When is a Paladin better to have in a fight than a Fighter?

[D-Man]

Ever? One of the Paladin's primary purposes is to destroy evil, but a Fighter's +4 damage from Greater Weapon Specialization will exceed a Paladin's Smite Attack damage in most fights (do to iterative attacks), sometimes even in one round, and its never "used up" as long as the Fighter has the weapon.

So what am I missing about Paladins. Is there ever a fight where there'd be an inclination to say, "Man I wish we had a Paladin" as opposed to a Fighter?

 

[Pyrex]

When you're fighting something that inflicts a nasty disease.

When you need to heal the person you're rescuing so they don't die before the fight ends.

When you're in an encounter where the front-line is being forced to make several successive will saves (Umber Hulks, etc...).

When fighting undead.

Fighters have their niche, but so do Paladins.

 

[Whisper72]

Uhmm.... when he is holding his holy avenger and has the whole protection from evil aura?? The fact he can lay on hands?? The fact that, if you do not have a cleric on hand, he can turn undead fairly decently as well, and een if you DO have another cleric type, he can mop up those whom the cleric did not have enuff oomph for?? The fact that at higher levels he can throw around a few spells??

Depends a bit therefore how you define 'fight'. Is it the extended combat encounter or only a one-on-one smashfest.

 

[MDSnowman]

When is he better?

Anytime you need to make a saving throw.

Between the decent wisdom and Charisma pretty much required to be an effective paladin there's practilly no chance you'll be failing the average will save. Toss in a holy avenger and you're golden.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

A Paladin is also more valuable against spellcasters. He can still do plenty of damage to take them down, and at the same time is far less vulnerable to spells thanks to Divine Grace. At mid- to high-levels, his saves will be on par with the monk's, possibly better.

I know the original question specified a fight, but a Paladin also has a lot of value outside of a fight that a fighter does not. Diplomacy makes a Paladin much better at interacting with NPCs than a fighter.

 

[Felix]

A mounted Paladin beats out a mounted Fighter.

Specially when he's riding an intelligent celestial pegasus and the fighter is riding his Heavy Warhorse.

 

[D-Man]

I was just speaking with regard to hurtin' evil folks. Seems like a Fighter would put down an evil foe quicker than the Paladin 95% of the time.

All those feats, plus the exclusive +2 to hit and +4 damage due to Greater Weapon Focus/Specialization.

And I was definitely thinking an extended fight. A Paladin's Smite Evil would be great for a one or two hit duel but when its drawn out and the Fighter gets +4 on every iterative attack. Wham, wham, wham. In one round a 12th level Fighter did the same as a 12th level Paladin's Smite, and he's got more where that came from, each and every round.

But you can't hurt bad guys if you fail a crucial Will Save and are taken out of the fight, so Paladins definitely have that going for them. But I don't think those kinds of encounters make up 50% or more of the battles PC's face.

And if the mounts were equal I don't see how the Paladin would outshine a mounted Fighter. Of course, the mounts are rarely equal but still....

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Ever? One of the Paladin's primary purposes is to destroy evil, but a Fighter's +4 damage from Greater Weapon Specialization will exceed a Paladin's Smite Attack damage in most fights (do to iterative attacks), sometimes even in one round, and its never "used up" as long as the Fighter has the weapon.

So what am I missing about Paladins. Is there ever a fight where there'd be an inclination to say, "Man I wish we had a Paladin" as opposed to a Fighter?

Blend Power Attack, a few Smite Evils (With a good Charisma, the Paladin's primary stat) and a two handed weapon and your Paladin is going to single handedly take down the main threat on the field - the fighter normally can't fulfill this role quite as effectively as a Paladin. Leave the grunt work to the cleaving fighter who can mow down numerous lesser opponents with his or her feats.

This is not to mention superior saves (go that charisma), a lay on hands (Charisma again) that brings the other group fighter back to full health followed by a mount that is better at hacking up the bad guys than anyone else in the party - go the Dire Lion - and talk of weapon specialization is simply not an issue.
Not to mention that your diplomacy skills should be out the kahootz (Charisma again) for when you are not fighting, you have a package that can easily stand alongside of the best fighters around. Both classes are good and many would actually say that the Paladin is slightly better. However, which ever way you choose to look at it, the Paladin is a powerful member of any group.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Urbanmech]

Well a paladin with Divine Favor, (not sure if that is the right feat) from Complete Warrior, can spend a turning attempt and add his Charisma bonus to damage to each attack. At high levels this can easily be more than +4 per hit. Granted he could only do that as many rounds as he had turn attempts but it still is good in a pinch.

 

[DaveStebbins]

But you can't hurt bad guys if you fail a crucial Will Save and are taken out of the fight, so Paladins definitely have that going for them. But I don't think those kinds of encounters make up 50% or more of the battles PC's face.

It doesn't have to happen often. The Paladin will always be a capable fighter, but unlikely to outshine the fighter in pure damage-dealing (which is the fighter's forte). But the Paladin only has to make that crucial save and single-handedly save the day once in while to be worth his weight in gold pieces to a party. Plus that Aura of Courage thing is REAL handy against those enemies which radiate a fear effect (which targets what is usually the Fighter's weakest save).

-Dave