Paladins: Why the Suck and how to Un-suck them

[Longknife]

Hi. Paladins suck. Thanks Josh.

 

Here I'm gonna break down reasons Paladins suck as a class and how to remedy those problems:

 

 

1) Paladins are inferior tanks to Fighters, hands down.

 

For a class that advertises itself as a tank, Paladin absolutely falls flat when compared to the alternative. If I have a squad where I need a tank? A Fighter can get +5 Deflection and an extra +2 for enemy engagement from the Defender Modal, another +10 to all defenses with Wary Defender, and another temporary +20 via Vigorous Defender for brief moments of heavy fire. This totals to +15 deflection and +10 of everything else alongside a temporary +35 deflection and +30 everything else when Vigorous Defender is activated, all while engaging two extra enemies.

    To top this off, Knock down allows a Fighter to get some damage off of him or others for a brief amount of time. Surely we've all had a battle with tons of enemies and one scary looking wizard in the back, and the solution was to run the Fighter through the enemies (naturally engaging them) and knock the wiz on his butt to buy time for the team to pick off stragglers, no? The Fighter later gets an AOE knock down, as well as a Scorpion "GET OVER HERE" skill to pull aggro off of a teammate; to my knowledge this is the only skill of it's type. Lastly, the Fighter regenerates endurance naturally. This means that a good chunk of incoming damage - already highly diminished by his high defenses - will be countered by his natural regeneration.


Now let's look at the Paladin. A Paladin can, with the help of Faith and Conviction + Deep Faith, can either get (either because I'm unsure of how Deep Faith works) + 10 deflection and + 21 of everything else, or +16 and +40 of everything else. You may be reading and asking "wtf that's a pretty big difference, shouldn't you figure that out first before bothering with this post?" No, and here's why: this benefit does not exist for any paladins that are not the player character. These benefits are earned by following the proper dialog reputations to the letter. A paladin who picks neutral dialog options will not gain any of these defenses, and it will be quite a while in gameplay before you can even achieve that maximum amount. But for a hired adventurer Paladin or Pallegina? These benefits do not upgrade at all. You don't get them. This means Paladin's extra defense is non-existent for everyone but the player character, and the player character himself will not actually get such immense benefits ("immense" if it's the latter numbers, humble and about on par with Fighter if it's the former) until later in the game. Aside from this, Paladin houses no other benefits to defense whatsoever. These two are literally all Paladin has to try and bring it's defenses above that of other classes, and NPC Paladins cannot access these.

        While the numbers may be unclear, what's very clear is that Paladin offers nothing else. It does not have knock downs or engagement-grabbing support skills, it does not have extra engagement, and it does not naturally regenerate endurance. The only other tank benefit Paladin has to it's name is a modal that can increase it's DR by 3, while increasing the DR of surrounding allies by 3 as well. While nice, it ultimately doesn't seem to outweigh everything Fighter has.

 

 

Final Verdict:  In an ideal scenario, Paladin can have defenses to compete with Fighter to some degree. However, what Paladin lacks is flexibility. A tank's job is to hold the line and protect the squishies in the back. Fighter has the means to both ensure a squishy getting shot at is less likely and to get that pressure off the squishy should that happen. All of this is topped off with a natural Endurance regeneration which simply can't be underestimated, as it can be the difference between a character losing 80% Endurance to the swarm at the start of a long battle and later being in tip-top shape with little to no micromanagement or babysitting neccesary, and "oh he died 2 minutes ago." There is a reason people pick Fighters, and that's because the tank style they offer is far more adaptable, prepared for a variety of situations, and in some cases (when the Paladin lacks Faith benefits) 100% superior.

How to fix it: Let's assume the +16 deflection and +40 every other defense numbers are correct. That's awesome. This is clearly enough to compete with Fighter. However, this doesn't apply to NPC Paladins and doesn't come into fruition until later in game. The fix is simple: adjust NPC Paladins to be affected by the player's dispositions OR have the faith naturally level up over time. Perhaps Pallegina's faith could level up over time since we don't know how her order works (or advertise how it works, passionate and benevolent...?) whereas NPC Paladins would relate to the player's reputations and the player is of course free to hire a paladin belonging to an order that already aligns with how the player acts.
   As for the fact that Paladins would be "late bloomers" with their highest defense, that could simply be addressed by providing the Paladin with other means to provide for the party in the mean time, namely support skills, which I will criticize further below.




2) Paladins have inferior offense to Monks and Barbarians by a clear margin

 

 

The other two class alternatives to Fighter that are expected to hang out near the front lines are Monk and Barbarian. Arguably, Paladin tanks better than these two. I say "arguably" because while Paladin can bolster superior defenses, both of these classes are awarded insane amounts of endurance. If you have a Barb or Monk, you'll regularly see them below 50% Endurance, but it also doesn't frighten you so much because the other 50% they have remaining is nothing to sneeze at. It's also a useful tactic for activating many helpful racials.
   Which of these two classes has superior defense? It's somewhat debateable. I think most of us would agree Paladin, but wouldn't call the gap huge. Their offenses however...?

 

 

Barbarian, assuming One Stands Alone is not a bug, should need no justification as to why his offense is superior. +20 damage across the board on a class that's in a constant AOE mode is nothing to sneeze at. Hell, it's downright disgusting. And Monk? Well Monk is a drunkard who likes marching into battlefields with nothing but a shirt on. In that sense the "who tanks better" argument quickly dies down between Monk and Paladin, except Monk focuses far more on offense. Monk actively chooses to take damage that he can expect to handle reliably, then turns that damage around into even greater damage for the opponents. If that wasn't enough, Monk gets plenty of utility skills to help out the team: knock downs, skills that help the Monk rush down any dangerous threats by jumping to them...the works. In this sense Monk both "tanks" (outpaces incoming damage, disables incoming damage, moves away from incoming damage) and dishes out damage in an extremely helpful manner. Monk reliably tanks down singular targets while Barbarian can work wonders on groups if surrounded (and of course you'll make every effort to make this happen). Both classes expect to take heavy damage, but bother also expect to dish out amounts of damage FAR higher than what they take.

  Now there's Paladin. What does Paladin do?
Erm, well there's a Flames skill. And uhhh....that's it, really. A modal will give the Paladin (and nearby allies) higher accuracy and - with it - higher crit rate, but aside from that? Aside from that you MIGHT have an extra offensive skill from your respective Paladin order, and there's one per rest skill that increases damage but can only be used on specific foes, not on everything.

   This is akin to a Wizard's two per encounter spells, except the Paladin's two per encounter spells are single target. I also must say that at least from personal experience, I almost never see the Wizzie's AOE miss a target, but Flames of Devotion can miss just like any random swing can.

   Point is, Paladin really doesn't have any damage skills to it's name. Like...at all. You use Flames of Devotion, and after that, the Paladin becomes a Fighter with slightly less accuracy.....UNLESS you use the accuracy modal, but the moment you do, you lose the defense modal you might've been convinced to use above...see where this is going?

 

 

 

Final Verdict:  This is not a contest. It's clear as day. Paladin has nothing to it's name on damage except for two forgettable per encounter skills that are clearly inferior to per encounter skills offered by other classes. Everyone and their mother has more damage output than Paladin; even Fighter can be built offensively if you want and will offer better damage output. Paladin's damage increases essentially stop at Flames of Devotion and never really pick up again.


How to fix it: Crank that **** up to 11. Would it be broken or "too powerful" if Flames of Devotion were made strong enough to compete with what Blinding Strike is to Rogue? A Rogue using Blinding Strike (or another ailment skill) on an enemy = dead enemy. A Paladin using Flames of Devotion on an enemy = merely a flesh wound. The thing is, a Rogue gets massive damage boosts any time an enemy has an ailment. If a Cipher or Wizard uses an AOE blind spell, Rogue is in candyland and will proceed to wipe the floor. Even IF Paladin's Flames of Devotion became practically an insta-kill for any mediocre enemy, this would not overstep it's boundaries as it would only clear out two mediocre enemies before the Paladin becomes nothing but a Fighter. Buff that **** up, it won't break anything, and it would reinforce the Paladin's "leader" role as the Paladin would be a class you can send after important targets. Remember when I said you might counter a scary Wizard or Cipher by sending the Fighter to spam it with disables? Paladin would have an alternative method of simply dropping the target dead much like a Rogue can, but a Rogue would retain it's superior flexibility by being able to continue to wipe out enemies if the proper circumstances are provided. I'm not saying this in the context of "yes make Flames of Devotion hit THAT HARD that it instantly KOs the average target," I'm merely making the comparison to Rogue to highlight how Paladin would by no means become OP even IF that were the case.

   Doing so also naturally boosts all of the Paladin abilities that are activated when the Paladin scores a kill. These too are lackluster because you can never be assured an enemy will die specifically to your paladin if focused at all, but if you're wanting one of those buffs badly, then you can choose to Flames of Devotion an enemy with decent health to get it.




3) Paladin's support skills are all pathetic in one way or another

 

 

Let's go down the list, shall we?

Lay on Hands: This is another case of a "meh" skill (Flames of Devotion) vs. another "meh" skill (Wizzie's per encounter AOE) where the alternative is an AOE. What benefits does this offer that Divine Radiance from Priest does not? Both are per encounter, this one heals more, but I've never known it to save a life in a dire situation. This skill for me has mostly been to either heal my Paladin themselves as a quasi (sucky) Fighter endurance regeneration, or to heal my Priest at a time the Priest has something more important to cast. But in the latter scenario....why not just bring another Priest? The Priest's per encounter spell meanwhile can damage enemies, provide everyone with an accuracy buff (competing with Paladin's modal a tad) and heal anyone who might have taken damage.

 

How to Fix it: Again, crank this up to 11. Give me more reason to use this. Why not make it heal truckloads, to the point where it actually competes with a Priest's level 3 or level 4 heal spell while lacking the AOE aspect? This would be huge without being overpowered. FFS this thing could bring you from 1 endurance to max and still wouldn't muscle in on the Priest's job because the Paladin is limited to one per fight.

Liberating Exhortation and Deprive the Unworthy:  These are good in theory, the problem? Paladin is already so god damned confused as to what it wants to be that there's NO WAY you're going to pick these very situational abilities over some of the more universal alternatives. These are good abilities, but when I'm offered them as alternatives to all the other things Paladin is trying to be, I'll probably skip these because they're too situational. There's very limited fights where I can imagine needing these.

 

How to Fix it:  Make these AOE. If I'm fighting....what are they, Earth Wardens? The little hovering rock enemies that eat my health slowly with their debuff? Or Xuarips Skirmishers that stun? A single Liberating Exhortation can win the fight ALL thanks to the Paladin. That alone would justify the Paladin's existence. Deprive the Unworthy currently is more something for a boss, but if made to be an AOE, then the Paladin can temporarily counteract a buff-happy cleric on the enemy team. Single-target makes these very situational, AOE makes these game-changers, but their uses are still specific enough so that this won't break anything. In return, switch these from per encounter (you're NOT gonna need these that friggin' often) to per rest (would still be very capable of being a game-changer with only two AOEs per rest).

 

 

Modals in General:  Paladin modals are awesome. You know what's not? The piss-poor range they have. OMFG what is this? Is this like....was Josh trying to reinforce the "every stat matters" idea and felt Intelligence didn't do enough for Paladins, so he "fixed" it by making the range on these suck balls unless you capped Int? It's annoying as hell, is what this is. These modals are great, and they'd be even greater if they actually hit someone else besides my Fighter. My Fighter doesn't need extra DR, he's already tanky enough. My Fighter doesn't need extra accuracy and crit, he's not my damage dealer. Yknow what classes would love these? The ones I have positioned in the back because they have no defense but excellent offense.


How to Fix it: Stop making Intelligence a "recommended for Paladin" skill altogether. Just boost the range on these things up and make Int's effect on the range be modest. As it stands now, Int is practically a requirement on Paladin for NO other reason whatsoever except to service these modals. You know what removing the demand for Int would also do? It'd give people spare points to play with and put towards Might or Con, which simultaneously would make Paladin hit harder or be tankier. As it stands now you've got Paladin so confused as to what it wants to be, it sucks and gets sub-par scores in everything. The most painful of all of this half-assedry is seeing intelligence needlessly be forced upon Paladin as a recommended stat, as if the stat demands for paladin weren't high enough already.

And no, not all of these suck. The revive for example is quite nice, the later abilities (if you actually bother with a Paladin for that long) are all nice, and the sworn enemy one can be quite good, but those alone are not enough to justify bringing a Paladin along.




Overall....

 

 

The problem with Paladin is that it's a "jack-of-all-trades, master of none." It can heal!! It can buff allies!! It can deal damage!! It can tank!! AND IT SUCKS BALLS AT ALL OF THOSE JOBS! For every ability you name that a Paladin has, chances are there's another class that does that job better. The idea was clearly to make Paladin provide a little of everything in some way, the problem being that it seems the developers were so conservative with the stats they provided the Paladin with, that Paladin simply cannot hold a candle to any of the others in any category.

 

   What is my motivation to use a Paladin as a support + backup tank for my Fighter instead of just using a Priest with my Fighter? What is my motivation to use my Paladin to help my Rogue with the damage dealing department instead of just using a Barbarian?

As it stands now, no one is questioning if a Paladin is OP, because it's painfully obvious that all of Paladin's sub-par abilities combined can not compete with anyone else's focused efforts on 1-2 areas. Paladin is too ADHD and bipolar and hasn't justified that attitude.

 

The fix? Just beef it up across the board. There's plenty of room for this. Not every above suggestion needs to be taken (all of them together might send the Paladin closer to OP territory), but there's no reason that all of these singular complaints and suggested tweaks cannot function in and of themselves.




Thoughts?

Edited April 12, 2015 by Longknife

[Crucis]

Why should Paladins be as good at tanking as Fighters?  If they were, then why would anyone bother playing Fighters?  Every class needs a niche.

 

Furthermore, enough with the drama queen routine.  Just because something isn't perfect does NOT mean that it sucks for crying out loud!!!

[Longknife]

Why should Paladins be as good at tanking as Fighters?  If they were, then why would anyone bother playing Fighters?  Every class needs a niche.

 

Furthermore, enough with the drama queen routine.  Just because something isn't perfect does NOT mean that it sucks for crying out loud!!!

 

 

By no means would my suggestion for defense make them superior tanks to Fighters. Fighters would still offer endurance regen, superior engagement and superior support control (knock down, aggro pull). That's the point: you can safely apply almost all of these suggested tweaks without Paladin becoming superior to the classes they compete with in that area. With my defense suggestion, Paladin would be the superior class for raw defense, but not neccesarily the one for keeping your squad alive, or even for staying up for that matter since endurance regen and knock down can be useful for a lot of different things.

 

  My offense suggestion wouldn't break Paladins either, nor would the support ones.

 

 

The point is Paladins are abysmally sub-par across the board, to the point where minor tweaks could be made to everything across the board and they'd still be balanced.

[Raven Darkholme]

In a group the accuracy bonus of the pala is nice, which later also gives better crit chance.

As stand alone char he really sucks.

[Gromnir]

poe paladin is a support class.  compare tanky capacity to fighters or dps ability to striker kinda classes is wacky and misguided.

 

our suggestion is to do opposite o' what longknife suggests.  am tired o' watching as the paladin slouches toward bethlehem. the paladin were a fine class as first envisioned by obsidian, but the community wants the support class to be better tanky or better at killing stuff, so obsidian has incrementally expanded the role o' the paladin.

 

stop.

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/63968-update-56-paladins-and-wild-orlans/?hl=paladin

 

give us back the paladin we were promised.  make paladin improvements so that it is better in support.  perhaps make the class less boring by offering options to be a more active support character, but efforts to improve the paladin should not be to improve dps or tankyness.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Longknife]

In a group the accuracy bonus of the pala is nice, which later also gives better crit chance.

As stand alone char he really sucks.

 

And why not just trade out the Paladin with his +5 accuracy bonus for a Priest who can provide exactly the same?

 

That's exactly the point: Paladin is Jack-of-all-trades, master of none, but he's currently not jack-of-all-trades enough to warrant his existence in a party, regardless of what you want from your 6th man.

[Ninjerk]

What I'd really like to see is Zealous auras all being baseline (perhaps with some nerfs for *Balance* even though I think ZE and the other not-ZF-one are incredibly underwhelming), make F&C a class ability you can select on level-up with Deep Faith included, and have a separate F&C-like ability that would give you bonuses to offensive stats based on your dispositions (very small amounts of accuracy, attack speed, that sort of thing).  Now your paladin provides a similar accuracy buff to priests while being more front-line capable and you can build him in two different directions (off-tankish support or offensive support).

 

EDIT: I also think the order-specific abilities should be baseline with balance adjustments.

Edited April 12, 2015 by Ninjerk

[I am Catharsis]

Paladins are good enough to solo run in PotD, just saying. If you make your hero a paladin and improve the "Faith and Conviction" passive, it makes a great tank imo.

 

I agree that they are not that fun to play with, but their def stats are close to awesome. You just need to build them without the recommanded stats and focus more on Constitution and here you go.

[Crucis]

 

Why should Paladins be as good at tanking as Fighters?  If they were, then why would anyone bother playing Fighters?  Every class needs a niche.

 

Furthermore, enough with the drama queen routine.  Just because something isn't perfect does NOT mean that it sucks for crying out loud!!!

 

 

By no means would my suggestion for defense make them superior tanks to Fighters. Fighters would still offer endurance regen, superior engagement and superior support control (knock down, aggro pull). That's the point: you can safely apply almost all of these suggested tweaks without Paladin becoming superior to the classes they compete with in that area. With my defense suggestion, Paladin would be the superior class for raw defense, but not neccesarily the one for keeping your squad alive, or even for staying up for that matter since endurance regen and knock down can be useful for a lot of different things.

 

  My offense suggestion wouldn't break Paladins either, nor would the support ones.

 

 

The point is Paladins are abysmally sub-par across the board, to the point where minor tweaks could be made to everything across the board and they'd still be balanced.

 

 

You lose me the moment you stop speaking plain english and start speaking computer geek.  What the heck is "aggro", FFS???!!!  The only aggro I know relates to farming, not computer games.  (And I've got nothing to do with agro related business whatsoever.  Just some comon knowledge.)

[Gromnir]

 

 

Why should Paladins be as good at tanking as Fighters?  If they were, then why would anyone bother playing Fighters?  Every class needs a niche.

 

Furthermore, enough with the drama queen routine.  Just because something isn't perfect does NOT mean that it sucks for crying out loud!!!

 

 

By no means would my suggestion for defense make them superior tanks to Fighters. Fighters would still offer endurance regen, superior engagement and superior support control (knock down, aggro pull). That's the point: you can safely apply almost all of these suggested tweaks without Paladin becoming superior to the classes they compete with in that area. With my defense suggestion, Paladin would be the superior class for raw defense, but not neccesarily the one for keeping your squad alive, or even for staying up for that matter since endurance regen and knock down can be useful for a lot of different things.

 

  My offense suggestion wouldn't break Paladins either, nor would the support ones.

 

 

The point is Paladins are abysmally sub-par across the board, to the point where minor tweaks could be made to everything across the board and they'd still be balanced.

 

 

You lose me the moment you stop speaking plain english and start speaking computer geek.  What the heck is "aggro", FFS???!!!  The only aggro I know relates to farming, not computer games.  (And I've got nothing to do with agro related business whatsoever.  Just some comon knowledge.)

 

to be fair, d&d 4e were rather unabashed about adopting what had previous been mmo nomenclature.  a rpg geek is also gonna be familiar with the aforementioned terms, though he/she might sneer derisively at their use.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Odd Hermit]

I agree with most points but -

• Regen is not a big deal at all, other classes can provide enough healing and you can even get it from items.

• OSA is almost certainly a bug/unintended

• Engagement limit and offensive capability have never mattered on a pure tank, for me.

I went through PotD just recently with a PC Paladin tank, and once on Hard with a hired adventurer Paladin which was serviceable.

 

I prefer having a tank/support to a tank/control since my squishies can CC things off themselves better as they have higher accuracy. On Path of the Damned especially since Fighter/Monk abilities will often miss anyway especially if using a large shield. Aura, heals and dispels from Paladin tank can't miss, OTOH. I do think Auras need to be larger though.

 

As a damage build though, Paladins are garbage.

 

Paladins are good enough to solo run in PotD, just saying. If you make your hero a paladin and improve the "Faith and Conviction" passive, it makes a great tank imo.

 

I agree that they are not that fun to play with, but their def stats are close to awesome. You just need to build them without the recommanded stats and focus more on Constitution and here you go.

 

Solo PotD is all about cheesing retaliation, traps, stealth/move speed/fog of war, and summoning items.

 

It has absolutely nothing to do with class balance in the context of normal party play.

Edited April 12, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Longknife]

 

 

Why should Paladins be as good at tanking as Fighters?  If they were, then why would anyone bother playing Fighters?  Every class needs a niche.

 

Furthermore, enough with the drama queen routine.  Just because something isn't perfect does NOT mean that it sucks for crying out loud!!!

 

 

By no means would my suggestion for defense make them superior tanks to Fighters. Fighters would still offer endurance regen, superior engagement and superior support control (knock down, aggro pull). That's the point: you can safely apply almost all of these suggested tweaks without Paladin becoming superior to the classes they compete with in that area. With my defense suggestion, Paladin would be the superior class for raw defense, but not neccesarily the one for keeping your squad alive, or even for staying up for that matter since endurance regen and knock down can be useful for a lot of different things.

 

  My offense suggestion wouldn't break Paladins either, nor would the support ones.

 

 

The point is Paladins are abysmally sub-par across the board, to the point where minor tweaks could be made to everything across the board and they'd still be balanced.

 

 

You lose me the moment you stop speaking plain english and start speaking computer geek.  What the heck is "aggro", FFS???!!!  The only aggro I know relates to farming, not computer games.  (And I've got nothing to do with agro related business whatsoever.  Just some comon knowledge.)

 

 

Aggro = aggression.

 

It means if I have an enemy go for my Cipher or Wizard, Fighter can pull the attention away with a skill (forget the name) without even needing to move. No other class can do this. MAYBE Monk could rush that enemy down and knock them on their ass quick, but aside from that, no one else offers this.

[View619]

So...Paladin's are the bard class of POE. Interesting, I thought that was the Chanter.

[Volourn]

Paladins are awesome. Plain and simple.  Best tanks in the game. My paladin simply  rarely gets hit at all. My fighter gets beat up a lot. CASE CLOSED. PALADIN = W.

[Crucis]

 

 

 

Why should Paladins be as good at tanking as Fighters?  If they were, then why would anyone bother playing Fighters?  Every class needs a niche.

 

Furthermore, enough with the drama queen routine.  Just because something isn't perfect does NOT mean that it sucks for crying out loud!!!

 

 

By no means would my suggestion for defense make them superior tanks to Fighters. Fighters would still offer endurance regen, superior engagement and superior support control (knock down, aggro pull). That's the point: you can safely apply almost all of these suggested tweaks without Paladin becoming superior to the classes they compete with in that area. With my defense suggestion, Paladin would be the superior class for raw defense, but not neccesarily the one for keeping your squad alive, or even for staying up for that matter since endurance regen and knock down can be useful for a lot of different things.

 

  My offense suggestion wouldn't break Paladins either, nor would the support ones.

 

 

The point is Paladins are abysmally sub-par across the board, to the point where minor tweaks could be made to everything across the board and they'd still be balanced.

 

 

You lose me the moment you stop speaking plain english and start speaking computer geek.  What the heck is "aggro", FFS???!!!  The only aggro I know relates to farming, not computer games.  (And I've got nothing to do with agro related business whatsoever.  Just some comon knowledge.)

 

 

Aggro = aggression.

 

It means if I have an enemy go for my Cipher or Wizard, Fighter can pull the attention away with a skill (forget the name) without even needing to move. No other class can do this. MAYBE Monk could rush that enemy down and knock them on their ass quick, but aside from that, no one else offers this.

 

 

Oooookay.  I don't meta-game this strictly speaking.  I'm not hoping that my front line tank is going to use some special ability to prevent a charging enemy after a back liner.  I just plain get him out in front and block them.  Now, this may end up being functionally the same thing in the end.  But for me, it's a matter of perspective and role playing.  It's the job of my front liners to form a meat shield to physically block enemies from getting at my back liners ... my spellcasters and archers (well, now including "gunners" too).

 

I use Eder as my primary tank, but tend to send Pallegine into melee pretty quicky as well.  And if there seem to be too many tanks for those 2 to handle easily, I might add Durance to the meat shield, though I prefer not to.  Come to think of it, my Ranger's wolf animal companion is often the 3rd "person" in the meat shield.     But Eder is the heart and soul of my front liners, since except against the very toughest enemies, he's nearly untouchable in melee.

 

In short, it's Eder's job to tell the enemy, "You shall not pass!"

 

 

 

 

[Ruminate]

The fighter's Constant Recovery is overrated, while the paladin's Lay on Hands is underrated.

At 10 might and 10 intelligence, Lay on Hands heals for ~57 endurance over the course of ~5 seconds.

At 10 might, Constant Recovery heals ~3 endurance every ~3 seconds.

A battle must last over ~57 seconds before Constant Recovery outperforms Lay on Hands.

Lay on Hands also scales better than Constant Recovery because it is affected by INT.

 

A fighter makes the best tank for one reason and one reason only: +2 engagements

A better solution to fix the tank disparity is to increase the number of engagements on Hold the Line to +2, and reduce the number of engagements on Defender to +1.

A fighter used as a primary tank would want both as early as possible, so they aren't really nerfed. Their max engagements remain the same. On the otherhand, this would buff any other class that wants to tank.

[Infares]

My current party (merely on hard, mind you) has a Fighter tank, Moon Monk off tank, support wayfarer reach paladin, support reach chanter, ranged rogue, and ranged cipher (both wood elves). Paladin basically fills in for the priest and heals with Flames of Conviction and last hits. I do have a Priest, Druid, and Wizard chilling at the Tavern in addition to the companions incase they should be needed later, but so far I've yet to have anyone even drop, even through Eothas' Temple.

You'll get exactly the mileage out of a paladin as the niche you carve for him in your group. 

[Crucis]

Paladins are awesome. Plain and simple.  Best tanks in the game. My paladin simply  rarely gets hit at all. My fighter gets beat up a lot. CASE CLOSED. PALADIN = W.

 

Your fighter gets beat up a lot?  You must be doing something wrong then, because my Fighter, Eder (the companion NPC) is practically untouchable in melee.  Of course, I will say that I've consistently been giving him all the best armor, shields, and other items as well as defense talents (i.e. Defender, Wary Defender, Weapon and Shield style, Hold the Line) that help improve his ability to be untouchable.  Currently (near the end of the game), Eder's deflection rating is at 125 when using a weapon and shield.  Pallegine's deflection rating isn't as high, because she doesn't have all the same talents and items, though with a weapon and shield, she's still at 103.  That said, I've recently been having her dual wield a pair of battle axes, rather than go with only an axe and shield.  And since she's usually second into the melee, she's able to engage many of the enemies that are paying more attention to Eder and chop'em to pieces.  And even at a mere 83 Defl with the dual axes, she tends to take little damage.

 

I think that Eder's the better tank, though it might be possible that if I'd chosen more defensive talents for Pallegine, she might have been able to be Eder's equal in this regard.  Still, I'm not unhappy with how Pallegine's turned out. 

[Eggnog]

No, paladins are not the best tanks in the game.  That's just absurd.  I've tried and tried to figure out how to insert a paladin into a party but, in the end, some other class is usually better suited to the role I'm looking for.  I think paladins in their current incarnation are best suited for escort duty at the stronghold.

[gkathellar]

Paladins are good enough to solo run in PotD, just saying. If you make your hero a paladin and improve the "Faith and Conviction" passive, it makes a great tank imo.

 

I agree that they are not that fun to play with, but their def stats are close to awesome. You just need to build them without the recommanded stats and focus more on Constitution and here you go.

 

Their defensive stats are awesome if they're the Watcher. Otherwise ...

 

Yeah.

[Emptiness]

There are 11 classes and the party can hold a max of 6 characters.  No matter how you adjust the classes, they aren't all going to make the cut.

 

"Fighters are better tanks."  "Monks are better dps."  "Priests are better support."  Paladins give you some of all of that, and the ability to somewhat adjust the balance between the three to suit your tastes.

 

If the only measure of the worthiness of a class was whether it was "the best" at one of those three roles then there would only be three classes.  One of the reasons for having more classes is that sometimes flexibility is more important than being then best at one thing.

 

If you insist that every character in your party be the absolute best at their role, then of course you are going to gravitate away from Paladins...but adjusting Paladins to try to "fix" that "problem" is pointless.  Either Paladins will still be inferior to another choice, in which case you still won't be using them, or they will be superior to another choice, in which case you'll use Paladins but you or someone else will make a thread about how the superseded class is inferior to Paladins.

[bonarbill]

Wow, you're still butthurt that other people don't think fighters are the best tank in the game?  No need to take your anger our on Paladins, who are excellent support tank hybrid class.

Edited April 12, 2015 by bonarbill

[Brimsurfer]

I believe paladins do need a buff of some sort, I tried playing a Paladin but then I deleted the character because she seemed kind of week compared to fighters......and before you start yelling at me, please read on;

 

Now I am NOT saying that Paladin and Fighter should be the same...........they are different classes and they must also play differently and they both should have their unique and specific advantages and disadvantages.

 

But my point here is that, they both should be equally effective in handling situations in their own unique way. However, at the moment Fighter seems to manage different situations far better than a Paladin. The tools that a Fighter has at his disposal are far more effective than the ones a Paladin have.

 

Just like Druids and Mages, they are different but their role is more or less the same and they both mop the floor with enemies butts IN THEIR OWN WAY and they are both more or less equally effective IN THEIR OWN WAY. 

 

And that is what I am talking about in regards to Paladins and Fighters. At the moment Fighters are noticeable more effective in handling front line challenges than a Paladin and this needs to change. Paladin should be more or less similarly effective in managing the enemies that are rushing in, in his own way.

Edited April 12, 2015 by Brimsurfer

[Laz0r]

The problem here is that Paladins don't have a distinct role in this game, and they get outclassed in every individual role.

 

Support? Priest is better.

DPS? Literally every class except maybe the chanter is better.

Tank? Fighter is better.

 

Having a Paladin in your group is literally a detriment, because there is at least one class out there that can do what you set them up for BETTER.

Edited April 12, 2015 by Laz0r

[Crucis]

No, paladins are not the best tanks in the game.  That's just absurd.  I've tried and tried to figure out how to insert a paladin into a party but, in the end, some other class is usually better suited to the role I'm looking for.  I think paladins in their current incarnation are best suited for escort duty at the stronghold.

 

Oh boo-hoo.  So paladins aren't the best at something.  For crying out loud, that does NOT mean that they're not ill-suited to being in a party.  Everyone on a party doesn't have to be the best at something.  Jeez. 

 

 

I have Pallegine in my party.  Would I be better off with another Fighter instead of her to be a second tank?  Maybe yes, maybe no.  Would this supposed second fighter be a better pure tank, similar to Eder?  Probably.  OTOH, he wouldn't be giving the party the various bonuses that a padadin can constantly provide. 

 

Is that enough to justify using a paladin rather than a second fighter?  Perhaps not to some people, but a second (particularly a custom made) fighter in a party that already has Eder would seem boring to me.  Seems to me that if you want a second tank in the party, it should be of another class, whether that's a paladin, a barbarian, a monk, etc.  And it's also about play style and role playing preferences.  I happen to like paladins and like having them in my parties.  They very well may not be the most powerful or efficient choice, but I still like having a paladin in my part regardless.  Other people may love monks or barbs in this slot. And if so, good for them.