Paladin. Disappointing

[Darth Cyric]

Nonsense. The fighter had more hit-points because he was up at the front and more likely to get hit. He didn't use to have special magical "stay and play with me!" powers before. That's WHY he has the HP, because he's a melee fighter who job is to get in there and mix it up, which is clearly NOT the same as one who magically sticks mobs to himself.

The difference is very simple:

1) 3.XE or earlier Fighter - Is in a dangerous position, but tries not to get hit. Does not encourage people to hit him by any means beyond proximity.

The Fighter was also one of the weakest classes in 3.x. There's a reason Book of Nine Swords was drafted in the first place, and there's a reason 4e is going in the same sort of direction.

And in 3.x the Paladin was even weaker than the Fighter.

As for magical, that just reveals the general lack of imagination you've displayed in this entire thread. How about the Fighter being trained to attack and hit in such a way that stops his enemies' movements dead in their tracks? Is that so hard to imagine?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The Fighter was also one of the weakest classes in 3.x. There's a reason Book of Nine Swords was drafted in the first place, and there's a reason 4e is going in the same sort of direction.

And in 3.x the Paladin was even weaker than the Fighter.

As for magical, that just reveals the general lack of imagination you've displayed in this entire thread. How about the Fighter being trained to attack and hit in such a way that stops his enemies' movements dead in their tracks? Is that so hard to imagine?

Whilst your apparently desperate need to insult me is somewhat humourous, it's not a lack of imagination that's my problem, I'm afraid.

I already said, if you read my post, that an ability that affected enemies ADJACENT to the Fighter would make sense, because it could represent what you described. Did you not read that?

What makes NO SENSE is being able to give an enemy who is:

1) Unaware of the Fighter.

2) Not adjacent to the Fighter.

3) Completely brainless

A significant penalty or forfeit.

Screaming that you're going to bloodily murder a certain Wizard from across the room - Yes, this could be off-putting. To a humanoid, sane opponent who is aware of you and you make some kind of "CHA attack" against. Hitting someone so hard that they continue to worry about you to the point of it being off-putting, makes sense. With a humanoid, sane, pain-feeling opponent.

Love-tapping a dragon who then flies out of the room and who you CANNOT even get to, and still penalising him? Doesn't make sense.

Doing any of these things to a formless, brainless enemy, or an utterly fearless one possessed of extreme strength (not uncommon in D&D)? Makes no sense.

No amount of "imagination" will solve these sort of problem. Only willingness to ignore them gets rid of them. Some people are happy to ignore any kind of crazy wierdness if it makes for a "better" game, some aren't, or feel that it doesn't actually make for a "better" game, per se. Anyway, I suggest you read my post again, it seems like you missed most of it.

 

[Darth Cyric]

Whilst your apparently desperate need to insult me is somewhat humourous, it's not a lack of imagination that's my problem, I'm afraid.

I don't need to be desperate to insult you. It's become far too easy for me to do so.

I already said, if you read my post, that an ability that affected enemies ADJACENT to the Fighter would make sense, because it could represent what you described. Did you not read that?

I didn't read it because that's not what you said in the first place.

On the other hand, apparently it's you who never read something. Namely, the character sheet for the Fighter, which says under Race and Class features:

Combat Challenge: When you attack you may mark the enemy, giving a -2 to attack targets other than you ...

- The only way you're doing this from range is with a ranged weapon. In which case it becomes an example of an enemy who is aware of the fact that you're pelting it with throwing axes or crossbow bolts. Of course, since Fighter powers are generally melee, and you have to spend actions to switch from ranged to melee, this is not always an optimal tactic.

Combat Challenge: When an adjacent enemy shifts, make an immediate basic melee attack against them

- Pretty self-explanatory.

Combat Superiority: +2 to opportunity attacks and enemies stop moving if a move provoked the attack.

- Opportunity attacks: Attacks you can only perform if you actually THREATEN someone. Which means you're ADJACENT to them.

Where did you get your misinformation, I wonder?

What makes NO SENSE is being able to give an enemy who is:

1) Unaware of the Fighter.

2) Not adjacent to the Fighter.

3) Completely brainless

A significant penalty or forfeit.

Except, you know, that doesn't happen, as I outlined above. By this point, I wouldn't be surprised if you tried to tell me that water isn't wet.

Love-tapping a dragon who then flies out of the room and who you CANNOT even get to, and still penalising him? Doesn't make sense.

If the dragon flew out of the room and didn't come back, the encounter's most likely over, and so is the mark.

If the dragon swoops back in, then most likely that Fighter who just gashed him (and that's IF the Fighter actually managed to hit him, which doesn't always happen, so I don't know where you got "love-tapping" from) is going to be the first thing on his mind. And all that time spent on the dragon flying out of the room is probably also time spent by the party to rearrange its formation.

And all that is if the dragon even managed to escape the Fighter's threat range unscathed.

You're not even trying.

Anyway, I suggest you read my post again, it seems like you missed most of it.

And I suggest you actually do some research before you come across as uninformed. Oh, too late.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Wow Darth, I'm going to put you on ignore before you get yourself reported.

I'm aware of everything you've claimed I'm not, and if you choose not pretend not to understand what I'm describing, I'm sorry for you, but your insistence on making this about being insulting rather than actually, y'know discussing anything put us both a risk of bannage, and I'm not posting that way any more. Sorry if this is a let-down for you, and no doubt you can have fun with the kiss-off line that I'll no doubt see someone quote

 

[Darth Cyric]

Wow Darth, I'm going to put you on ignore before you get yourself reported.

I'm aware of everything you've claimed I'm not, and if you choose not pretend not to understand what I'm describing, I'm sorry for you, but your insistence on making this about being insulting rather than actually, y'know discussing anything put us both a risk of bannage, and I'm not posting that way any more. Sorry if this is a let-down for you, and no doubt you can have fun with the kiss-off line that I'll no doubt see someone quote

Please. You've been nothing but insulting in this entire thread. Even got warned about it once already, if I recall. Not to mention that you've had your ignorance long since called out.

Word of advice: if you can't take the heat, don't jump into the furnace.

 

[Kraydak]

...

One other interesting point:

The Paladin's Divine Challenge ability is thoroughly broken. We breezed through fights in my group by having the fighter (me) pin down a mob while the paladin challenged him and ran off. Every time the creature attacked someone other than the paladin (who the creature couldn't get to because we blocked him off) the creature would take 8 damage. The paladin just sat in another room and literally did nothing for round after round while his divine challenge did damage over and over again. Incidently, 8 damage is the maximum that the Paladin could do with any attack other than his daily, and the damage from the challenge always hit. Since you only tend to land 55% of your attacks in 4ed, a source of certain damage was very overpowered for us.

Word from the GMs at the conferance is that after some likely revisions, the Divine Challenge will now fade if the paladin does not move towards the creature or attack it somehow. Line of sight may also be necessary.

...
-TM

I think I was the first person on this board to predict paladin mark+running . The fact that something so utterly basic got through *really* raises questions on the play-testing quality, although WotC postings are somewhat at odds with your report (they suggested that the problem already been dealt with).

As a side note, given that the paladin doesn't do his defending shtick through reducing opponent's mobility, finding rules that prevent mark+run that don't utterly hose the paladin will be very hard

 

[kigmatzomat]

Umm...how is "standing in front kicking behind and leaving the wizard to take names" not the same thing as "standing around and getting hit while everyone else kills the monsters?"

They can be quite different and I can sum it up succinctly:

Striker's yell "Who's next?!?" and Defenders yell "Is that all you've got?!"

Here's an example from an Earthdawn game I was in, where it was quite evident. I played a weaponsmith/nethermancer, another guy played a skyraider/warrior.

He could make 2-5 attacks, typically doing 20-50 damage with each. I could make 1, although it tended to do 35-70 damage when I hit. He actually had more hit points but I could be simultaneously bathed in dragon fire, under the influence of evil bone-twisting magic, AND be chewed on by a monster and generally take little to no damage.

His character's tag line was "Who's next?!?"

Mine was "Is that all you've got?!?"

The trick is to make the defender "sticky" in some fashion to the monster so the BBEG doesn't just go around. In ED if the BBEG ignored me, I used my talents to make everyone else do more damage, much more damage. Plus I had a taunt/enrage talent that made monsters aggro me.

 

[Darth Cyric]

nevermind

 

[helium3]

Word from the GMs at the conferance is that after some likely revisions, the Divine Challenge will now fade if the paladin does not move towards the creature or attack it somehow. Line of sight may also be necessary.

Yeah. That's not going to cause endless rules laywerly arguments about whether or not the Paladin is actually "moving towards" or "attacking." Sheesh.

This effect seems like an awfully big oops that should've been caught during play-testing, either internal or external.

 

[Insight]

Nope it says: at will BUT max 3/day (?) MAX 1 per round:
effect: You spend a healing surge but regain no hit points. (fair enough I see your point, however....)Instead, the target regains hit points as if it has spent a healing surge.
So unless you cannot target yourself, you are the target, you heal yourself. Particularly if you are an evil Paladin .
Another good one for the Sage, I suppose. If you can't use it one yourself, it should specify that. Anybody actually tried it at DDXP????

You can definitely heal yourself with Lay on Hands. I had Paladins in 2 different previews heal themselves that way when the Cleric was down.