Paladin is more of a striker?

[Adso]

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.

You can take thrown (simple) weapons with the paladin, but it's never the best option, since your weapon powers are almost always melee, and your ranged powers are almost always implement powers. If you use this "throw build" you'll end up doing basic attacks with ranged (meaning you'll have to build in a higher Dex than you normally would) and trying not tanking your Cha (since you want to get the most damage you can out of your divine challenge ability) even then I don't think it’ll work very well. You are better off, using your challenge, marking foes, and keeping them on you, and then attacking with powers that grant allies bonuses to AC, grant temporary hit points, or that move your opponent away from you or your allies (making your target work to come get you or take your radiant damage, all of which is fine defending if you ask me).

Playing a paladin pretty regularly for the past few months, I can say they make great defenders. I have consistently been able to protect my allies and get monsters to attack me. Now I also taunt my DM a lot, so he attacks me more. Knowing how to roleplay a defender is key, I must admit.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

The so called 'catch me if you can' tactic seems very paladin like to me.

Drawing of the big bad monster from your allies so it kills you? Yep very paladin like.

 

[Wormwood]

It's a clever combo with diminishing returns as you gain levels.

Not a game breaker from where I'm sitting.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

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

Actually, I'm pretty case that it will be the case.

Challenging a guy safely from the top of a city wall? Not happening.

 

[Kraydak]

You can take thrown (simple) weapons with the paladin, but it's never the best option, since your weapon powers are almost always melee, and your ranged powers are almost always implement powers. If you use this "throw build" you'll end up doing basic attacks with ranged (meaning you'll have to build in a higher Dex than you normally would) and trying not tanking your Cha (since you want to get the most damage you can out of your divine challenge ability) even then I don't think it’ll work very well.

(1) Heavy thrown weapons for strengthy goodness!
(2) I admit, I had been assuming the paladin did not have enough at-will ranged damage abilities to cut it as a ranged combatant running off of powers alone. If they do, then of course, use them instead of thrown weapons.

You are better off, using your challenge, marking foes, and keeping them on you, and then attacking with powers that grant allies bonuses to AC, grant temporary hit points, or that move your opponent away from you or your allies (making your target work to come get you or take your radiant damage, all of which is fine defending if you ask me).

If the divine challenge analogues at all levels do enough damage to make the paladin sticky, then they do enough damage to base a striker off of. Sure, the divine challenges won't provide *all* the damage, but enough that thrown weapons should be able to make up the difference handily. You end up with a striker who can midnight (quite well) as a defender, and who can effectively turn non-defenders into defender-lites by buffing their AC (through the Mark -2 to hit) and granting them defenderesque hp/healing surges through LoH.

Playing a paladin pretty regularly for the past few months, I can say they make great defenders. I have consistently been able to protect my allies and get monsters to attack me. Now I also taunt my DM a lot, so he attacks me more. Knowing how to roleplay a defender is key, I must admit.

Out of curiosity, how many targets can you lock down? Do they try to scatter, forcing you into a version of whack-a-mole?

 

[Fanaelialae]

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.

It's probably a decent build for a ranger, true, but consider that not only would the ranger be drawing more attention than is likely optimal, his mark would also be 1/encounter. Meaning that all the enemy has to do is break his LoS or otherwise distract him for one round (so that he can't attack his marked target for that round). The mark then goes away and isn't available again until the next encounter.

I'll grant that it could indeed be an interesting ranger build, but against a DM who has a reasonable grasp of tactics (ideally, a trait every DM should possess), I seriously doubt it would be broken (IMO).

 

[Verys Arkon]

I posted this in the sister thread on Gleemax :

I don't have a problem with this power at all, and it fits perfectly with the Paladin. It isn't that the Paladin is running around the battlefield snipping at the creatures, it is that he is trying to drag the creature AWAY from whatever the monster is currently chewing on.

The party has been split up, and the ogre is swinging its massive club at the vulnerable wizard Skamos. From across the field of battle Corrin, Paladin of Tymora, waves his sword at the creature and screams "Fight me, a worthy opponent! Tymora demands you fight her champion!" The Ogre is surrounded by the holy glow of Tymora, and leaves Skamos alone or risk the wrath of the goddess.

Where the fighter defender defends by getting in the way of a monster before it gets to a weaker party member, the Paladin pulls creatures off allies. They are both defending, but with different flavorr. If the ogre ignores the challenge and takes the 8 points of damage, thats the monster's fault (and by extension the DMs fault). If DMs play monsters that constantly ignore the challenge and keep taking 8 points, then you've got a 'broken' DM, not a broken power.

 

[OchreJelly]

All these discussions are fine and all, but they tend to ignore what actually would happen at a game table. I mean what are all the other monsters doing? I guess they are swarming over the squishies while the valiant paladin hangs in the back ranks going "plunk" "plunk" with his bow.

I said it in the other thread and others have here as well. The opportunity cost of acting outside your role seems high. Sure it's a nice tactic that could be used situationally (just as wizards occasionally like to mix things up in melee), but I don't see it being a paladin's "go to" tactic.

 

[ZetaStriker]

I'll grant that it could indeed be an interesting ranger build, but against a DM who has a reasonable grasp of tactics (ideally, a trait every DM should possess), I seriously doubt it would be broken (IMO).

Again, that was assuming that, somehow, the PC would always be out of harm's way and damaging the foes with his Divine Challenge. Which is a huge assumption, as I've already proven that it'll never work. Of course, everyone seems perfectly happy to ignore my valid arguments against the build in favor of fantasy, but there just isn't a situation in which that monster isn't going to somehow get to the Paladin, forcing him to do his job in the back row while someone else tries to hold the front line.

 

[Kraydak]

Again, that was assuming that, somehow, the PC would always be out of harm's way and damaging the foes with his Divine Challenge. Which is a huge assumption, as I've already proven that it'll never work. Of course, everyone seems perfectly happy to ignore my valid arguments against the build in favor of fantasy, but there just isn't a situation in which that monster isn't going to somehow get to the Paladin, forcing him to do his job in the back row while someone else tries to hold the front line.

If your tank decides to play back-line striker, you have a problem. If the player who gets to take the striker role has a paladin-striker, you don't have a problem. Remember, if the paladin-striker has a monster in his face, then so would a ranger or warlock. The difference? The paladin can survive the attention better.

No one is arguing that the party's only "defender" should act as a back-line striker, they are arguing that a paladin is a good fit for the party's striker. The only way that wouldn't work is if the entire striker role doesn't work.