D&D 4E Paladins - The first 4e class to fail

[Varis]

An inablity to control the field (not 'sticky' compared to a fighter), the MAD stat requirements (especially if you are not a dragonborn) and an alternate (WOW build?) forcing the 'defender' to stand back and use ranged attacks/effects/buffs(aka wow), confirms for me the festering idea that they simply got the Pallys concept wrong.

All it can do, is avoid a few hits and provide a few heals (mainly for themselves, because they have such a low con(MAD) and possibly get themselves killed (preferrably sooner than later).

I'm especially bitter about this because I LOVE pally's - but 4e has just absolutely killed them. I have previously almost exclusively always played them. I figure that if I have abandoned the 4e Paladin as a failed design concept, then, most likely, so have most people (it would be interesting to see a poll of Pally defenders v's Fighter defenders)

I have tried to play a pally with different builds and every time they have been a let down.

I want to be constructive though. Although a 'few heads rolling' and a 'refund' would certainly make me feel a lot better, I instead would like to hear/see about 'sucessfull Paladin builds' (heh, which is probably a contrdictory concept - no,..stay constructive ), especially non dragonborn pallys (human for example).

Please, prove this old, battle hardened believer, that the gods still smile on the malady that has become the paladin.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

I play(ed) a human paladin since we started our 4e campaign. I put the (ed) in there since he isn't quite dead yet, depending on how our last-ditch rescue mission goes next week.

At any rate, my experience differs from yours greatly.

1. I have no MAD. My STR is a 10 and the class plays just fine.

2. I have no idea what ranged build you are talking about. There is an odd ranged implement power here and there but almost all the powers are weapon ones.

3. Who helps (in terms of removing hurty ouchies) other party members more, the paladin or the fighter? Thats right, the paladin. He can heal them, grant them saves, give them bonuses to AC and all kinds of other fun stuff. So what if he isn't as "sticky" as the fighter. Its a different schtick. At no point does WotC say that defender=locks down people so they can't move. The paladin defends the party by occasionally letting someone get by, but then turning around and healing the guy that got whacked.

The paladin isn't bad or broken or vastly inferior to any of the other classes. Your perception of what a defender (and possibly a paladin) should be just doesn't match what came out in the wash.

DS

 

[chaotix42]

Well I must say that the only paladin I've seen in play is a dragonborn, so that right there helps to alleviate the MAD issues a bit. He mixes & matches weapon & implement powers as he levels depending on what he feels has been useful, so we've seen quite a few of the powers in play already. He went Astral Weapon too btw, because it's sweet. Carving A Path Of Light? I could start a fanclub over that name.

What's wrong with the paladin's mark, anyway? If the paladin marks a monster & he's all alone, the monster has to:

a) Move & provoke an OA
b) Make an attack with a -2 penalty
c) Take automatic damage

I feel that's enough to discourage most intelligent monsters from ignoring a paladin, until it notices a bigger threat or has trouble hitting his massive AC (plate + heavy shield).

I also don't think a defender has to be "sticky." That's one of the fighter's cool things, yes. Is the swordmage sticky? Not really. Is it a good defender? I think so. Same thing for the paladin.

Sorry that I got dragonborn in my evidence, btw!

 

[LostSoul]

I am playing a Paladin in an online game - named Varis, actually - who has high Cha (18) and Con (17).

So far I've missed the ability to use Str (10) to do interesting (and outside the rules) combat maneuvers, but otherwise I think he's a very solid character.

I multiclassed with Warlock, Half-Elf so I picked up another Warlock power, so he's got tons of tricks to try. He's less of a Defender than a Fighter, but he can really mess some up.

 

[Hejdun]

As with all dual-ability classes, it's best to choose one ability and ignore the other. In reality, the Paladin has two distinct paths you can go down. There are several problems with this approach, like one path being significantly better than the other in marking. Secondly, there are several levels at which there are no Str-based powers, which seems to be a rather large oversight. But really, the biggest problem with the Paladin is that it has some rather pitiful powers. Even before Martial Power, the fighter had 2nd level utility powers that were head and shoulders above what the Paladin got.

The good thing is that there's a good prospect that Divine Power will un-gimp the Paladin. With some feats to help even out the paths (i.e. perhaps allow Chaladins to use Charisma for melee basic attacks, or Straladins to use Strength with their mark) and more powers to choose from, they can significantly improve. The core of the class is mostly solid, it's just the powers that need some work.

 

[Mengu]

I think half-elf paladins work great. A good array for the mad paladin is 16/14/14/13/10/8, so you end up with Str 14, Con 15, Dex 10, Int 8, Wis 14, Cha 18. The only high stat you need is charisma, and 18's good enough.

I think you want to improve your leader like abilities. Picking one of the better channel divinity feats is a good idea to have another good option if you don't need divine mettle. Melora's Tide, Raven Queen's Blessing, or Harmony of Erathis are some good ones.

You pretty much have to use a sword. Bastard sword is an option if you have the feat for it.

Group insight is another nice leaderlike boost. Student of Battle is nice addition to the healing arsenal. Toughness and Durable are always good.

For powers, again going for the most leaderlike powers is helpful. Righteous Smite is a pretty fantastic encounter power. If you find you don't have another defender, Piercing Smite is good for marking multiple targets. Wrath of the Gods will make you the controller's, the ranger's, and the tempest fighter's best friend. The bigger the group, the more devastating this power is.

I think where paladin's lack in class features, they make up for it with some phenomenal attack and utility powers.

From a group composition perspective if you want two defenders, paladin is a great option for the second. Except for a 2-3 man group, paladins would fall short as an only defender, they definitely need to be paired up with another (fighter, warden, swordmage, doesn't matter).

For some other group dynamics tips, I've seen Enfeebling Strike and Illusory Ambush in conjunction, and it's very crippling. Disheartening Strike will also combo well with these. A -4 or -6 penalty against a paladin in plate and shield is tough for many monsters.

Some interesting Diletante powers for the half-elf paladin are Eyebite, Furious Smash, and Burning Spray.

 

[Mallus]

As far as I'm concerned, the 4e paladin is the first one worth playing.

The class isn't meant to be as sticky as a fighter, it's meant to challenge single tough opponents, buff/debuff, destroy undead, and rock social situations.

 

[Solodan]

I agree, paladins are the first class to "Fail"

Or, more specifically, the first class to be completely outclassed by another class (Though melee rangers may argue, and technically it'll be a tie with wizards, as invokers may arguablly outclass good old wiz).

Avenger, though a striker, pretty much can do everything a pally can do in theory. Sure, the avenger doesn't have the mark, but has the AC, provides a suitable enough threat to lockdown a single target. Heck, one of the oaths is "Mark-like" in that if someone tries to get away, they suffer for it.

If the avenger takes certain Channel Divinity (Raven Queen, for example) then the avenger will also be able to heal just as good as a pally with a non-healing CD.

The nice thing is that 4E is balanced *enough* that a weak class can still do OK, hold its own and all. It doesn't change the fact that it is a few steps down from some other classes, and not even the best divine defender when push comes to shove.

Hopefully, fingers crossed, Divine Power gives pallys a boost in much the same way fighter's got bumped in martial power.

We'll have to see, as I also am a huge fan of the pally. I have fond memories of rolling my first 18 way back in AD&D and that opened up the 18 charisma I needed to play that lawful good class we all remember. Nostalgia can only go so far, and makes the current pally even more painful to watch.

Here's to hoping!

 

[Lord Sessadore]

Personally, I don't really see where paladins fall so short. They have a little more MAD than most classes, but a little prioritizing goes a long way. But really, they have the potential to have the best all-around defenses off the bat, they get some positively wicked powers.

Sure, they aren't as sticky as a fighter. No defender is. But you know what? Fighters can miss their combat superiority attacks, paladins can't miss with DC. It's guaranteed damage, and radiant at that, if the challenge gets violated. Also, the "several levels without Str powers" really means "there's no level 9 Str daily". That's easily solved with multiclassing, at least until DP comes out.

Also, I don't think the paladin will be overshadowed by the Avenger. The avenger can't heal and doesn't seem to give his allies many leadery bonuses. This is a big part of the paladin. Paladins are defender/leader, avengers are striker/controller - they're one-on-one duelists. They both punish their targets for not going one-on-one, but for different reasons - the paladin punishes for not focusing attacks on the paladin, the avenger punishes for not letting the avenger cut you up.

With a little careful handling, a paladin can be a very solid, potent class.

 

[Dionysos]

My game has been going for 8 months now, and one guy in it has been playing a Paladin the entire time. He levelled his character up from 1 to 12 (so far). He is quite the power gamer, and he thinks his Paladin is his favorite character that he has ever played.

For the first few levels, there WAS a general consensus in the group that the Fighter was a generally more useful combatant than the Paladin. They came about even at a certain point and since about level 9 or 10 or so, most of us think the Paladin actually outclasses the Fighter a bit.

The Fighter is still rather more "sticky", but the Paladin's marks get the job done. The the Paladin is AT LEAST as tough as the Fighter, though, and his heals and buffs (Wrath of the Gods is INSANE) make him a generally more useful character to have around.

Maybe the Paladin "fails" a tiny bit at the beginning of Heroic tier. After he picks up some momentum, though, he rocks the proverbial socks.

Our group is a large one, and amongst its members are said Paladin and Fighter, as well as a recently-added Swordmage. In this group, with all extant defenders represented, most of our group would say that the Paladin is the least dispensible of the three.

I think that the reason people get too fixated on the Fighter's hyper-stickiness is that they don't play enough to realize that ALL 4e PCs are a lot more resilient now than they were in previous editions. It isn't like in 3.x where, if a melee-focused bad guy got a full attack against the Wizard then said mage was probably toast. The Wizard now can take quite a few hits himself, as his HP and AC are not just a small fraction of the defenders' comparative values.

So, in a party where the main defender is a Paladin, it is probably true that the squishies will get hit a bit more. Not a heck of a lot more, though, and the Paladin's healing, buffing and low-end control abilites more than compensate.

So, no, the Paladin class is far from a failure.

PS: none of this is to say that the Fighter or Swordmage are weak classes. I think they are great too. But people need to actually give the Paladin a chance in play to see it shine. A couple sessions at very low levels won't do it.