D&D 4E Stalker0's Alternate 4e Paladin: The Crusader

[Tuft]

I'd imagine the 'all powers use Charisma' applies just to paladin powers being converted over.

Um, the OP says:

Further, if a Crusader is using an implement power from another class, he can use his weapon as if it were the proper implement, and can use his charisma modifier for attack rolls and damage rather than the ability score normally used.

 

[keterys]

Oops, I missed that one and read the later one.

So, yeah, that seems poor unless it applies to all classes pretty much.

 

[Tuft]

Oops, I missed that one and read the later one.

So, yeah, that seems poor unless it applies to all classes pretty much.

I think that should have been included in multiclassing from the beginning.

 

[keterys]

If it applies to all multiclasses, sure - I'm not sure that it's desirable to replace damage as well as attack, however, as it means that you're actually better off not caring about the primary, and caring about the secondary.

So like a wizard will do feylock powers better than a feylock, because it will have identical primary and secondary (Int) instead of split.

 

[sammysamhain]

Hey WoTC, are you listening? This is how it should have been done.

I am waiting for your finished product. Sounds great so far.

Sammy

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

The class itself is OK, but unlike a lot of the other posters here apparently I don't have a problem with marks. Seems to me DI is just another mark that isn't called a mark essentially. Marks allow the designers some control over the effectiveness of certain class features. It seems better to essentially follow that system than to keep inventing endless new ones.

I think switching primary stats of powers simply ends up making it too easy to bolt together cheesy combos to be frank. Multi classing may not have worked out quite the way the designers intended, but it really isn't so bad that we need to wholesale basically allow anyone to pick any power and make it work with their stats. If you want to access a lot of power from a MC then you really need to get the stats to work out for you.

There are certainly some fundamental design issues with 4e, but you can't patch in a fix without more than just superficial stat switching. There REALLY should be just one master power list. Class should simply give you some features and what powers you use should based on that and ability scores. With feats tailored to support specific build concepts then you can use MC strictly to allow acquisition of class features and bonus skills. There is no longer a need for powerswap feats at all at that point. But like I say, you can't just tweak the existing powers, they'd have to all be adjusted and there are plenty that would have to go.

 

[Garthanos]

The class itself is OK, but unlike a lot of the other posters here apparently I don't have a problem with marks. Seems to me DI is just another mark that isn't called a mark essentially. Marks allow the designers some control over the effectiveness of certain class features. It seems better to essentially follow that system than to keep inventing endless new ones.

The exclusivity of marks seems to bother some people.. the non magical marks are a rather simplistic measure of threat / distraction if I understand what they are simulating correctly... only the most recent threat counts. Maybe somebody has a better idea of how to describe them?

There REALLY should be just one master power list. Class should simply give you some features and what powers you use should based on that and ability scores. With feats tailored to support specific build concepts then you can use MC strictly to allow acquisition of class features and bonus skills. There is no longer a need for powerswap feats at all at that point. But like I say, you can't just tweak the existing powers, they'd have to all be adjusted and there are plenty that would have to go.

Should we build a D&D 5.0 wiki with this in mind or is there already one ;-)

 

[Thanlis]

Channel Divinity – The Crusader is not limited to one channel divinity use per encounter.

Can't do this -- a paladin of Tempus, for example, would be able to auto-crit on every hit. Other channel divinity feats create similar problems. You could say that paladins can't use feat powers with channel divinity, but that's a bit patchy for my tastes.

 

[Stalker0]

Can't do this -- a paladin of Tempus, for example, would be able to auto-crit on every hit. Other channel divinity feats create similar problems. You could say that paladins can't use feat powers with channel divinity, but that's a bit patchy for my tastes.

This could be fixed by saying that the powers listed here aren't channel divinity, and then take out the clause about using them without limit.

Although using Tempus isn't a good example, that feat is broken at once per encounter

 

[Thanlis]

This could be fixed by saying that the powers listed here aren't channel divinity, and then take out the clause about using them without limit.

Although using Tempus isn't a good example, that feat is broken at once per encounter

That works. And yeah, Tempus is superbroken.

But they all pretty much break. Bane: every at will becomes a basic melee attack with +Str damage bonus. Berronar's Salve: everyone gets to spend a healing surge whenever they drop to 0 hit points. Chauntea's Blessing: nobody ever fails a saving throw ever again. Glittergold's Gambit: nobody ever misses ever again. (Well, except you.)

No, that's an immediate interrupt, but still. Anyways, the fix you suggest works.