Paladin balanced without RP/alignment restrictions?

[Endur]

The problem with Paladins is that they have six necessary stats.

Strength to hit, cause damage, and wear armor.
Charisma for all of their special abilities.
Constitution for survival.
Dexterity for initiative and reflex saves and armor class.
Wisdom for spellcasting and will saves.
Intelligence for skills: Ride, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Knowledge Religion, Healing, and Animal Handling.

Fighters have three good stats: Str, Con, and Dex. Fighters have a poor skill selection, so they don't need intelligence. Fighters have no need for charisma for abilities. Fighters don't need wisdom. You can create a fighter with a high int, wis, and chr, but its not as useful as for a paladin.

So, if you plan on creating a balanced character, not one who is focused on str and con, then you might find a Paladin more beneficial than a Fighter.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Fighters have a low Will save, so they do need Wisdom. Plus, Int 13 gives you access to lots of feats.

 

[Pielorinho]

Tone down the insults, folks, or I'll lock the thread. Calling people obtuse and mocking their playstyle is not civil.

Daniel

 

[Psiblade]

I have seen a large number of 28 point fighters, barbarians, and paladins. That is not a well built 28 point fighter. The paladin is more normal.
28 point fighter
S: 16 (10) D:12 (4) C:16 (10) I:8 (0) W:12 (4) C:8 (0)
28 point paladin
S: 14 (6) D: 10 (2) C 14 (6) I 10 (2) W 12 (4) Ch 15 (8)

The equivalent fighter will hit harder (weapon spec, greater weapon spec., power attack), hit more often (weapon focus, greater weapon focus), have more feats (improved crit), get hit less (better dex), and have more hit points (better con & improved toughness). Fighters will add str as they go up. Most 28 point fighters also tend to be dwarves so they have even more hit points.

The paladin will be better at diplomacy (but can not lie) and other non-combat areas. Divine might, divine sacrifice and smite do help a paladin on the damage. Against an evil opponent, a paladin using smite can inflict serious damage. Also, a charisma based paladin can use divine might quite often (10 times at 15th) which will add around 7 points of damage per attack at 15th level.

The difference is the to hit bonuses that the fighter will have. Each +1 to hit equals +2 damage. The fighter will be +3 to hit and +6 damage which equals around +5 (12-7 from divine might) damage per blow above the paladin. Average combat is 4 to 5 rounds with two or three combats per day. Average swings would be around 36 per day at 15th. Average damage per day more by the fighter would be at least 100 points at 15th level before improved crit and other fighter feats kick in.

These numbers fit what I have seen in practice. Fighters are better at fighting in general. Paladins can do more things, but fighters are better at fighting.

-Psiblade

 

[Pielorinho]

Psiblade, that's a very interesting analysis. Admittedly I've not played much with the differences between paladins and fighters, but would you say that in general paladins, while not as strong offensively compared to fighters, are significantly stronger defensively? Their big bonuses to saving throws, their various immunities, and their spells (several of which have defensive qualities, IIRC) would seem to give them an advantage.

Fer instance, I'd think that any paladin of at least fourth level is going to go into most battles with protection from evil and/or bless weapon cast; these spells could make a significant difference at such a low level. And woe be the opponent of a paladin with bless weapon and the Improved Critical feat.

Daniel

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Fer instance, I'd think that any paladin of at least fourth level is going to go into most battles with protection from evil and/or bless weapon cast; these spells could make a significant difference at such a low level. And woe be the opponent of a paladin with bless weapon and the Improved Critical feat.

Not even close. There is a big difference between what you see on paper and in practice.

The Paladin has far too few spells per day and too low a caster level (therefore short spell durations) to have these spells up in the majority of battles assuming that there is opportunity to buff at all.

Spellcasting is a vastly overrated feature of the Paladin. A 8th level Paladin with a 12 Wis is only slightly more effective as a spell caster than a 1st level Cleric with a 12 Wisdom. The significant difference is the Bless Weapon spell. But if you bank on that spell and happen to spend the day fighting dire animals, your spellcasting is down the toilet because the Paladin, unlike the Cleric, cannot spontaneously cast.

 

[Gaiden]

I played a paladin from 1st through 17th level. He was the divine might, spirited charge, leadership type of paladin. I found that he could be extremely effective (especially at higher levels) and could outdamage both the fighter and barbarian.

However, this is with the caveat that he could do this a few times per day and that he and his mount were one trick ponies (his mount was a dire lion). If he could not charge, he could simply not dish it out the way a fighter or barbarian could. If he got locked in melee combat he simply could not dish it out like a fighter or a barbarian could. Basically, a fighter or barbarian (if played smart) could toast my pally with ease.

The character was a saving monster with 3.0 version of armor of command, a cloak of charisma and defensive magic cast all the time. His AC at early levels was great, but past 9th level was relying more on his mobility than his AC.

My conclusion with the character was that he was rather boring to play in terms of combat because it was just the same thing over and over again. Moreover, if a paladin is intended to be a tank - and there is no better, his role was trumped by the fact that he had to be so mobile while the rest of the party was not nearly so. This meant that to act as the main defense meant giving up attack power, and vice a versa.

Paladins are no where near the fighting machines that are fighters or barbarians, and nothing beats the straight fighter. However, as everyone has already said, paladins have all that other jazz that keeps them balanced. From a purely mechanical perspective the ability for smackdown damage from around 12th level and up definitely could appear overpowered. However, with multiple encounters a day and an inability to charge with a large creature, the paladin's lack of versatility becomes all too apparent.

I agree with the majority of people who consider the paladin's code a flavor thing. I don't think it is there for any real balance reasons. Look at the dragon magazine with alternative paladins if you are interested in classes with similar power but that have different alignment restrictions and codes of conduct.

 

[Merlion]

My question is this: If what Celtavian says is true, and Paladins are somehow overpowered, how is the alignment restriction going to change that in a meaningful way? How is being a lawful good overpowered character going to be that much less disruptive than being a neutral good overpowered character?

Now the multiclass restriction may prevent some potential problematic combos, but I dont see where the alignment thing makes a difference


although, I do not think paladins are overpowered, it has been stated that roleplaying factors are not used to balance mechanical ones, and I feel that removing many of the RP restrictions on the Paladin class would be a great service to the game

I've seen a lot of threads involving discussion of the problems caused in groups by some interpretations of the whole Paladin Code thing...and some times pretty big problems caused by just it as is.

 

[Psiblade]

Hello Daniel,

I will agree that paladins are the best melee class at avoiding damage especially with sword & shield style. Charisma based Paladins with their high saves are also much more likely to succeed on saving throws. Paladins will have to gain access to vests of resistance rather cloaks of resistance. This can be easy or hard depending upon the campaign. If the vests of resistance are available, then charisma based paladins will have around a 30% better chance to save than fighters at 15th level.

If given a chance to buff for a couple of rounds, Paladin damage will increased greatly because of spells like bless weapon, divine sacrifice, and holy sword. However, using a round in combat to buff decreases the number of attacks that you make by 20% to 25% for that combat. Not to mention someone else in your party gets to tank the monster while you cast a spell. :\

If you have big damage dealers in your party, then a paladin is a better tank because they are great at avoiding damage not dealing damage. Less damage taken equals less healing needed which means the party has greater staying power.

I did not want to seem to be down on paladins, but the half-orc/dwarven power attacking fighter is the king of melee damage dealing. Paladins are the king of avoiding damage. Which class is better? The class that fits the rest of the party better.

-Psiblade

 

[Lord Pendragon]

the half-orc/dwarven power attacking fighter is the king of melee damage dealing.

As far as I can tell, the fighter has the following advantages over the paladin, as far as melee damage dealing:

* Access to Weapon Specialization and Greater Weapon Specialization.
* Reliance on fewer stats, giving him an advantage in a point-buy campaign.

Everything else is either available to both paladin and fighter (Power Attack), or adds to versatility, but not directly to melee damage (technique feats such as Improved Trip or Improved Disarm that a paladin can't afford.)

I'm curious what makes the fighter such a clear superior to the paladin in direct melee damage, other than what I've mentioned.