Paladin vs Fighter: Who is the better Defender?

[Sitara]

I'm surprised this hasn't been done yet here, but what do you think?

First, the fighter seems to have the better marking ability. The paladin's mark is better when used against a foe vulnerable to radiant energy, though overall IMO the fighters mark wins.

The paladin's lay on hands power is just amazing. Channel divinity is also great. So the paladin wins the remaining class features.


Onto powers:

Overall from what I can gather, the paladin deals more damage than the paladin. The paladin however deals more damage when up against foes vulnerable to radiant damage, And the paladin can also soak damage better thanks to more healing.

Surprisingly the paladin has few if any buff's, and they are kinda weak. Opposite of what I was expecting. Also, the paladin's powers increase exponentially when armed with an implement (holy avenger or magic holy symbol)

But looking solely at powers it appears to me the fighter has an advantage over the paladin, as in they deal more damage and appear to have, overall, better status effects.

Fighter
-Fewer demand from ability scores
-More damage dealing attacks.
-Almost as durable as the paladin
-better marking ability

Paladin
-Requires more ability scores
-Performs best when up against demonic/undead foes (foes vulnerable to radiant damage)
-Requires a magic holy symbol or holy avenger to perform to fullest extent.


So it looks to me the fighter wins out. I would like to be proven wrong however (fan of paladins here ), so go ahead and voice your thoughts.

 

[cdrcjsn]

Paladins:
* seem better against single opponents.
* more resilient with better armor, defenses and multiple ways of healing and removing status conditions
* attacks often target other defenses than AC
* better buffs for their allies (Wrath of the Gods, utility 6 is amazing)
* can be a secondary leader

Fighters:
* have an easier time dealing with groups of foes
* does not suffer from multiple attribute dependency as much as the paladin
* has more damaging exploits and hits harder than paladins (that little +1 to hit with weapons comes up a lot)
* can be a secondary striker

Picking one over the other to play seems to be a matter of taste, playstyle and what the rest of the party looks like. Fairly balanced imo.

 

[Nifft]

Fighters have a lot of push/slide powers which make them DEFENDER(controller) characters.

Paladins have a lot of heal/buff powers which make them DEFENDER(leader) characters.

Both are quite good at defending, but I'd give Paladins the edge, because they can more literally keep the back lines alive, thanks to healing.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Surgoshan]

Overall from what I can gather, the paladin deals more damage than the paladin. The paladin however deals more damage when up against foes vulnerable to radiant damage

That just makes me giggle. I'm assuming the first 'paladin' should be 'fighter'?

Yeah, the fighter is all about crowd control, while the paladin is more about locking down the BBEG.

 

[katsci]

In my opinion, the efficiency of paladin and fighter vary most heavily with the part composition, especially the clerics play style. As stated in the Players Handbook, the cleric can be built as a battle cleric (a little less healing, but more damage potential) or a devoted cleric (standing back, trying to stay out of melee combat for the most part). A paladin is likely more potent if paired with a battle cleric, as both have some healing and offensive potential; A fighter may be better fitted to having a devoted cleric, lacking the ability to heal others. The efficiency/power difference no doubt varies based on the encounter, and it may even vary on an adventure or even campaign scale to some degree. (If the campaign is going to be heavy in undead, and other evil stuff, paladin might be a better choice.) In the end it probably all evens out pretty well and depends more on player preference than anything.

 

[Sitara]

I don't see how the paladin is better at fighting the BBEG (unless said BBEG is undead or demonic) since fighter powers seem to do more damage, even on solo's. Again though, I owuld like to be proven wrong. One gem of a power the pally has is the one that allows him, on a successful attack, to make the target vulnerable to radiant damage. Thence comes the pain, as they say.

 

[Fedifensor]

Yeah, the fighter is all about crowd control, while the paladin is more about locking down the BBEG.

Still learning the rules, but I've been writing up a dragonborn paladin for my wife that has Draconic Breath along with Arcane Initiate, taking Thunderwave as the encounter power. Two encounter powers that do damage to an area is a great way to clear the battlefield of minions...

 

[Zurai]

Fighters seem more of a pure Defender to me. Paladins act like a Defender-Leader hybrid. Fighters have tons of powers that revolve around keeping their enemies in melee with the fighter; paladins mostly just hurt enemies if they don't attack the paladin. Basically, fighters prevent the enemies from attacking the squishes, while paladins just punish them later.

That's just my quick-take on the situation, though.

 

[Stalker0]

I think the paladin is a better defender.

More healing + better armor tied in with a better mark. I like the fighter's mark, and it definitely got a boost since DDXP, but I think the paladin has the edge.

I think the fighter is a little more offense on the defenders side of the coin, and the paladin is pure defender.

But both accomplish the role very well.

 

[frankthedm]

Paladin is better if you have sloppy or reckless fools in the party. Giving others your healing surges is great when the idiots burn through theirs left and right.