Paladins mark "fix" a plazebo?

[Derren]

Of course, one neat angle of this challenge is that it gives the monsters a way out of it!

Paladin challenges you. On your next turn you run away from him and round a corner so that the paladin can neither attack you or move adjacent to you. Bingo! mark goes away!

(this *does* fix the original mark problem of creatures being 'marked for life' as it were)

Cheers

And get an AoO from the melee characters and give the PCs a chance to heal and reorganise. And as soon as the monster comes back it is mark time again. This tactic is about as useful as a monster marking a other monster to override the paladins mark, maybe even less.

 

[mach1.9pants]

I thought the 'problem' was a paladin marking someone then just going away? Other wise this is a valid tactic, using synergy with the 2 characters abilities, just like the designers wanted. The Pal cannot just leave the mark on and leave the country! So the choice of the baddies is not good but there will be other powers that leave the monster in a bad position...and they are supposed to!
It is also a nerf for the pal wasting his standard actions on a bow rather than using at will or other powers.
And the range is not bow range but burst 5 IIRC.

As Hong would say 'it is a feature not a bug'

 

[FireLance]

And get an AoO from the fighter next to it.
Remember what the problem was in te Delve? The Paladin marking the enemy and the fighter lockingit into place so that the enemy either has to move past the fighter, getting AoOs, to attack the paladin, has to attack the fighter being damaged by the paladins mark or doing nothing which is just bad battle tactic.

Or good synergy between the fighter and the paladin.

And this change does not fix this problem at all.
Also the attack doesn't even need to have a realistic chance of hitting. The paladin can mark the enemy and then run away while firing arrows from extreme range at the enemy which only hit on a 20 and it would work

I think the key constraint on this tactic will be how much space there is to maneuver around. The maximum range of a longbow might theoretically be 40 squares (based on the Ranger pregen sheet), but indoors, in a confined space, the maximum practical range is likely to be shorter.

As I previously noted, this tactic is still very effective against an opponent with no ranged attacks. However, opponents that have ranged attacks can attack him back. This means that they might still draw an AOO from the fighter, either for the ranged attack or for shifting away from him, but the challenged opponent still has the chance of avoiding damage while doing something productive.

In addition, if the challenged opponent has allies, one or more of them can maneuver to engage the paladin, making it difficult or risky to continue making ranged attacks against his challenged opponent.

Except that this is not the goal of this tactic. The paladin is not drawing the enemy away from someone else as this tactic requires the monster to not be able to attack the paladin, either through a fighter lock or range, so that it suffers automatic damage every round.

This "fix" doesn't fix this exploit at all.It just requires the paladin to not run away past bow range.

Like I said, there are two issues here. The first is whether it is too effective, and as mentioned, it still works very well against opponents with only melee attack capability, but it is now less effective against opponents with ranged attack capability.

The other is whether a defender needs to be in melee in order to defend. As previously stated, as long as the paladin can still draw his challenged opponent's attacks, he need not be in melee with it to function as a defender.

 

[WhatGravitas]

The paladin can mark the enemy and then run away while firing arrows from extreme range at the enemy which only hit on a 20 and it would work.

Well, that would make most of his melee attacks useless, no?

But even with a fighter-lock, it only affects a certain type of targets: Creatures without good movement abilities and ranged attacks. The restriction on attacks for the paladin, goes a long way - bow range is similar to the range of ranged attacks of the critters.

And that's the kicker: What if there's more than one target? Unless we're talking about encounters with a solo monster (like a dragon), but these guys usually have good movement AND superior ranged abilities - like a breath weapon.

And due to the "must attack" clause, the paladin must keep a line of effect and line of sight to the target, so he cannot hide from the enemy - the enemy will always have a way to get to the paladin.

And you're surely right: A combination of two defenders can produce dangerous lose/lose-situations for an enemy. But in any case, it only works on a single enemy. And even with a melee attack clause for the paladin, this wouldn't have changed (reach weapons go a looong way).

So, the fix is probably not the most elegant one, but it fixes the problem to a sufficient amount. It's not a placebo.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Deep Blue 9000]

I thought the 'problem' was a paladin marking someone then just going away? Other wise this is a valid tactic, using synergy with the 2 characters abilities, just like the designers wanted. The Pal cannot just leave the mark on and leave the country! So the choice of the baddies is not good but there will be other powers that leave the monster in a bad position...and they are supposed to!
It is also a nerf for the pal wasting his standard actions on a bow rather than using at will or other powers.
And the range is not bow range but burst 5 IIRC.

As Hong would say 'it is a feature not a bug'

The paladin mark only has range 5 to apply it but after that it is sustained by making ranged attacks against the target out to the bow's maximum range. And pre-nerf the mark was so powerful to make it worth giving up the paladin's melee damage to gain the mark damage. Since the nerf did not reduce the mark's damage, this is still the case.

Some people think that a paladin's best combat option to be to run away from his enemies to be a bug as it is completely out of character for the class.

 

[mach1.9pants]

The paladin mark only has range 5 to apply it but after that it is sustained by making ranged attacks against the target out to the bow's maximum range. And pre-nerf the mark was so powerful to make it worth giving up the paladin's melee damage to gain the mark damage. Since the nerf did not reduce the mark's damage, this is still the case.

gotcha, quite powerful but still requiring 2 defenders to gang up. IMO that is OK, 2 defenders working together should be very effective.

Some people think that a paladin's best combat option to be to run away from his enemies to be a bug as it is completely out of character for the class.

Depends on the paladins god and or philosophy. I don't think that engaging a baddie with a bow is 'running away' (the original could have running away, I guess, but I ignored it 'cos it was quickly superceded). A pal of an archery god or hunting god or just a pal of vengeance would be fine.

So, I can see why people aren't happy but:
1. Two defenders working together should be really tough on the monsters
2. As long as the pal is still engaging the baddies I have no problems, character wise.

ps Do we know that the mark still does the same damage?

 

[FireLance]

By the way, it may also be possible that paladins aren't proficient with good ranged weapons. The D&D XP sample paladin uses a throwing hammer with a maximum range of 10 squares, and the Keep on the Shadowfell dragonborn paladin uses a javelin (maximum range unknown). It could be that, like the warlord, the paladin is only proficient with simple ranged weapons. This makes the tactic of maintaining the challenge at range a shade more unattractive, except for elf paladins who are automatically proficient with bows (and maybe challenging at range is not entirely inappropriate, flavor-wise, for an elf paladin).

 

[Cadfan]

Not to mention, an exploit that requires two characters to pull off, requires the paladin to use a non standard paladin weapon that isn't compatible with his other abilities, and puts one of the party's defenders in the back row shooting arrows, isn't an exploit.

I mean, for crying out loud, you'd get better overall damage by rolling up a Ranger.

I'm not bothered by an "exploit" that lets a paladin mimic a sub par ranger if and only if someone helps him do it.

 

[Derren]

By the way, it may also be possible that paladins aren't proficient with good ranged weapons. The D&D XP sample paladin uses a throwing hammer with a maximum range of 10 squares, and the Keep on the Shadowfell dragonborn paladin uses a javelin (maximum range unknown). It could be that, like the warlord, the paladin is only proficient with simple ranged weapons. This makes the tactic of maintaining the challenge at range a shade more unattractive, except for elf paladins who are automatically proficient with bows (and maybe challenging at range is not entirely inappropriate, flavor-wise, for an elf paladin).

Nonprofiency only means that you won't get the specific weapon bonus (bows get a + to attack I think) but when you go so far away that you only hit with a 20 anyway this doesn't matter.
And you forget muticlassing. A single ability from a ranger, wizard or warlock removes that "not effective at range" as might using magical items (depending on what they can do).

Not to mention, an exploit that requires two characters to pull off, requires the paladin to use a non standard paladin weapon that isn't compatible with his other abilities, and puts one of the party's defenders in the back row shooting arrows, isn't an exploit.

I mean, for crying out loud, you'd get better overall damage by rolling up a Ranger.

I'm not bothered by an "exploit" that lets a paladin mimic a sub par ranger if and only if someone helps him do it.

And still many people reported that this tactic made the dragon combat a lot easier or was even the decisive factor for winning the battle.

 

[DevoutlyApathetic]

This "fix" is particularly inelegant.