What I'd like to see changed for paladins

Discussion concerning the upcoming Toril 2.0 update as well as general 3.5 edition D&D discussion
Malvareth
Sojourner
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:40 pm

What I'd like to see changed for paladins

Postby Malvareth » Wed Nov 07, 2007 7:58 am

I recently did a lot of levels as a paladin (brought one to 43 and another to 49 in a month) so while I'm no expert, here are a few conclusions that I've come to:

- Re-mounting in combat needs to be an option. It has been suggested in just about every single thread on the subject, and I've never seen anyone disagree with it. It makes sense both seen from both logical- and playability-minded perspectives. You can associate a penality of some kind with it, I'd suggest a short delay of a round or perhaps two afterwards, or you could let it provoke an attack of opportunity which seems to be a popular consequence in 2.0. Either way, it's one of the main things that exclude paladins from being truly viable tanks; we tank only slightly better than a ranger when not mounted, so if we get dismounted in a fight we're screwed.

- I'd like to see a slight change to charge; currently it seems to work like shieldpunch, with a blanket 70% chance to succeed, a very brief stun, and one or two rounds of lag for the target. This isn't bad, but another reason paladins are strictly worse than warriors is because of their inability to truly pin down a mob while tanking it. My suggestion is to give charge a better chance of success, based on the mounted combat skill so that it practically always succeeds at max skill but keeps its 70% chance of stunning so that it's not a surefire way of disrupting spellcasters. A tanking warrior, when able, will often keep the mob in a bash lock instead of relying on rescue whenever it switches, especially in exp groups, but a paladin just can't safely do so with only 70% chance to succeed charge. Keeping a mob from switching is obviously a better alternative to hoping for succesful rescues whenever it does.

- Do something about guard. It's a fantastic idea and is one of the things that could bring paladins out of its gimmick class state, but it just doesn't work very well as it is now. More specifically, guard does not function while the paladin is lagged. Attempting to rescue immediately will always be a much better solution than trying to rely on guard, except maybe if the paladin is grouped with only one other player, so the usual result is that guard never occurs because the paladin is lagged from rescue when a mob switches. In other words, guard's only real use is as a minor safety measure against aggressive mobs who wander into the room and attack whoever you're guarding before a tank can tag it. Needless to say, not only is this too rare to make the skill even moderately valuable, it's also a neglectible factor when you consider the odds of a mob attacking exactly the one player out of 14 that you're guarding. On the other hand, allowing guard to simply work through lag may be too good, so I propose that it should work through lag but only once per round - you won't get a guard attempt for each attack aimed at your guardee, but it'll be useful more than once a month. I just did Izan's, and despite guarding the cleric the entire time, I saw the skill activate twice. I probably rescued that same cleric more than thirty times, to make a comparison.

- Allow the paladin to lay hands on a target while in combat provided that the paladin isn't tanking a mob. This ability loses a lot of its potential when you have to wait through disengage lag to use it on anyone else.

- Make the use and preservation of mounts less annoying. Mounts should share protections and saving throws with the paladin, and perhaps they should even have the evasion feat in 2.0. Give paladins a spell or ability to summon their mount if they become separated, or the ability to acquire a new one while indoors. Make the entire mount code better at reflecting the fact that a paladin's mount is not a tamed animal but an entity granted to them by their god. Allow riding indoors at any skill level, because even though it's only a problem at lower levels it makes no sense when you consider that an ogre is still bigger than a mounted human. If you want the paladin to rely completely on their mount to perform optimally, don't make it such a pain in the arse to do so.

In conclusion, I don't want to see paladins replace warriors, I don't think anybody does. What I want is for paladins to be considered viable tanks for all but the most difficult encounters. Warriors should be better at the technical aspect of tanking: mitigating/avoiding damage, and surviving more hits. They should only be slightly better, though; paladins should not have so many crippling disadvantages, and their slight spell utility does not make up for this in any way. Right now, it seems that paladins only have an advantage over warriors when it comes to soloing and maybe dealing damage, none of which should be a determining factor in balancing a tank class.

Note: many of these suggestions apply to anti-paladins as well.
Kegor
Sojourner
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: St. Cloud, MN
Contact:

Postby Kegor » Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:25 am

Good post, and I agree with everything you said even though I would never play a paladin.

I would also like to add that in 2.0 mounts, and pets of any nature, should poof when a character dies or leaves the game just like necros and shamans. Any summoned pet for any reason always should, since they can no longer be controled by the summoner, and are therefor released to either run off or poof.
Disoputlip
Sojourner
Posts: 956
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Copenhagen

Postby Disoputlip » Sun Dec 16, 2007 1:52 am

Make the avenger holy word a keyword thing, 1/24 minutes.

That would make avenger viable in xping
Malvareth
Sojourner
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 7:40 pm

Postby Malvareth » Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

It is viable in exp'ing, I have leveled from 1 to 50 with it and never had any trouble besides having to manage things a little more carefully, i.e don't use it on a duergar scout if there are three more duergars in the room. The times it has given me any real trouble can be counted on one hand, and considering the frequency and the proc (and its other effects), as well as the ease of acquiring the weapon, I think it's fair.
My biggest claim to fame is spending the first twenty years of my life two kilometers from the university where DIKU was created. Should that make me sad or proud?
Lilira
Sojourner
Posts: 1438
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:53 pm

Postby Lilira » Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:36 pm

Jaznolg wrote:Good post, and I agree with everything you said even though I would never play a paladin.

I would also like to add that in 2.0 mounts, and pets of any nature, should poof when a character dies or leaves the game just like necros and shamans. Any summoned pet for any reason always should, since they can no longer be controled by the summoner, and are therefor released to either run off or poof.


But but but.... I LIKE finding nightmares and being the bard on hellspawn!!!

BTW... there is a command to dismiss mounts. Its just that noone ever uses the dang thing. Summon return. You can also claim your pets after a death... claim (horse, griffon, nightmare, destrier dire whatever...).
~\o--Lilira Shadowlyre--o/~

You group-say 'my chars will carry the component on them if I can.'
Inama group-says 'hopefully they'll have some sort of volume discounts on ress items for people like you'
You group-say 'oh? Ya think? *giggle*'
Inama group-says 'they could at least implement frequent dier miles'

Suzalize group-says 'oh, eya's over weight i bet'

Return to “Toril 2.0 Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests