As I understand it, almost all character classes have at least a couple of fundamental build options of which one must be chosen at the beginning of the character creation process (i.e. a Ranger has to choose between a bow and dual melee weapons, a Warlock has to choose a Pact etc). Then, when a new book comes out for that class, it gives a new option or two.
However, the Paladin does not really follow this format since his "build options" are just choosing Str or Cha as the primary stat. Does this mean that the new build will just be a bunch of new powers to support a different primary stat? If so, what do you think the new stat will be and how are the current class features (Divine Challenge/Strength/Mettle) going to work since they are all Str/Cha based?
My guess is there's going to be a lot of Strength powers for Paladins in Divine Power, because there sure weren't in the Player's Handbook. :P
Likely possibilities would be a paladin that gets a "divine mount" option
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that it is a feat, quite similar to the Arcane Familiar feats. Unless, of course, they make it an important part of the build, like Rangers do with their Beast Companion.
If that is the case, maybe they'll give the new build a different marking ability and replace the built-in Channel Divinities (Strength and Mettle) with something completely new. Maybe something like the bolded section of the following:
Listing of Sources for all Confirmed Info on Future Products
Divine Power
-Work was done on diety domains and portfolios for a core rule book, Source
-There will be a sidebar converting domains and portfolios to Realm dieties, Source
-New builds for cleric; paladin; invoker; and avenger, Source
-Includes new powers; feats; paragon paths; and epic destinies, Source
-Will include ways for paladin to shrug off negative status effects, Source
-Sample Domains
-Rise of the Raven Queen
So it sounds like most people are expecting an exchange of class features to form the basis of a new build. That seems a bit weird to me since the two original builds will then be identical and the new build will have a different set of features. I guess there is nothing really wrong with that but it just seems odd to me.
If that is the case, maybe they'll give the new build a different marking ability and replace the built-in Channel Divinities (Strength and Mettle) with something completely new. Maybe something like the bolded section of the following:
I dont find it that odd. There were numerous new class features offered in Martial Power, such as the battlerager and tempest fighter builds. There may very well be paladins with a different marking mechanism/channel divinity abilities.
So it sounds like most people are expecting an exchange of class features to form the basis of a new build. That seems a bit weird to me since the two original builds will then be identical and the new build will have a different set of features. I guess there is nothing really wrong with that but it just seems odd to me.
You mean, just like the fighter or ranger? ;)
You mean, just like the fighter or ranger? ;)
Maybe I'm not explaining myself very clearly? My point was that I thought it would be strange that the Avenging and Protecting Paladins share the exact same class features but a new build would have different ones. You are saying that the Ranger/Fighter follow that same trend but (unless I am missing something) that is not true. :P The two original Ranger builds had separate class features to differentiate them and so it seems natural for the newest Beast Mastery build to follow that trend. (Same with Fighter classes to a lesser extent)
Don't get me wrong, I fully believe this could be how WotC creates the new Paladin build, I just think it would be strange for two builds to share the exact same features and have a third one with a completely different set.
If there are going to be alternate Paladin features, they should be alternate versions of Divine Challenge. Divine Challenge works well for the Cha Paladin, and considerably less well for the Str Paladin. As far as class features go, this seems like the place where options would be appreciated.
Yeah, I always thought it seemed a little strange that there was no Str bonus to Divine Challenge since that would make each main stat contribute to an equal number of class features:
STR - Divine Strength, Divine Challenge
CHA - Divine Mettle, Divine Challenge
Maybe they did it to help balance out the weak opportunity attacks of Cha-based Paladins.
My point was that I thought it would be strange that the Avenging and Protecting Paladins share the exact same class features but a new build would have different ones. You are saying that the Ranger/Fighter follow that same trend but (unless I am missing something) that is not true. :P The two original Ranger builds had separate class features to differentiate them and so it seems natural for the newest Beast Mastery build to follow that trend. (Same with Fighter classes to a lesser extent)
Don't get me wrong, I fully believe this could be how WotC creates the new Paladin build, I just think it would be strange for two builds to share the exact same features and have a third one with a completely different set.
The Fighter builds in PH1 have Fighter Weapon Talent, the two builds in MP swap out Fighter Weapon Talent for one of two new class features.
The Ranger builds in PH1 have Prime Shot and choose a fighting style. If you take the MP (beastmaster) build you give up Prime Shot and don't choose one of the fighting styles.
Both situations involve giving up a class feature that the PH1 builds share to get a new class feature specific to the build in MP.
Maybe the STR one would not be an immediate punishement but would give you a bonus equal to your STR mod on your next attack when they dare defy your challenge! You wouldn't be as sticky as a fighter (though you'd have better basic attack than a CHAladin without the need for a feat) but you would be pretty darn good at the punishement part.
Maybe the WIS one would bring out the leader side of the Paladin even more, no only giving out some punishement to the opponent but a boon to your ally!
Maybe they did it to help balance out the weak opportunity attacks of Cha-based Paladins.
I'm certain that is why they did it, but, with the Melee Training feat in play now, it is unbalanced again. Therefore, I find it likely that Divine Challenge will get an alternate version ... just makes sense.
Yours,
Lord Dreadman
That said, I'm seeing either Lay on Hands or Divine Challenge getting alternate versions or being lost in favour of Paladin Mount or something to that extent. A mount could make a more movable Paladin - more like a Crusader sort of archetype. I could see them getting a different marking ability related to their mount and losing Divine Challenge, and maybe also loosing Lay on Hands to adjust for the huge bonus the mount would give to speed.
There will definitely be a new Channel Divinity power at least. For divine characters, every build has a Channel Divinity power that's keyed to the build. So the new build will have a new Channel Divinity keyed to it as well.
That said, I'm seeing either Lay on Hands or Divine Challenge getting alternate versions or being lost in favour of Paladin Mount or something to that extent. A mount could make a more movable Paladin - more like a Crusader sort of archetype. I could see them getting a different marking ability related to their mount and losing Divine Challenge, and maybe also loosing Lay on Hands to adjust for the huge bonus the mount would give to speed.
I don't know... Lay on Hands is pretty iconic for the Paladin class. Taking that away would be like having a cleric without a Turn Undead ability or a Thief without a big damage sneak attack ability. But, I suppose anything is possible.
Also, why does everyone expect the Paladin to get a mount? Forgive me if the topic has been beaten to death already but it doesn't seem like a very feasible feature since mounts are not very versatile. What is the Paladin going to do with his mount in a cramped dungeon with ladders and narrow walkways? What happens when the mounted Paladin walks over a pit-trap or has to scale a wall or swim in deep water?
My guess is that new builds will be based on different marking mechanics (different from Divine Challenge) and perhaps different default Channel Divinity powers.
If I wanted a special mount, I would have spent gold on it. Gold was much easier to come by than class features, and I always resented having to have a huge portion of my personal power shunted off into a secondary target with less HP and weaker defenses. In 4e, buy a mount with an interesting mount ability and take Mounted Combat. There, done.
I expect mounts to be handled the way Arcane Power handled familiars. No more, no less. No, it's not going to be an alternative class feature because it would be pointless to give out a feature that's only useful in open terrain.
Yeah, that's pretty much what I was thinking.
My guess is that new builds will be based on different marking mechanics (different from Divine Challenge) and perhaps different default Channel Divinity powers.
Man I hope so! I feel like the current class features are sorta wasted on my Straladin. (I know I know, it's MY fault for building a Straladin and not a Chaladin ;) )
Spending a single feat on a mount that could be summoned out of thin air isn't too bad a deal.
Could be, but it would depend on how much time you spend in a dungeon; mounts are usually a lot less useful indoors, of course. That's always been the flaw in that class feature.
Could be, but it would depend on how much time you spend in a dungeon; mounts are usually a lot less useful indoors, of course. That's always been the flaw in that class feature.
Mount as class feature is painful, if it is replacing something else. Feats in 4E are cheap. So are items and rituals, if they want to put the mount in those resources.
Mount as class feature is painful, if it is replacing something else. Feats in 4E are cheap. So are items and rituals, if they want to put the mount in those resources.
Could a mount be as effective as a ranger beast companion? Isn't that sort of an objective litmus test for its viability as a class feature?
What if there were something like "mount specialization" as a mutliclass, like the weapon specialist options?
Could a mount be as effective as a ranger beast companion? Isn't that sort of an objective litmus test for its viability as a class feature?
What if there were something like "mount specialization" as a mutliclass, like the weapon specialist options?
A beast companion is medium and mve on its own. A special mount would have to be LARGE and would only be useful moving along with you, so the tactical uses would be diminished greatly.
Spending a single feat on a mount that could be summoned out of thin air isn't too bad a deal.
I'd feel a little too much like a Power Ranger calling down my mount from space :D
I'd feel a little too much like a Power Ranger calling down my mount from space :D
You could always keep it in a pokemon ball instead like the paladins in order of the stick.
There will definitely be a new Channel Divinity power at least. For divine characters, every build has a Channel Divinity power that's keyed to the build. So the new build will have a new Channel Divinity keyed to it as well.
That said, I'm seeing either Lay on Hands or Divine Challenge getting alternate versions or being lost in favour of Paladin Mount or something to that extent. A mount could make a more movable Paladin - more like a Crusader sort of archetype. I could see them getting a different marking ability related to their mount and losing Divine Challenge, and maybe also loosing Lay on Hands to adjust for the huge bonus the mount would give to speed.
This.
I still see a STR or CHA based paladin. But there are ideas.
A replacement for LOH that deals damage
A STR based mark, like a free flying charge like the swordmage but more divine.
Or the mount could attack as part of the mark.
The Avenging Paladin is suggested to take Str primary, Cha secondary, and Wis tertiary. The Protecting Paladin is suggested to take Cha primary, Str secondary, and Wis tertiary. It would be nice if Str powers often had a "kicker" from Cha, and vice versa. That would solve most of the issues with builds for the Paladin.
The problem with the Paladin in the PHB is that the suggested builds (Avenging and Protecting) are not backed up by the powers. Many powers have Wis as the secondary boost, which incites many players to make that their next best stat (after Str or Cha). The effect is to cut your power selection in half (or less, if you are Strength focused).
The Avenging Paladin is suggested to take Str primary, Cha secondary, and Wis tertiary. The Protecting Paladin is suggested to take Cha primary, Str secondary, and Wis tertiary. It would be nice if Str powers often had a "kicker" from Cha, and vice versa. That would solve most of the issues with builds for the Paladin.
On the contrary I think it would just make them more MAD for no reason. One attack stat is all that's needed.
On the contrary I think it would just make them more MAD for no reason. One attack stat is all that's needed.
As long as the available powers fully support only having one attack stat. The current Str-based powers are significantly fewer (and usually weaker) than the Charisma powers. This is partially due to the fact that Charisma can be used with both implement and weapon powers while Strength can only be used with weapons. Most of my issues with the Straladin would vanish if a few good Str-based powers could be strategically added to certain levels (level 9 has NO Str-based power for example). Oh, and some improved early-level utility powers would be nice too. :D
Most of my issues with the Straladin would vanish if a few good Str-based powers could be strategically added to certain levels (level 9 has NO Str-based power for example).
Indeed, fortunately that should no longer be a problem after Divine Power. The power books so far have added about 6 new powers per level for the classes covered. So STR paladins are probably looking at getting at least 2-4 new powers per level.
Through in a STR based alternative to Divine Challenge and everything should be pretty much perfect.
A STR-based alternate to Divine Challenge would be a step in the right direction, but Paladins will need more feats/powers/features that improve their Divine Challenge, as well, if they want to compete with Fighters. Right now, the consequences for ignoring the mark are pitiful.
Maybe, but it's always seemed to me that the inherent -2 attack penalty of the marked condition has always been the most important ability of a defender. The ability to add a form of punishment on top of that has always seemed more like icing to me.
Maybe, but it's always seemed to me that the inherent -2 attack penalty of the marked condition has always been the most important ability of a defender. The ability to add a form of punishment on top of that has always seemed more like icing to me.
The amount of iceing though seems to be the difference between the classes marks. Fighters and Shielding SM's would seem to have the full Wedding Cake do-over, while Pallies have some what less. (Not counting a couple of PP's that is)
first, I'm glad to join this forum (I'm french, so, sorry for my poor english).
For the paladin, I realy love this class but it seems that paladin needs more than 3 carac for being realy competitive. Dex and Con are important for tank but we can't put points everywhere... so... I Love Cha-tankadin... and i love shields, but in my advice, this item wasn't developed by any class... so... I hope that the futur class feature will be based on the "Shield spec" maybe with the introduction of Con as a tertiary Stat...
The classic mount feature would make me happy. I remember one game when our Paladin and his Celestial War Horse both used smite on the same foe and made it a very sad puppy. If they do bring it back, I'm sure they'll do the summoned mount style again.
Perhaps it would be cool if the mount had powers that were leader/controller oriented, where the mount does 'something', and allies benefit or foes suffer.
Simple errata, and voila, the DC becomes competitive again.
Well, the most frustrating part about the mark is that it's easily boosted with simple errata, but it hasn't been done. WOTC seems to be dragging its feet on this. Just change the damage numbers (5/10/15 would be preferred) and remove the paragraph about the whole engagement clause. The clause was the result of backlash against a poorly designed encounter at DDXP '08, solved nothing, and only restricted the Paladin unnecessarily.
Simple errata, and voila, the DC becomes competitive again.
I have to say that after reading the thread linked in your sig, I agree. However, what I find even more mind boggling is the fact that, to my knowledge, WoTC has yet to clairify how Divine Challange is supposed to work. I know how I interpet it but I can also see how people with the other view could see it the way they do. After multiple exhaustive threads without any meaningful conclusion, I am suprised there has not been an official clairification.
Just further confirmation that the engagement clause was added without much foresight.
I think the greatest indictment is the Champion of Order utility None Shall Pass. That power was clearly written without an engagement clause in mind, as there's nothing that spells out how to maintain the mark against two enemies (Unless you're adjacent to them both? And that's gonna happen how often?)
Somewhat true, though a reasonable interpretation would be that engaging either of the targets is enough to maintain both marks.
I'm currently playing a paladin and personally I like the engagement clause. I find that it invokes a very appropriate flavor. Leave marking one target and engaging a different target for the swordmage. I like my paladins to charge headlong into battle against their designated foe.
To Wit:
- They have two attack stats (already a negative) but unlock the Warlock, whose striker mechanic (curse) is compeltely divorced from Stats, their is sitting right on top of CHA
- The STR Pal does not have enough (or any) powers at every level - This is the one that CAN be rectified by DP
- The -2 of a mark means NOTHING on its own. Consider the following. A paladin has an AC of 31 at level 11 (not unusual) and his buddy the rogue has an AC of 25 (also normal) if the only penalty to a monster adjacent to both is -2 to hit, guess what, 27 is still lower that 31 AND its on a squishie. 10 points of radiant damage doesn't change that equaltion much, but a 30 dmg melee basic from a fighter sure does
- The paladin's mark (as above) is too weak, no only in its punishment, but in its restictions. The engagement clause is bunk - See litigation's post fo further proof.
- They have MAD issues beyond attack stats. The three other defenders (Fighter/Warden/SM) have a build where Con, i.e. Toughness, figures in to the build in some way. It is at the least a tertiary stat. For paladins it doesn't even rate. So even though they have more surges base, they often get dwarfed by Fighters and even Shielding SM
I frankly do not see how all of these issues can be solved with one Power Book or one new build. What is worse is that I love paladin, I love this class and some of the ideas are spot on (Lay on Hands, Cha to attack for some powers, etc)
The solution?
They should have been Cha Primary - Wis/Con secondary. All attacks should run off of Cha and Wis should have been the Heal focused (Leader) build with Con the tank (Super Defender) focused build. Of course, this is the benefit of Hindsight and I in no way blame the original designers. Everything is a learning process and frankly it may be the fault of the community that they can not change it as at this point people would claim it was a shameless attempt to grab more cash rather than a (needed) fix.
- They have two attack stats (already a negative) but unlock the Warlock, whose striker mechanic (curse) is compeltely divorced from Stats, their is sitting right on top of CHA
Technically this can also be easily fixed by Divine Power. The previous power books have included new class features for most of the classes covered. Giving paladins a STR based mark as an alternate class feature.
As for the current Divine Challenge, a few feats (something the power books are also known for) could go a long way to making it a better mark.
As for the current Divine Challenge, a few feats (something the power books are also known for) could go a long way to making it a better mark.
I've seen several posts mention the idea of using feats to make the Divine Challange more effective. Personally, I don't like the idea of using feats to bring something up to an effective level or make it a truely viable option. IMO, feats should be used to add little bonuses (cherry on top) instead of "fixing" weak features. We only get so many feats and there are a LOT of great feat options, why should I waste one to fix a broken class feature? Nevermind the fact that with the new Channel Divinity feats and Domains, I suspect the Paladin is going to have a LOT more feat options.
I've seen several posts mention the idea of using feats to make the Divine Challange more effective. Personally, I don't like the idea of using feats to bring something up to an effective level or make it a truely viable option. IMO, feats should be used to add little bonuses (cherry on top) instead of "fixing" weak features. We only get so many feats and there are a LOT of great feat options, why should I waste one to fix a broken class feature? Nevermind the fact that with the new Channel Divinity feats and Domains, I suspect the Paladin is going to have a LOT more feat options.
All true, but Divine Challenge isn't nearly as brokenly bad as some make it out to be either (at least not for CHA focused paladins). The damage might be minimal but it is guaranteed, unlike the fighter's granted attack. It also doesn't require an action when triggered, thus leaving the paladin still able to take other immediate actions, again unlike the fighter (or for that matter swordmage and warden as well). The enemy also can't avoid triggering it by removing themselves from adjacency, again unlike the fighter (granted retreating from a fighter isn't easy but it can be done, teleporting being a good way).
Finally, the most important part of marking the, -2 penalty works just fine. I've said it before and I'll say it again, "everything else is just icing". The paladin's icing might be a little thinner but it's undeniably there. They might be sub-par as a defender but they are far from being useless at their role.
Characters who have swim 8 and water breathing, but walk 4 and need to be fully immersed in water every 8 hours aren't good more than 10 miles from the shore.
Characters who have a +3 to combat while mounted and a full suite of weapon bonuses with the Lance can't do a whole lot useful in a 5 foot wide tunnel under a mountain.
And you're gonna spend a LOT more time in narrow coridors in most campaigns than you are in an open field.
I would like to see some expansion/definition of mounted combat anyway. The rules so far are promising, but could use a little further expression. Some real horsemanship abilities, maybe even a prestige class or two (Martial Power 2? Nature Power?), could make it cool to play a Zorro/Lone Ranger/Genghis Khan type for both flavor and mechanics.
The citations where paladins will gain some significant abilities to shrug off effects sounds interesting to me as well. While it would be hard to beat the Warden's save-at-start-of-turn freebie, I could see some extra ways to grant saving throws to self or others (or bonuses thereto) as very paladinny; I could even see an ability to shrug off (for oneself or others) effects in mid-turn - the ones that last "until the end of next turn" that you can't save against.
Of the classes I've played, paladin so far is the one I haven't been able to really get my head around; maybe Divine Power will provide that spark to make it as interesting as the other classes. Here's hoping...
I'd like to see some feats that boost DC (two targets perhaps?)
I think that in addition to the two fixes above, some better powers might go a long way towards closing the gap between paladins and other defenders. I really like the look of the exalted retribution daily 25 power. If Divine Power included a few lower-level versions of this with a few tweaks, such powers might meaningfully complement the paladin's primary threat mechanic.
I certainly hope it's NOT a Divine Mount build. It's a classic paladin feature, and it could be made available as a feat, but one thing I've found is that building a character around Mounted Combat is a bit like making a character from an aquatic race. Unless the Campaign is SPECIFICALLY designed for that type of character, they will be 90-100% useless.
Characters who have swim 8 and water breathing, but walk 4 and need to be fully immersed in water every 8 hours aren't good more than 10 miles from the shore.
Characters who have a +3 to combat while mounted and a full suite of weapon bonuses with the Lance can't do a whole lot useful in a 5 foot wide tunnel under a mountain.
And you're gonna spend a LOT more time in narrow coridors in most campaigns than you are in an open field.
Personally, I think mounts are pretty underrated. For 1 feat, you get the equivalent to a free magic item slot that gives you large bonuses to mobility and other strong ancillary benefits. Downside, of course, is that your mount might get killed, unlike your magic sword. Viewing mounts as consumables that you might benefit from for multiple encounters, though, makes them seem rather cost-effective for the benefit. Not something that I would sink all my feats into, but worthwhile.
It looks like the new one might be called the "Virtuous Paladin," based on the info from the Editorial Calendar. I have no idea what that actually means, though, but I doubt it involves mounts.
I noticed that as well. It makes me wonder if it has a prerequisite that you have to serve a "good" god.
1) It's clearly superior for minions and is a death sentance for them
2) It can easily be maintained on multiple targets
3) It's automatically got ranged applications
I'd like to see it made more useful, but as I see it, it's actually quite balanced compared to others. Fighter's Challenge is slightly overpowered though, i'd like to see some feats that support it better though, that's about all it needs.
I don't see the big problem with DC.
1) It's clearly superior for minions and is a death sentance for them
Why in the Nine Hells would you ever mark a minion?
2) It can easily be maintained on multiple targets
Uh, you can only DC one target at a time.
It's fun to look at all those posts saying "OMG! Combat Challenge deals more damage than Divine Challenge!" and notice that everyone forgets one small thing: a fighter's melee basic attack has to hit. Radiant damage (the best damage type in the game, period) from DC is automatic.
DPR calculations factor in hit/miss ratio. Fighter CC still comes out on top, and by a significant margin.
It's fun to look at all those posts saying "OMG! Combat Challenge deals more damage than Divine Challenge!" and notice that everyone forgets one small thing: a fighter's melee basic attack has to hit. Radiant damage (the best damage type in the game, period) from DC is automatic.
Yeah fine the fighter has to hit, you forget though that the threat of getting hit for 30 odd damage is more scary than the promise of taking 10 damage.
I dont think those numbers are too far out.
As to getting bfeats to fix DC, I really hope it doesn't happen. So many of my feats already go to trying to break even with the other Defenders, please dont tax me more.
Anyone else find it in teresting that the Valerous Paladin picture is a Half Orc. Another Str build in the offing?
I had a random thought...how about 'Channel Divinity: Summon Astral Mount' ?
I'm not really a big fan of mounts but that would be a good way to do it. My only concern is that it makes the other CD powers pale in comparison as none of them last a whole encounter.
My only concern is that it makes the other CD powers pale in comparison as none of them last a whole encounter.
Melora's Tide can potentially do so.
Melora's Tide can potentially do so.
Oh, I was just thinking about the free CDs that come with the Paladin Class (Divine Strength, Divine Mettle).
Why in the Nine Hells would you ever mark a minion?
Because you want them to attack you rather than an ally?
You mark a minion its dead if it doesn't attack you, that's pretty handy.
A fighter will kill a minion unless it misses with an attack
A Swordmage does waste time marking minions
A Warden will only mark a minion they're adjacent to
A Paladin is about the only one that can mark minions and its a minor action to do, it's really quite effective.
It'd be more effective if you could mark more than one target at a time :X
DPR calculations factor in hit/miss ratio. Fighter CC still comes out on top, and by a significant margin.
Who cares? Its a defender not a Striker
Strength Based Paladins have good damage associated with Marking (not necessarily with DC) and marking others.
All Paladins have a strong Leader side to their powers which can mitigate their lacking defender sides, and their Marking ability is only a small part of their role as defenders.
They do need a lot of work and their powers are messed up... and they could do with something that works along side DC.
But DC isn't useless or totally borked, it's a fraction of their abilities and they can otherwise perform well in their role.
There's a ritual in it that allows you to attune a non-hostile creature with the mount keyword that you can then summon to you as a minor action. Very handy not just for paladins but any character who doesn't want to lose their mount.
I think that in addition to the two fixes above, some better powers might go a long way towards closing the gap between paladins and other defenders. I really like the look of the exalted retribution daily 25 power. If Divine Power included a few lower-level versions of this with a few tweaks, such powers might meaningfully complement the paladin's primary threat mechanic.
I just noticed that one of my bard's powers is pretty similar to this. Foolhardy fighting, the level 13 bard encounter power in PHB2 causes all of the target's attacks to provoke OAs for a round. Pretty nice for any half-elf with eldritch strike or if you have a glaive user with HBO/PG in the party. "Oh what's that? You attack? But you're not in range of your target anymore!"
I really hope there are one or two paladin powers like these two in DP (that's a rather unfortunate acronym, I must say :embarrass)
Back on topic, I wonder if the "virtuous" paladin is a more leadery take on the paladin. Virtues make me think bards (but maybe it's just because I happen to think bards quite a lot, as I play one).
Yeah fine the fighter has to hit, you forget though that the threat of getting hit for 30 odd damage is more scary than the promise of taking 10 damage.
I dont think those numbers are too far out.
As to getting bfeats to fix DC, I really hope it doesn't happen. So many of my feats already go to trying to break even with the other Defenders, please dont tax me more.
Anyone else find it in teresting that the Valerous Paladin picture is a Half Orc. Another Str build in the offing?
Well, have you seen the full pic linked on it? It shows a half-elf too. Who knows.
Who cares? Its a defender not a Striker
Because having a more punishing mark makes it a better defender.
On July 6, there's supposed to be a Divine Power preview of a "Virtuous Paladin." Now, the Favored Soul preview was a Paragon Path, so this too might be such a thing, but it sounds to me like a new build. Discuss.
Favoured Soul doesn't include Avenger in it's title, Virtuous Paladin includes Paladin in it's title. Thus, Favoured Soul was a PPath, and Virtuous Paladin is a build. Hopefully a Cha/Wis build.
Favoured Soul doesn't include Avenger in it's title, Virtuous Paladin includes Paladin in it's title. Thus, Favoured Soul was a PPath, and Virtuous Paladin is a build. Hopefully a Cha/Wis build.
Haha, I was pretty much hoping it would be the opposite (a Str/Wis build). As far as class features go, the chaladin already has the upper hand (potent mark and divine mettle) whereas the Straladin only has Divine Strength which is pretty weak IMO. And don't even get me started on the fact that there are twice as many charisma-based powers as there are strength based ones (and the majority of the strength powers are pretty weak).
I like the engagement clause. The paladin must put himself in a position so that the DC means something to the target. What I would change is the remove restriction that you cannot use DC on the next turn if you do not engage the enemy. I think that having the challenge end at the end of the paladin's turn is enough. If the paladin uses DC on an enemy, but then walks away and just heals someone, it should be the same as if the paladin did not use the DC and then heals someone without engaging.
The liability of missing a turn using DC is too much. If a Paladin has to move to engage, but is stopped by some effect (trap or obstacle perhaps) he is screwed over for one turn. If he is able to get out of the effect the next turn and engage, he cannot use DC for that turn. If a marked target manages to move away from the paladin such that the paladin needs 2 turns to reengage (and has no one on which to use DC), the paladin instead of losing 1 turn of marking loses 2 turns of marking. On the second turn that the paladin reengages he cannot use DC because on the previous turn he cannot reach the target.
This thread already has math with how inadequet DC is even accounting for hit chance on mobs a few levels higher. DC damage doesn't grow like Basic Attack damage does.
Really? I must have missed that one, and I can't seem to find it with a quick glance, but as I figure it the difference isn't so extreme.
LV.1: Assuming a paladin with 18 CHA vs. a fighter with 18 STR and a d10 weapon
[INDENT]Divine Challenge: 7 damage (constant)
Combat Challenge: 9.5 damage (average per hit)[/INDENT]
LV.30: Assuming a paladin with 26 CHA vs. a fighter with 26 STR and a d10 weapon with +6 enhancement
[INDENT]Divine Challenge: 17 damage (constant)
Combat Challenge: 25 damage (average per hit)[/INDENT]
The difference starts at 2.5 and grows to 8, which seems to fit with typical tier scaling. True, typical lv.30 fighter will likely have a much high average damage, but he need feats, additional magic accessories, and specific path/destiny features to do so. Therefor, it is my conclusion that the CHA paladin's mark is balanced by basic mechanics and thus all such a paladin needs to keep pace are equivalent feats, magical accessories, and path/destiny options.
A STR paladin, however is another matter. Their divine challenge damage will start lower and grow much slower, but that's a flaw easily fixed by introducing an alternative STR based mark class feature for such paladins.
A feat that patches DC would therefore feel a lot more like a feat tax than a feat a Fighter would take.
Anyway did anybody notice this:
Powers: ardent strike (paladin DP)
on the "Excerpts: Divine Power Destruction Domain"? it refers to a build in the book(Virtous Paladin? another one?) and IMHO could be a Strenght-based power? don't you?
So that's two new Paladin at-wills confirmed. Hopefully they give STR and CHA both some love here so Humans can be happy.
Up first is Divine Power, which Rob Heinsoo headed up. I contributed a classic paladin build, a classic cleric build, and quite a bit of writing in various paragon paths here and there. It should be out next month.
Link provided.
Bel
I can’t say much about what I’m working on right now here in the office, other than to say it’s super-duper double-awesome, and it represents a welcome homecoming of sorts for me. So let me tell you about a couple of things closer in that are coming out with my name on them. Up first is Divine Power, which Rob Heinsoo headed up. I contributed a classic paladin build, a classic cleric build, and quite a bit of writing in various paragon paths here and there. It should be out next month.
Not much but there it is.
Bel
*hopes*
But the question is: What does a build constitute? Hopefully it's more than just "hey guys look, if you want you could pick these powers and these feats and call yourself a virtuous paladin, that's what I did!" Hopefully a build actually involves new class feature options.
*hopes*
So far they have. I see no reason not to expect at least two new class features for the Paladin.
So far they have. I see no reason not to expect at least two new class features for the Paladin.
Oh, I wouldn't be surprised if they did it. But I'm worried that they won't. The reason I have not to *expect* two new class features is that it seems that all the new class features for previous classes involved trading for class features that at least involved a modicum of choice already. And the fact that "build" is much more ambiguous than "class feature". We'll see. I really hope you're right
Looking at the DP feats excerpt (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20090703b), it seems likely that there are two new class features that replace Lay on Hands: Ardent Vow and Call of Virtue.
Also notice that Divine Challenge is specifically described as a prerequisite for some of these feats. Which could also mean that the Paladin is getting at least one new marking mechanic, as well.
OHHHH YEAH!!!!
Also notice that Divine Challenge is specifically described as a prerequisite for some of these feats. Which could also mean that the Paladin is getting at least one new marking mechanic, as well.
OHHHH YEAH!!!!
Hmm, true! I did wonder whether perhaps paladins now get to choose, say, two of:
Ardent Vow
Call of Virtue
Lay on Hands
Divine Challenge.
That would make for some interesting builds!
Also notice that Divine Challenge is specifically described as a prerequisite for some of these feats. Which could also mean that the Paladin is getting at least one new marking mechanic, as well.
It could also mean there's new Paladin Multiclass feats, not all of which offer Divine Challenge.
But I did notice the feats mentioning a "Divine Sanction" effect, which could mean they're making the Damage debuff portion of DC into a separate effect.
It could also mean there's new Paladin Multiclass feats, not all of which offer Divine Challenge.
But I did notice the feats mentioning a "Divine Sanction" effect, which could mean they're making the Damage debuff portion of DC into a separate effect.
Hmm, that's another thing I was wondering about. Perhaps strength paladins somehow have the option to pick an alternative sanction to 3/6/9 + cha radiant damage? One tied into strength? Maybe there's one that blinds instead? We're assuming a lot, but it's a possibility (that people would no doubt be very happy with :P)
Those almost seem to replace DC not LoH.
LoH is at least usefull most of the time.
No. They will replace LoH. My evidence being "Untiring Virtue - Ardent vow, call of virtue, or lay on hands - Gain additional use of ardent vow, call of virtue, or lay on hands when you reach a milestone"
Remember that DC can be used whenever you want, while LoH can only be used Wis mod times per day. BTW excellent feat.
A Human could start like 20 CHA, 13 CON, 13 WIS, pump WIS at Lv. 4 to get to 14 for two LoHs to start a day (okay for Heroic), and then put every other stat boost after that into CON.
Alternatively, make a STR/CON Paladin who can take full advantage of Hammer Rhythm plus Untiring Virtue. Except Fortitude will be your only good defense, but that's no different from any Hammer Fighter or Rageblood Barbarian.
It could also mean there's new Paladin Multiclass feats, not all of which offer Divine Challenge.
But I did notice the feats mentioning a "Divine Sanction" effect, which could mean they're making the Damage debuff portion of DC into a separate effect.
I hope Virtous Paladin will be a CHA/COS build(Untiring Virtue grants LoH even with a low Wisdom mod and touch of salvation, which involves call of virtue, has 15 Cha as a prerequisite) while the "Ardent"paladin will still be based on STR/WIS if they make a new challenge, otherwise i guess he will focus on STR/CHA and use the normal DC. (is it just my influence or the word ardent could somehow relate to Dragonborn?)
Virtuous paladins are a Cha build that trades lay on hands for Touch of Virtue, which ends an effect on an ally. Also noteworthy is the fact that it doesn't expand a healing surge. With Untiring virtue, suddenly the virtuous paladin looks delightfully non-MAD.
Looking at those dailies, now I *really* want to know what a "divine sanction" is. I'm guessing that it is the 3+cha (or alternative) part of the old divine challenge write-up, and that they've re-written divine challenge to be in two parts - the challenge, which all paladins have, and a sanction (of which there are a few options, and paladins have to choose one of them).
But I've been wrong before!
If divine challenge has been rewritten, I'm wondering what this means for characters with the Soldier of the Faith feat...? Hopefully they haven't done something mean like made the divine sanction an encounter power for such characters? :P
New build is up.
Virtuous paladins are a Cha build that trades lay on hands for Touch of Virtue, which ends an effect on an ally. Also noteworthy is the fact that it doesn't expand a healing surge. With Untiring virtue, suddenly the virtuous paladin looks delightfully non-MAD.
Looking at those dailies, now I *really* want to know what a "divine sanction" is. I'm guessing that it is the 3+cha (or alternative) part of the old divine challenge write-up, and that they've re-written divine challenge to be in two parts - the challenge, which all paladins have, and a sanction (of which there are a few options, and paladins have to choose one of them).
But I've been wrong before!
If divine challenge has been rewritten, I'm wondering what this means for characters with the Soldier of the Faith feat...? Hopefully they haven't done something mean like made the divine sanction an encounter power for such characters? :P
Solid guess this of yours! I'm not going as far as to actually activate my brain and actually formulate my guess (... :D), but in broad terms I think they're either doing as you said, or they reached the same effects without actually rewriting rules, which would be more their way. How would they do something so (intelligently) radical without rewriting, I won't guess, since as I already said it would take too many brain cycles :D
I'm definitely happy that they're bringing two new builds of my favorite class to the game. And as things stand, I'm now nearly sure I'll like the Ardent build the best (although I prefer Cha based pallys as a concept).
Impressions:
- Virtue's Touch is flat-out better than Lay on Hands. Untiring Virtue is going to be huge for this build.
- Now I'm really interested in what this "divine sanction" thing entails. If I had to guess, it's the punishment part of DC, so it's "marking" without actually being a mark. If that's the case, it has the advantage of encouraging some nice teamwork with a second Defender, but of course the enemy won't get a penalty to hit an ally.
- Can't judge Majestic Halo since I'm still not 100% on what divine sanction means. Name of Awe looks decent with its nice area and its immobilization and weakening, divine sanction or no. Failure is No Option is a pretty good utility. Setting up nearby allies in any way you please I'd say is worth a standard action (a flank or positioning for a lovely gang-beatdown of one enemy).
- So two new Paladin builds are confirmed.
- The Ardent build sacrifices his own defense and health for greater power and focuses on offense. So that one might be a Striker secondary. If he's making "sacrifices" he'd better do more DPR than the Fighter (and have some multi-attack powers). Doubt that'll be the case, though. He'll probably be STR-based, in any case.
- One thing I DO like is how the Virtuous build, at least, recognized that Charisma is #1, and Wisdom (NOT Strength) is #2. The PHB build suggestions put the two attack stats at #1 and #2, which we know of course is not optimal. So WOTC seems to have gotten that part, at least.
- That said, I'd probably go CHA/CON with my Virtuous builds, with a WIS starting around 14 or so.
Virtuous paladins are a Cha build that trades lay on hands for Touch of Virtue, which ends an effect on an ally. Also noteworthy is the fact that it doesn't expand a healing surge. With Untiring virtue, suddenly the virtuous paladin looks delightfully non-MAD.
Also of mild note, Touch of Virtue is a daily power with extra uses, instead of an at-will power with limited uses the way Lay on Hands is. The distinction is subtle and has little actual affect in game, but it can make a world of difference on player based first immersions.
Also of mild note, Touch of Virtue is a daily power with extra uses, instead of an at-will power with limited uses the way Lay on Hands is. The distinction is subtle and has little actual affect in game, but it can make a world of difference on player based first immersions.
I hadn't noticed the difference. Can I ask you to expand on what you think would be the differences and the "player based first impressions"? Are you simply referring to the fact that "the green" on Lay on Hands could attract more than "the black" on Touch of Virtue, or were you implying more than that?
Also of mild note, Touch of Virtue is a daily power with extra uses, instead of an at-will power with limited uses the way Lay on Hands is. The distinction is subtle and has little actual affect in game, but it can make a world of difference on player based first immersions.
Heh, yeah, I noticed this too.
I hadn't noticed the difference. Can I ask you to expand on what you think would be the differences and the "player based first impressions"? Are you simply referring to the fact that "the green" on Lay on Hands could attract more than "the black" on Touch of Virtue, or were you implying more than that?
Quite the opposite actually, in my opinion at least. Because LoH is a limited use at-will it comes off as a bad power, while ToV as daily with extra uses should provide the opposite immersion. This was likely partially the reason why the barbarian's rage strike power was changed from a limted use at-will to an daily with extra uses between it's playtest and actual release versions, so I'm glad to see a similar change made in regards to this new paladin ability.
As for what difference it makes mechanicaly? Very little, though there are abilities that care about a power's usage type (such as those that trigger of the use of a daily or temporarily restrict a character to only at-will powers).
Also of mild note, Touch of Virtue is a daily power with extra uses, instead of an at-will power with limited uses the way Lay on Hands is. The distinction is subtle and has little actual affect in game, but it can make a world of difference on player based first immersions.
Unless they simply update Lay on Hands at the same time. I always felt that its usability was badly classified. An At-Will power that you can only use a limited number of times a day is not an At-Will power at all. It makes much more sense to classify such usability as Daily (Special).
Because the more I think about it, the more I think Virtue's Touch thoroughly outclasses it.
With "touch of salvation", LoH has a similar effect as Virtue's touch.
We don't know how much the bonus is, but if it is CHA-modifier, LoH is not outclassed: In the hands of a chaladin, LoH + tos will most likely delete the worst effect and it spends healing.
VT + tos are a 100% saving throw and an additional saving throw - useful if you have more than one harmful effect.
Never the less, I would be very happy if LoH is improved
As far as I can see it is the choice of LoH or VT.
The Chaladin seems to become more stickier: He is able to "divine sanction" a lot more enemies than before (lvl 1 daily, feat at paragon; as far as we know). Whatever "divine sanction" is :P
I really like Majestic Halo. Nothing like a wack of weapon based radiant damage that does something on a miss.
This book really can't come out fast enough for me!
I believe "Divine Sanction" is the "Mark and 3/6/9 + cha damage" portion of Divine Challenge. Divine Challenge will probably be errata'd to "applies Divine Sanction to target" and Divine Sanction will be given it's own power card.
And this would be a very good point to let the paladin choose from two different sanctions:
Damage + CHA-modifier
Damage + STR-modifier
If this is true, I am very happy about "Majestic halo" and the paragon feat that sanction an adjacent enemy.
I'm hoping there are a bunch of Encounter powers that give bonuses based on your particular "sanction" or "touch" power. We shall see though.
I really like Majestic Halo. Nothing like a wack of weapon based radiant damage that does something on a miss.
This book really can't come out fast enough for me!
Tell me about it... I'm writing some kind of experimental fantasy novel, in which one of the experiments is "novelizing" true game mechanics. And the protagonist is a paladin who, right now, is very crippled, feature-speaking, due to fighter hybridizing in order to get cool powers. I'm really really hoping that the new mechanics for paladins will let me drop the fighter hybrid thing.
P.S.: I know it sounds stupid to restrict fiction to game mechanics but hey, that's why it's an experiment...
And this would be a very good point to let the paladin choose from two different sanctions:
Damage + CHA-modifier
Damage + STR-modifier
or a
dmg + Wis-mod
will be OK for both
or a
dmg + Wis-mod
will be OK for both
Not really, Wis is pretty strictly a secondary stat for Paladins. All a Paladins attack powers are either Strength or Charisma based, so one of those should be their main stat.
I'd quite like it if they had two new versions of the [let's just call it sanction, even though it's still possible that the sanction is someting entirely different]. In addition to the default cha one (which I hope has been buffed to 5/10/15), they could have some sort of scaling strength-based one, and then perhaps a third that is good for either strength or charisma paladins. Perhaps this would work with a daze effect (as it doesn't necessarily need to key off of an abililty at all).
I believe "Divine Sanction" is the "Mark and 3/6/9 + cha damage" portion of Divine Challenge. Divine Challenge will probably be errata'd to "applies Divine Sanction to target" and Divine Sanction will be given it's own power card.
According to the Pod cast, Divine Sanction is a separate marking ability, activated by new powers and feats.
Pod Cast (mp3)[/url]"]"I would say that one of the most interesting things that we present for paladins is not build specific. ... It is the mechanic that we call divine sanction ... that is a marking mechanic similar to divine challenge, but is meant to complement divine challenge. And the divine sanction is a marking mechanic that is introduced in the powers and some of the feats in and it can be operating at the same time as divine challenge. So the paladin can mark a guy with divine challenge, then use one of these powers to mark a different guy, or a group of guys. And divine sanction doesn't have the same limitation that divine challenge does. The paladin doesn't need to run up and engage them, or attack them, round after round. Divine sanction usually has a set duration -- not unlike other powers we already have in the game that include marking of some kind. ... It is similar to the divine challenge in that it does deal radiant damage, and that is something we wanted to preserve, because we wanted the paladins' marking to feel distinct from the fighters', or the wardens' and I think we succeeded here. And also, we're doing this because we perceived a need in the paladin; we felt that the paladin needed more ways to mark, because in the players handbook one, the paladin was excellent at controlling a single foe ... but when it came to groups, the fighter clearly outshone the paladin, Now part of that was intentional, but it went too far."
Cool!
Now I just wish that old Paladin marking powers (like Arcing Smite) would get altered to apply Divine Sanction!