hurt.

 

[Garthanos]

Well, personally, even the flavor (white/green/black knight, et. al) is bland to me, and compared to other archetypes the power level seems lackluster.

Based on legendary oath bound heros, just about any oath is possible but from my reading aside from some very minor correlations (all making use of berserkergang and having conflicting oaths) the nature of the power gained and what armor if any and so on seems very inconsistent. Paladin smite fests are some of the biggest novas rumor has it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

@lowkey13 has his own Paladin Archetype. At level 3 you take the Oath of Denial, which requires you to stop being a paladin and refunds your those three levels to be chosen again.

Not quite @lowkey13's version, but here is mine: