What's the Paladin bring to the table?

[Mercule]

It wasn't too long after 3e was released that I ditched the paladin class from my games. It always struck me as the poster child for base classes that should be prestige classes. Really, what is a paladin besides a religious fighter with a strong moral code? He gets the fighter BAB, but no feats. He gets cleric spells and turn undead, but not as effective. Then, he gets some save bonuses and some pretty minor healing.

When 4e was announced I wondered whether paladin would be included. After I found out the cleric was getting updated, I thought maybe the paladin would end up being the warrior priest that the cleric currently is, and the cleric would be more appropriate to portraying agents of tricksters, sailors, and art patrons. Alas, I don't really have faith that this is the case, with all the emphasis or combat effectiveness, and still expect the cleric to be as good of a secondary skull-crusher as the warlord.

So, I'm once again left wondering what the paladin brings that a fighter/cleric doesn't. With 4e feat-based multi-classing, the paladin may be even less necessary than in 3e. Just play a fighter with some clerical feats and choose a "paladin" paragon path when the time comes.

Am I the only one who wonders this?

I know the play-testers are still under NDAs, but does anyone care to at least say, "Trust me, paladins aren't just fighter/clerics?" Otherwise, I'll find out in a month.

 

[Blackbrrd]

I have seen both in action (although just at level 1), and they played very differently.

The paladin is good at holding aggro and really good at staying alive*, and does ok damage.

The cleric good damage, is ok at staying alive and can't keep aggro.

*even better than the fighter due to lay on hands.

 

[Ximenes088]

Fighter with cleric splash: a defender with 1/day healing word.

Paladin: a defender with 3/day lay on hands and one fewer feat spent.

Sure, you can burn another three feats on swapping out three of your fighter powers for cleric ones, but that costs you 2/3rds of your heroic-tier feats to get something that approximates what paladins get as a baseline. Since the cleric multiclass feat is vastly inferior to paladin LOH, you better hope those three swapped powers are real cherries.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

With the narrowing of multiclassing, I see a continued expansion of base classes for 4e. (Although "base" isn't really an appropriate descriptor anymore, because there are no longer different kinds of classes.) If you remove the paladin in 4e, you're going to remove the Divine Defender role, which may be perfectly fine for some. However, it seems that the two classes are going to operate pretty differently.

 

[malraux]

From what I've seen, the paladin is really good at getting the attention of a single bad guy and really making him target only the paladin, whereas the fighter is pretty good at crowd control. While the paladin also gets some party buffing and healing abilities, its more individually focused than the clerics powers.

 

[Kitirat]

It wasn't too long after 3e was released that I ditched the paladin class from my games. It always struck me as the poster child for base classes that should be prestige classes. Really, what is a paladin besides a religious fighter with a strong moral code? He gets the fighter BAB, but no feats. He gets cleric spells and turn undead, but not as effective. Then, he gets some save bonuses and some pretty minor healing.

When 4e was announced I wondered whether paladin would be included. After I found out the cleric was getting updated, I thought maybe the paladin would end up being the warrior priest that the cleric currently is, and the cleric would be more appropriate to portraying agents of tricksters, sailors, and art patrons. Alas, I don't really have faith that this is the case, with all the emphasis or combat effectiveness, and still expect the cleric to be as good of a secondary skull-crusher as the warlord.

So, I'm once again left wondering what the paladin brings that a fighter/cleric doesn't. With 4e feat-based multi-classing, the paladin may be even less necessary than in 3e. Just play a fighter with some clerical feats and choose a "paladin" paragon path when the time comes.

Am I the only one who wonders this?

I know the play-testers are still under NDAs, but does anyone care to at least say, "Trust me, paladins aren't just fighter/clerics?" Otherwise, I'll find out in a month.

The paladin was one of the most interesting characters to play and DM against so far. He is a defender, but not in the manner of a fighter. He does not hold foes down, he draws foes off allies instead, very different feel. He has healing on the fly, but it is not as good or easy as a cleric and his abilities focus on staying up. I would say he still feels like a mix, but is unique at the same time. He is the guy who can stay up the longest and save his friends (yes he can stay up longer than the cleric).

Here are some of paraphased quotes I can remenber from people I've had play it:
"Most versatile and fun to play of the pregens (Pro 4th Ed, played all 6 at demos)"
"I hate how boring it is, why do I dont play a cleric?" (likes 3.5 more than 4th)
"I think the paladin is my favorite" (4th xp demo, I played ranger in, guy playing the fighter.)
"Why a halfling? Sigh." Later after seeing lost in crowd used: "Not half bad, pardon the pun."
(regular 3.5 player, in same xp demo above.)
"Felt like a video game, but maybe because it was a pregen. At least I was the most powerful." (Pro 3.5. player who is on the fence for 4th, game regular with me.)

that is what I can remember. As a DM, of the pregens, the Pally has been one of the strongest and goes down later than most. And I percieve him as something unique. I would say the warlord feels more like a fighter cleric than the pally.

See ya,
Ken

 

[1of3]

So, I'm once again left wondering what the paladin brings that a fighter/cleric doesn't. With 4e feat-based multi-classing, the paladin may be even less necessary than in 3e. Just play a fighter with some clerical feats and choose a "paladin" paragon path when the time comes.

Am I the only one who wonders this?

Probably yes. You are looking for a reason that there is a Paladin class.

There is no answer. Or perhaps, the answer is that some guy in the distant past - maybe after a couple of beers, maybe sober - made it up. And now it's there.

 

[Blackbrrd]

Its a valid question in 3e, why play a paladin? Personally I would rather play a Fighter/Cleric in 3e who gets a lot more spells, more feats and maybe 2 less bab. Except you will probably find a prc with full bab and 1/2 cleric casting.

 

[PrecociousApprentice]

With the new multiclass feats being restricted to only one extra class, I think that the pally may be good for playing a character with both a divine power source and an arcane power source that is also a good defender. The swordmage could also do this. Paladin(wizard), paladin(warlock) is a decent way to represent a fighter/mage/cleric from previous editions.
Any combiniation of paladin and an arcane character can get divine/arcane/fighter. Same with any combination of swordmage and cleric to get a divine/arcane/fighter. They will feel different depending on the build, but is a good way to get a fighter that is both arcane and divine.

 

[gangrel767]

Defense of the Paladin

I find myself drawn to the defense of the most noble and virtuous of classes.... the Paladin. I have played a few Paladins in my days, both as a player and a Dm. Here are my 2 cents.

***I do want to note that I am an old school player/dm who insists the Paladin always be Lawful Good (or now... Good), so my ideals for them are as such. Therefor I will only speak of my experience and none other.***

While the Paladin can probably be simulated by taking a fighter/cleric mix in any edition of D&D, it will never replace the feel of the Paladin. For me, a class is not only defined by the numbers on the page, but the feel of the class and the Paladin has always been a class that seemed to gel perfectly together. From the gleeming steed they receive as a gift from their god to the fact that they can protect the party, both systematically (in combat) and in social scenarios. They are brave warriors able to slay any foe, especially evil ones. This is a self-less class. A Paladin would be the first one into battle and the last one to leave, not because he loves carnage, but because he needs to protect and ensure safety for those around him. Picture the valiant knight on horseback, seemingly glowing white with his chivalrous virtue... this is your Paladin.

While they are not always my first choice for a class, the Paladin is the class that you are always happy to see added to your party... and later on, you almost always wish you were them.