Paladin is more of a striker?

[Dormain1]

Originally Posted by Mal Malenkirk
The idea is to say : ''Over my dead body'''
Not : ''Catch me if you can.''

I wasn't trying to say run away from the challenged foe, more along the lines of "I bet your not strong/bad enough to get past my friend here and hit me", remember hp in 4e also represent moral

I hope you don't think that if a PC can't reach a foe in melee then they can't DivC them, I think you may see a few ranged Paladins who want to challenge you

Now im seeing eladrin Pallys teleporting to the other side of the fighter just to see if their foe will try the fighter gauntlet again

I agree the more traditional Pally will be the stand and challenge type

remember that as soon as the fighter hits the challenged foe the Pallys mark goes away and it will no longer get damaged unless the Pally challenges them again

 

[Plane Sailing]

I'm bet it's not 8 point of damage. It's probably a typo and it's really 1D8.

Probably not a typo - all kinds of ongoing damage that we've seen has been a fixed amount, probably to simplify bookkeeping and avoid lots of extra dice rolling on other peoples turns.

 

[ZetaStriker]

All these comments seem to assume several things I doubt any competent DM(or even most incompetent ones...) will let happen.

Everything said assumes there is only one monster ever attacking anyone.
It assumes that said monster has no ranged or special movement abilities. Basically, you're either fighting a single minion, normal, or elite monster, as all solos will have something they can do, if only for a round or so.
It assumes that Divine Challenge will do damage every turn, when chances are, a monster would risk a Fighter missing on his attack of opportunity rather than taking the automatic damage.

And even if anyone didn't assume that there was only one monster:

That the enemy party doesn't have any controllers or soldiers with abilities to prevent this.

I seriously doubt, in any situation, in any DM's game, that all three of these factors will come into play at once. Especially number one, as only Solo monsters are built to come at the party alone, and if it's a straggler from a group, it's probably screwed no matter what the Paladin is doing. Am I saying the ranged Paladin wouldn't work? No, it sounds like an awesome concept, especially if some Ranger multiclassing is thrown in. It would just still funtion as a simple Defender, rather than a Striker.

Assuming that this 'trick' could be pulled off though, a Ranger multiclassing into Paladin for Divine Challenge should be far, FAR more effective at not only dealing damage. And yes, the Eladrin teleport would only make it even more broken.

 

[Rhiarion]

Even though the "Kender or Eladrin" concept brought up by Dormain1 may be a valid roleplaying choice, I can't shake the feeling the challenge favours the brave.

In my mind the DivC is a blessing for those that would take the fight to their enemy.

The clarification of 'engage' is a welcome one to me.

To characters that would play the "taunt and evade" game, while dealing damage from afar, there are plenty of roles/ class combos for all of you.

For those chosen few that would run into certain death, without fear, because that is what they believe they should spend thier lives doing, DivC is your God and Faith helping you.
Your willingness to risk life and limb, is what inspires those that witness your selflessness.
For a Paladin to lead in this way is the foundation of Faith.
You are happy to leave the shifty clever tactics, to others that are more suited to it.


IMHO of course, YMMV.

Edit- I now think if a Paladin violates the terms of the blessing, they should take the damage.
That should set certain players straight about the ability.

P.S. If a situation occurs where a DivC fails, such is life.
My harshness is reserved for players that wish to exploit this ability in a way that conflicts with its intention. It would be up the Paladins God on a case by case basis.

 

[Staffan]

One thing that can make this tactic a little problematic might be the paladin's proficiencies. We haven't seen them yet, but take a look at the Warlord: "Simple melee, Military melee, Simple ranged." I wouldn't be surprised if the paladin's selection is similar. So that would probably mean that the paladin's ranged attacks are limited to thrown weapons or something sucky like that. The preview halfling paladin's only ranged attack is his thrown hammer, with a range of 5/10, and he only carries two of those.

 

[FireLance]

One thing that can make this tactic a little problematic might be the paladin's proficiencies. We haven't seen them yet, but take a look at the Warlord: "Simple melee, Military melee, Simple ranged." I wouldn't be surprised if the paladin's selection is similar. So that would probably mean that the paladin's ranged attacks are limited to thrown weapons or something sucky like that. The preview halfling paladin's only ranged attack is his thrown hammer, with a range of 5/10, and he only carries two of those.

As pointed out by Derren in the other thread, non-proficiency with the bow simply means that the paladin doesn't get a proficiency bonus to attacks. I think the real cost is the opportunity cost of spending a standard action to make a ranged attack. If the challenged opponent has such a high AC that the paladin's regular melee attacks aren't effective, then this becomes a good tactic. Of course, in that case, the challenged opponent doesn't have much to worry about from the fighter's basic melee attack for shifting, or opportunity attack for moving or using a ranged attack either...

 

[malraux]

Or... you can stick the paladin in the back. The revised Divine Challenge requires them to attack, but it doesn't say from where. You challenge a melee monster and hide behind the "real" defender, shooting a bow or something. You don't get to challenge and run away anymore, but you do get to stay out of harm's way. And the monster either sits there doing nothing or takes 8 damage a round...

And then the other 4 monsters in the encounter get handled by filling up on tasty wizard chunks, so they aren't hungry enough to also go after you.

Seriously, this tactic only works against solo monsters with no ranged capabilities. I'd bet those are relatively rare creatures.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Yes, I suppose that a Paladin makes a pretty good Striker in many situations if the party has a plethora of Defenders for the situation at hand.

But a real Striker makes a great Striker in all situations, and is less dependent on a using a mark of his own which can disrupt some the Fighter's tricks that use a mark.

 

[TwoSix]

Also, it's never been stated that Defenders aren't supposed to do damage. The striker's advantage lies in mobility, the ability to apply damage wherever it's needed, and the ability to combine damage with other tactical options (pushs, slides, attack penalties). Defenders can put out single-target damage comparable to strikers with the proper weapon and power choices.

 

[Kraydak]

Yes, I suppose that a Paladin makes a pretty good Striker in many situations if the party has a plethora of Defenders for the situation at hand.

But a real Striker makes a great Striker in all situations, and is less dependent on a using a mark of his own which can disrupt some the Fighter's tricks that use a mark.

Divine challenge does enough damage that a paladin makes a good striker on his own merits. The fact that he will also be protecting the tanks (by marking), can heal *and* grant healing surges (LoH) and, if needed, can tank is just gravy.

I do suggest thrown weapons, as they allow for shields. i expect that the returning enhancement on magical thrown weapons will either be extremely cheap, or, even more likely, come free.

The real question is does the paladin make a good *defender*. I posit that the challenge restrictions mean that, if the paladin doesn't get a full suite of movement restriction abilities (and at DDXP time, he *didn't*), the paladin will not cut it in the highly mobile, large fight participant number world of 4e.