Are Paladins really that bad?

[eubatham]

 

Well you played on normal and hard difficulty, this topic is about PotD playthrough. Differences in performance exists in those difficulties as well, but in lower difficulties the encounters aren't hard enough so as to bring these differences into light.

 

Its mostly in PotD when you get close to realise the full potential of the classes and the contrast between class performances lights up like a Christmas tree on Christmas eve.

 

 

I think that finishing the game on hard or normal shouldn't have too much bearing on the discussion, really. As long as people talk and measure the Paladin as a class amongst other classes, they should be on point.

 

However talking about something being "viable to finish the game" is pointless and not really the point of the thread, considering it's been proven over and over again that you can finish the game solo with any class on any difficulty. 

Edited April 14, 2015 by eubatham

[CriticalFailure]

not only did I manage to solo everything between the starter dungeon and gilded vale, I did the bear too.  took 3 tries, but I did it.

Well... Congratulations? I've soloed that area a couple of times too, but the point is, you don't HAVE to. If you manage, cool, but you can always leave it for later (and if the OP is struggling, saying "I did it" isn't going to help him anyway). I mean, you said it yourself: it took you three tries (and probably a while, considering that build's offensive capabilities).

 

I don't know if the rest of your post was directed at me, because I agree that a few tweaks to the existing paladin abilities should be enough.

[b0rsuk]

Also, stop acting like Path of the Damned is the correct way to play the game. I'd say it's the opposite - it's a rushed, least tested difficulty setting to keep min-maxers occupied. Difficulty levels like that are known for being exclusive. Rather than requiring more tactics and creativity, they just limit the number of abilities you can use effectively. The most common sin is very high monster resistances, which is a hard blow to any class that relies on debuffing, but a blessing to those who buff themselves.

 

Path of the Damned is a limited subset of Pillars of Eternity. Blaming paladins for PotD quirks is intellectually dishonest.

Edited April 14, 2015 by b0rsuk

[irongamer]

I've been enjoying my dialog option / tank paladin.  It is setup to pretty much tank only with high stats in the dialog options I was most interested in (Perception, Intelligence, and Resolve).  I guess you could do about the same with a fighter, but at least the int is sort of useful on the paladin.

 

Mig: 8

Con: 12

Dex: 8

Per: 17

Int: 16

Res: 18

 

It is interesting to have the dialog options that matter.  It is curious how the devs chose certain lines of text match up reputations like Passionate or Clever.

[Infares]

intellectually dishonest.

Side note, I generally only see this phrase used in debates with Creationists/Theists, lmao

Edited April 14, 2015 by Infares

[Infares]

 

Some claim that Paladin is a boring, low maintenance auto attack class. Turn on an Aura and stand on the front line whacking away with melee weapons until a party member needs a revive. However, Paladins built to secure killing blows are actually quite micro intensive, in that the player has to constantly monitor enemy health (especially on Expert mode, where floating health bars are not shown), and use careful timing of attacks and abilities. And not just the Paladin; this playstyle also encourages micromanaging the rest of the party in order to set up Pally combos.

 

--

 

Are the on-kill procs for Paladins' affected areas still centered around the Paladin or are they centered around the kill event that procced it? 

 

Black Path is centered on the Paladin as well. For the build I'm using that's not much of an issue, because it has high Int, Mig, and Dex to empower the casting of damage/healing scroll spells, as well as go for fast, strong killing blows with weapons. High Int synergizes especially well because it will affect all of:

 

• activated buff duration
• passive last-hit effect(s) radius and duration
• aura radius
• scroll spell radius/cone/duration

 

Black Path has a 7.5m radius when starting 18 Int. Massive by PoE radius standards. A position just behind the front line works best, in that both auras and last-hit procs will project toward either side of the battle, while the Paladin focuses on killing blows. My Bleaker will probably hover around the front line with an Estoc most of the time, and use reach/ranged/scrolls in trickier situations.

 

I'm digging how the standardized attribute system enables these types of off-beat builds, which, if not optimal, are at least viable and fun. A semi-tanky Death Knight caster ganksman with a slew of freebie on-kill support effects? Yes!

My own buffer/DPS paladin will likely segue into Estoc after he gets a few more levels of Benevolent/Passionate and can effectively offtank from Faith and Conviction alone without needing a shield. 2/2 or 3/3 will probably be best, here. 

 

But yeah, keeping a pike or quarterstaff on hand at all times is a given. I kinda wish they had enough reach to actually cleanly attack over the shoulders of tanks standing in a door, but sadly that's not really the case, so when choking I tend to have him switch to a bow and hang back a couple more feet so the pike chanter can still get his hits in.

 

Although, I haven't really experimented with engaging enemies with my tanks and then moving the tanks in closer, because melee range might be farther than actual hit box contact, that might allow reachers to jab the front line of enemies over the shoulder even if both tanks and both reachers are standing in a narrow doorway.

Edited April 14, 2015 by Infares

[Ceranai]

Also, stop acting like Path of the Damned is the correct way to play the game. I'd say it's the opposite - it's a rushed, least tested difficulty setting to keep min-maxers occupied. Difficulty levels like that are known for being exclusive. Rather than requiring more tactics and creativity, they just limit the number of abilities you can use effectively. The most common sin is very high monster resistances, which is a hard blow to any class that relies on debuffing, but a blessing to those who buff themselves.

 

Path of the Damned is a limited subset of Pillars of Eternity. Blaming paladins for PotD quirks is intellectually dishonest.

But then its a symptom of a greater problem. We want a greater challenge out of the game but dont want to play a class that feels gimped, and while i consider myself a min-maxer I would also say that even with totally random stats the game is too easy. I guess my problem might be that i came here from the paradox games series which were RP heavy but also very big on the strategy side of things. This game is hevay on the RP but the strategy is abysmal. I guess you could say its my fault for playing the wrong game but i think that a bit more strategy really wouldnt have hurt this game.

[Infares]

 

Also, stop acting like Path of the Damned is the correct way to play the game. I'd say it's the opposite - it's a rushed, least tested difficulty setting to keep min-maxers occupied. Difficulty levels like that are known for being exclusive. Rather than requiring more tactics and creativity, they just limit the number of abilities you can use effectively. The most common sin is very high monster resistances, which is a hard blow to any class that relies on debuffing, but a blessing to those who buff themselves.

 

Path of the Damned is a limited subset of Pillars of Eternity. Blaming paladins for PotD quirks is intellectually dishonest.

But then its a symptom of a greater problem. We want a greater challenge out of the game but dont want to play a class that feels gimped, and while i consider myself a min-maxer I would also say that even with totally random stats the game is too easy. I guess my problem might be that i came here from the paradox games series which were RP heavy but also very big on the strategy side of things. This game is hevay on the RP but the strategy is abysmal. I guess you could say its my fault for playing the wrong game but i think that a bit more strategy really wouldnt have hurt this game.

Different genres of games entirely. Games like Crusader Kings II and Europa Universalis are strictly strategy games with 4x and RPG elements. 

 

PoE is in the same genre as games like Fallout 1/2, Arcanum, BG 1/2, IWD 1/2, etc. Comparing apples to mongooses here.

[Ceranai]

 

 

Also, stop acting like Path of the Damned is the correct way to play the game. I'd say it's the opposite - it's a rushed, least tested difficulty setting to keep min-maxers occupied. Difficulty levels like that are known for being exclusive. Rather than requiring more tactics and creativity, they just limit the number of abilities you can use effectively. The most common sin is very high monster resistances, which is a hard blow to any class that relies on debuffing, but a blessing to those who buff themselves.

 

Path of the Damned is a limited subset of Pillars of Eternity. Blaming paladins for PotD quirks is intellectually dishonest.

But then its a symptom of a greater problem. We want a greater challenge out of the game but dont want to play a class that feels gimped, and while i consider myself a min-maxer I would also say that even with totally random stats the game is too easy. I guess my problem might be that i came here from the paradox games series which were RP heavy but also very big on the strategy side of things. This game is hevay on the RP but the strategy is abysmal. I guess you could say its my fault for playing the wrong game but i think that a bit more strategy really wouldnt have hurt this game.

Different genres of games entirely. Games like Crusader Kings II and Europa Universalis are strictly strategy games with 4x and RPG elements. 

 

PoE is in the same genre as games like Fallout 1/2, Arcanum, BG 1/2, IWD 1/2, etc. Comparing apples to mongooses here.

 

 

I guess i wasnt trying to make a direct comparison I was just trying to get across that when i play a game its not so much for the immersion factor its more for the challenge. I love the feeling f beating a game. I mean i enjoyed this game either way but the challenge factor was certainly lacking and PoTD felt like it tried to add a challenge factor just by changing the numbers around, kind of liek when i used to play WoW and they just kept adding 'new' monsters that were basically old monsters reskinned and resized

[Infares]

 

 

 

Also, stop acting like Path of the Damned is the correct way to play the game. I'd say it's the opposite - it's a rushed, least tested difficulty setting to keep min-maxers occupied. Difficulty levels like that are known for being exclusive. Rather than requiring more tactics and creativity, they just limit the number of abilities you can use effectively. The most common sin is very high monster resistances, which is a hard blow to any class that relies on debuffing, but a blessing to those who buff themselves.

 

Path of the Damned is a limited subset of Pillars of Eternity. Blaming paladins for PotD quirks is intellectually dishonest.

But then its a symptom of a greater problem. We want a greater challenge out of the game but dont want to play a class that feels gimped, and while i consider myself a min-maxer I would also say that even with totally random stats the game is too easy. I guess my problem might be that i came here from the paradox games series which were RP heavy but also very big on the strategy side of things. This game is hevay on the RP but the strategy is abysmal. I guess you could say its my fault for playing the wrong game but i think that a bit more strategy really wouldnt have hurt this game.

Different genres of games entirely. Games like Crusader Kings II and Europa Universalis are strictly strategy games with 4x and RPG elements. 

 

PoE is in the same genre as games like Fallout 1/2, Arcanum, BG 1/2, IWD 1/2, etc. Comparing apples to mongooses here.

 

 

I guess i wasnt trying to make a direct comparison I was just trying to get across that when i play a game its not so much for the immersion factor its more for the challenge. I love the feeling f beating a game. I mean i enjoyed this game either way but the challenge factor was certainly lacking and PoTD felt like it tried to add a challenge factor just by changing the numbers around, kind of liek when i used to play WoW and they just kept adding 'new' monsters that were basically old monsters reskinned and resized

I totally get that. Most of the thing about RPGs is the experience is about having an experience. Enjoying the story, plot elements, character development (in a literary sense). It's important to have mechanical achievement and challenge present, but they're not the focal point of the experience.

[Cantousent]

It is curious how the devs chose certain lines of text match up reputations like Passionate or Clever.

It always is curious to see how the devs thought the line should be read or understood. It can be hit or miss, although I've understood the reasoning behind everything I've seen so far. I like the fact that we have actual dialogue instead of a wheel or something that doesn't even write out the lines.

[Ceranai]

 

 

 

 

Also, stop acting like Path of the Damned is the correct way to play the game. I'd say it's the opposite - it's a rushed, least tested difficulty setting to keep min-maxers occupied. Difficulty levels like that are known for being exclusive. Rather than requiring more tactics and creativity, they just limit the number of abilities you can use effectively. The most common sin is very high monster resistances, which is a hard blow to any class that relies on debuffing, but a blessing to those who buff themselves.

 

Path of the Damned is a limited subset of Pillars of Eternity. Blaming paladins for PotD quirks is intellectually dishonest.

But then its a symptom of a greater problem. We want a greater challenge out of the game but dont want to play a class that feels gimped, and while i consider myself a min-maxer I would also say that even with totally random stats the game is too easy. I guess my problem might be that i came here from the paradox games series which were RP heavy but also very big on the strategy side of things. This game is hevay on the RP but the strategy is abysmal. I guess you could say its my fault for playing the wrong game but i think that a bit more strategy really wouldnt have hurt this game.

Different genres of games entirely. Games like Crusader Kings II and Europa Universalis are strictly strategy games with 4x and RPG elements. 

 

PoE is in the same genre as games like Fallout 1/2, Arcanum, BG 1/2, IWD 1/2, etc. Comparing apples to mongooses here.

 

 

I guess i wasnt trying to make a direct comparison I was just trying to get across that when i play a game its not so much for the immersion factor its more for the challenge. I love the feeling f beating a game. I mean i enjoyed this game either way but the challenge factor was certainly lacking and PoTD felt like it tried to add a challenge factor just by changing the numbers around, kind of liek when i used to play WoW and they just kept adding 'new' monsters that were basically old monsters reskinned and resized

I totally get that. Most of the thing about RPGs is the experience is about having an experience. Enjoying the story, plot elements, character development (in a literary sense). It's important to have mechanical achievement and challenge present, but they're not the focal point of the experience.

 

Yea i guess it would be better if I had enjoyed the plot more, or if i felt like my actions had any impact at all. I was a big BG1 fan when i was younger and it always felt like my choices mattered. I feel like in trying to make all builds viable this game has made all my choices meaningless. Like in my first attempt through I paid very close attention to everythin but by act two i had rerolled my character and i made a point of chosing different options and they had 0 impact on my game. By the time i started my STC run I chose my options pretty randomly and felt like it had no impact on my play at all, like my personality was all over the place. By the time i got to the final act i pretty much skipped through the plot to the extent that i couldnt really tell you what it was all about

[Ruminate]

Also, stop acting like Path of the Damned is the correct way to play the game. I'd say it's the opposite - it's a rushed, least tested difficulty setting to keep min-maxers occupied. Difficulty levels like that are known for being exclusive. Rather than requiring more tactics and creativity, they just limit the number of abilities you can use effectively. The most common sin is very high monster resistances, which is a hard blow to any class that relies on debuffing, but a blessing to those who buff themselves.

 

Path of the Damned is a limited subset of Pillars of Eternity. Blaming paladins for PotD quirks is intellectually dishonest.

 

I know people like to think Paladins lose value on PotD, but I find them to be more valuable on that difficulty. It is precisely because of the increase in monster resistances that a Paladin, particularly a Darcozzi Paladin, finds the most value in a group. Having an always on +6 accuracy buff and another +10 accuracy buff(stacks with everything) should not be underestimated on PotD. On hard or below, you will hit or crit most of the time. On PotD, you will miss or graze. Turning confusion from a hit to a crit doesn't do much except extend the duration. The enemy will be confused either way. But turning a confusion from a miss to a graze is the difference between not confusing at all vs. actually confusing them.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Ruminate

[Gromnir]

 

 

asked and answered.  is not that priests do better in support but that they do different, and they is far more squishy when doing it.  auras are not requiring casting, which in some battles is quite useful.  paladin auras also stack different than priest spells, which is a major advantage when paired with a priest.  and why not get a priest and a fighter?  

 

1=1

 

1+1 = 2

 

paladin occupies one party slot.   also, have a fighter and a priest don't make the priest any less squishy.  is more than a few folks who like to have a party with two tanks, and a paladin secondary tank who can also add support functionality is a great fit in may parties................................

 

 

 

Yes I agree Paladin take only one party slot but he is not a full time tank like a fighter and YOU ARE going to get a Fighter anyway (95% of the player base thinks Fighter is indispensable when it comes to tanking)......

 

complete untrue.  all through the beta we had many folks arguing that paladins make for better tanks than fighters.  is not our personal pov, but close to 50% o' the folks who have have been playing poe for many months already were rather adamant that the paladin were a superior choice for tanking.  

 

*shrug*

 

we think the fighter makes a better tank, but is hardly that we were amongst a 95% group... not even freaking close.  

 

for a party dynamic where you want an off-tank, or two tanks, we personal  wouldn't want 2 fighters.  a paladin and a sword & board monk both work very well for Gromnir filling tank roles in poe, and the paladin has additional support abilities that enhance our ubiquitous priestly support.  

 

our favorite tank is actual the sword & board monk and chances are that class and build is what we recommend for folks who keep trying to make the poe paladin into a tank. poe "monks"  (they ain't monastic, so we have a hard time calling 'em monks) can suck up damage and dish out pain with extreme prejudice.  kung fu monks always strike us as kinda a silly addition on a battlefield with heavily armed and armoured combatants, but a combat friar conceptually matches up very well with the poe sword & board monk.  we got a very nice spear & shield wielding monk that is not only ridiculous durable, but it has archers killing themselves and it is providing serious party damage as well.  am knowing folks like hatchet for most tanks, but the sword & board monk tank is as much about dealing hurt as absorbing, so we like the increased accuracy benefits.   

 

think o' the poe "monk" more in western rather than eastern terms and you got what so many is trying to twist the poe paladin into being-- a very capable tank that also does serious damage.  get added benefit that you need not worry about all those support qualities with a monk tank as the monk is actual the front-line class you desire the poe paladin to be.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Daemonjax]

 

It is curious how the devs chose certain lines of text match up reputations like Passionate or Clever.

It always is curious to see how the devs thought the line should be read or understood. It can be hit or miss, although I've understood the reasoning behind everything I've seen so far. I like the fact that we have actual dialogue instead of a wheel or something that doesn't even write out the lines.

 

 

I looked into that the other day, and all of that is totally moddable.

 

We can even change the whole might thing to provide different options depending on the class (high might on wizard class?  You force choke them like darth vader.  High might on cipher class?  You peer into their soul and intimidate them with knowledge.  etc.)

Edited April 15, 2015 by Daemonjax

[Brimsurfer]

 

 

Well you played on normal and hard difficulty, this topic is about PotD playthrough. Differences in performance exists in those difficulties as well, but in lower difficulties the encounters aren't hard enough so as to bring these differences into light.

 

Its mostly in PotD when you get close to realise the full potential of the classes and the contrast between class performances lights up like a Christmas tree on Christmas eve.

 

 

I think that finishing the game on hard or normal shouldn't have too much bearing on the discussion, really. As long as people talk and measure the Paladin as a class amongst other classes, they should be on point.

 

However talking about something being "viable to finish the game" is pointless and not really the point of the thread, considering it's been proven over and over again that you can finish the game solo with any class on any difficulty. 

 

 

 

Apparently you haven't read my original post so the purpose of why I started this topic is lost on you.......

 

 

Also, stop acting like Path of the Damned is the correct way to play the game. I'd say it's the opposite - it's a rushed, least tested difficulty setting to keep min-maxers occupied. Difficulty levels like that are known for being exclusive. Rather than requiring more tactics and creativity, they just limit the number of abilities you can use effectively. The most common sin is very high monster resistances, which is a hard blow to any class that relies on debuffing, but a blessing to those who buff themselves.

 

Path of the Damned is a limited subset of Pillars of Eternity. Blaming paladins for PotD quirks is intellectually dishonest.

 

 

I say the same to you my friend, what I said to the guy above.........I started this topic to seek a certain kind of info......if you read my original post, you will find out that I am talking about the effectiveness of Paladins specifically in PotD scenario........and no where have I said that PotD is the correct way of playing the game..

[Brimsurfer]

complete untrue.  all through the beta we had many folks arguing that paladins make for better tanks than fighters.  is not our personal pov, but close to 50% o' the folks who have have been playing poe for many months already were rather adamant that the paladin were a superior choice for tanking.  

 

 

 

*shrug*

 

we think the fighter makes a better tank, but is hardly that we were amongst a 95% group... not even freaking close.  

 

for a party dynamic where you want an off-tank, or two tanks, we personal  wouldn't want 2 fighters.  a paladin and a sword & board monk both work very well for Gromnir filling tank roles in poe, and the paladin has additional support abilities that enhance our ubiquitous priestly support.  

 

our favorite tank is actual the sword & board monk and chances are that class and build is what we recommend for folks who keep trying to make the poe paladin into a tank. poe "monks"  (they ain't monastic, so we have a hard time calling 'em monks) can suck up damage and dish out pain with extreme prejudice.  kung fu monks always strike us as kinda a silly addition on a battlefield with heavily armed and armoured combatants, but a combat friar conceptually matches up very well with the poe sword & board monk.  we got a very nice spear & shield wielding monk that is not only ridiculous durable, but it has archers killing themselves and it is providing serious party damage as well.  am knowing folks like hatchet for most tanks, but the sword & board monk tank is as much about dealing hurt as absorbing, so we like the increased accuracy benefits.   

 

think o' the poe "monk" more in western rather than eastern terms and you got what so many is trying to twist the poe paladin into being-- a very capable tank that also does serious damage.  get added benefit that you need not worry about all those support qualities with a monk tank as the monk is actual the front-line class you desire the poe paladin to be.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

It seems to me world is moving in one direction and you are moving in another, mate. There are hardly any people on this whole forum except may be only a very few who may agree with what you are saying, at least I have yet to come across any of  them........And if there are indeed some who think like you, as you keep claiming, then where are these people?.........I have been reading the whole forum on this and even in this topic......most people are saying the opposite of what you are claiming, and the ones who are saying the positive things about the current state of Paladins are the ones who played the game on lower difficulties that aren't hard enough to stretch the classes to the point where all wrinkles can be exposed and a meaningful comparison can be drawn.

 

And I only wanted to know about the effectiveness of Paladin class within the context of PotD, that was the whole point of starting this thread as I started a new PotD campaign with a Paladin but I didn't want my main character to be the least effective or even a second class member of my party, so I inquired about the usefulness of Paladins and the feedback I have received for the most part is that, PotD is do-able with Paladins, but more or less people consider Paladins to be the underdog class of this game. And the fact that you compare having a Paladin with having a SECOND fighter or second of any other class , is a proof that Paladins are indeed a notch below than other classes that fit within the same role.

 

Because even as off-tank or hybrid front line support class, Paladin is appearing to be weaker than other classes of the ilk. For example, if built properly Priest or Chanter can also hold their own in melee (I am playing a melee priest now, she is doing very well ......stopping the enemies who manage to get past my fighter) while providing much better support than Paladin.

 

So i don't know what to say but in the light of my experience and what most of others are saying, my opinion is starting form against having a paladin in my party....

 

EDIT: And BTW forgive my ignorance but who is 'WE'?.....You keep saying *'WE' think* or *'WE' believe*, is that like a royal WE or what?

Edited April 15, 2015 by Brimsurfer

[Ichthyic]

 

the ones who are saying the positive things about the current state of Paladins are the ones who played the game on lower difficulties

no.  this is not correct.

 

the difference is NOT the level of difficulty, but whether your PC was a paladin vs one of your NPC crew.

 

it makes a HUGE difference because of faith and conviction.

 

those of us like myself, that played a paladin as our main, will have a very different view of them.  I played hard since the very moment I could add a companion, and felt the pally was perfectly suited to an off tank and support role.  have been quite happy with it overall, only feeling like the auras should be party wide instead of area, and perhaps have some level scaling involved.

 

but other than minor tweaks, I had no problems at all using my paly as an off tank and arbalest user.  none.

 

 

 

EDIT: And BTW forgive my ignorance but who is 'WE'?.....You keep saying *'WE' think* or *'WE' believe*, is that like a royal WE or what?

I could be wrong, but I do recall that Gromnir was part of the beta testing crew.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Ichthyic

[Ichthyic]

 

Its mostly in PotD when you get close to realise the full potential of the classes and the contrast between class performances lights up like a Christmas tree on Christmas eve.

 

bull****.

 

 

[Ichthyic]

btw, here's a paladin, POTD solo... with videos to prove it...

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/77212-build-paladin-solo-potd-video-of-the-last-boss-included/?hl=%2Bpotd+%2Bsolo

one of the first POTD solos IIRC.

so your contention gets a big fat yawn from me.

 

[Gromnir]

 

complete untrue.  all through the beta we had many folks arguing that paladins make for better tanks than fighters.  is not our personal pov, but close to 50% o' the folks who have have been playing poe for many months already were rather adamant that the paladin were a superior choice for tanking.  

 

 

 

*shrug*

 

we think the fighter makes a better tank, but is hardly that we were amongst a 95% group... not even freaking close.  

 

for a party dynamic where you want an off-tank, or two tanks, we personal  wouldn't want 2 fighters.  a paladin and a sword & board monk both work very well for Gromnir filling tank roles in poe, and the paladin has additional support abilities that enhance our ubiquitous priestly support.  

 

our favorite tank is actual the sword & board monk and chances are that class and build is what we recommend for folks who keep trying to make the poe paladin into a tank. poe "monks"  (they ain't monastic, so we have a hard time calling 'em monks) can suck up damage and dish out pain with extreme prejudice.  kung fu monks always strike us as kinda a silly addition on a battlefield with heavily armed and armoured combatants, but a combat friar conceptually matches up very well with the poe sword & board monk.  we got a very nice spear & shield wielding monk that is not only ridiculous durable, but it has archers killing themselves and it is providing serious party damage as well.  am knowing folks like hatchet for most tanks, but the sword & board monk tank is as much about dealing hurt as absorbing, so we like the increased accuracy benefits.   

 

think o' the poe "monk" more in western rather than eastern terms and you got what so many is trying to twist the poe paladin into being-- a very capable tank that also does serious damage.  get added benefit that you need not worry about all those support qualities with a monk tank as the monk is actual the front-line class you desire the poe paladin to be.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

It seems to me world is moving in one direction and you are moving in another, mate. There are hardly any people on this whole forum except may be only a very few who may agree with what you are saying, at least I have yet to come across any of  them........And if there are indeed some who think like you, as you keep claiming, then where are these people?.........I have been reading the whole forum on this and even in this topic......most people are saying the opposite of what you are claiming, and the ones who are saying the positive things about the current state of Paladins are the ones who played the game on lower difficulties that aren't hard enough to stretch the classes to the point where all wrinkles can be exposed and a meaningful comparison can be drawn.

 

And I only wanted to know about the effectiveness of Paladin class within the context of PotD, that was the whole point of starting this thread as I started a new PotD campaign with a Paladin but I didn't want my main character to be the least effective or even a second class member of my party, so I inquired about the usefulness of Paladins and the feedback I have received for the most part is that, PotD is do-able with Paladins, but more or less people consider Paladins to be the underdog class of this game. And the fact that you compare having a Paladin with having a SECOND fighter or second of any other class , is a proof that Paladins are indeed a notch below than other classes that fit within the same role.

 

Because even as off-tank or hybrid front line support class, Paladin is appearing to be weaker than other classes of the ilk. For example, if built properly Priest or Chanter can also hold their own in melee (I am playing a melee priest now, she is doing very well ......stopping the enemies who manage to get past my fighter) while providing much better support than Paladin.

 

So i don't know what to say but in the light of my experience and what most of others are saying, my opinion is starting form against having a paladin in my party....

 

EDIT: And BTW forgive my ignorance but who is 'WE'?.....You keep saying *'WE' think* or *'WE' believe*, is that like a royal WE or what?

 

you aren't even paying attention to this thread if you believe Gromnir is the only personage who sees worth in the paladin as a support class.  therefore, most o' your post is based on a ridiculous premise that is ultimately meaningless anyway.  follow the herd mentality has always been a suspect course o' action.  nevertheless, since you brought up your imaginary 95% figure, we observed that many beta folks , folks with far more experience in the game than the average current poster, were near split on the paladin v. fighter as the best tank... though more than a few suggested that chanters were actual the best in that role.

 

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/71065-480-tank-advice-for-a-main-pc-with-full-party-of-story-companions/?p=1583973

 

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/71286-paladins-support-only/?p=1587993

 

"Yeah, paladins have pretty garbage offense. They make for the best pure tanks, though."

 

is a common enough quote from a beta backer who has been playing the game for over 9 months.

 

is more than a few such threads and quotes.

 

priests as tank, off or otherwise?  HA!  we love our combat priests, but you are showing a fundamental lack o' understanding o' the game mechanics if you are genuine in  suggesting that priests better fulfill an off-tank role in poe.  alternatively, such stuff kinda undercuts whatever claims you could possibly make concerning your rationality and objectivity regarding paladins if you place priests ahead o' the knightly order class insofar as tankyness.  

 

am not sure what axe you got to grind regarding paladins. did pallagenia spit in your caeser salad?  being silly.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Infares]

Yeah, in several MMOs, some classes excel at tanking several enemies at once, and some are completely dominant against a smaller number of enemies. In PoE, the Fighter is the former and the Paladin is the latter. With FaC and maxed out favored dispositions, the fighter can't touch the Paladin's defenses, though the Fighter can tank more normal enemies at once.

[AGX-17]

No, you just chose to be a terrible person, in-game. DARCOZZI 4 LYFE

[Brimsurfer]

 

 

the ones who are saying the positive things about the current state of Paladins are the ones who played the game on lower difficulties

no.  this is not correct.

 

the difference is NOT the level of difficulty, but whether your PC was a paladin vs one of your NPC crew.

 

it makes a HUGE difference because of faith and conviction.

 

those of us like myself, that played a paladin as our main, will have a very different view of them.  I played hard since the very moment I could add a companion, and felt the pally was perfectly suited to an off tank and support role.  have been quite happy with it overall, only feeling like the auras should be party wide instead of area, and perhaps have some level scaling involved.

 

but other than minor tweaks, I had no problems at all using my paly as an off tank and arbalest user.  none.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its mostly in PotD when you get close to realise the full potential of the classes and the contrast between class performances lights up like a Christmas tree on Christmas eve.

 

bull****.

 

 

 

 

 

What I said is 100% true in my experience. PotD is a very different experience than any other difficulty , if you do not want to accept that then its your business but you have not played the game on PotD as Paladin and I am only looking for PotD specific feedback, your insight do not have the experience that I am looking for.........

 

Thank you very much but we will not be proceeding with your app....

 

 

btw, here's a paladin, POTD solo... with videos to prove it...

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/77212-build-paladin-solo-potd-video-of-the-last-boss-included/?hl=%2Bpotd+%2Bsolo

 

one of the first POTD solos IIRC.

 

so your contention gets a big fat yawn from me.

 

 

 

Just learn to read mate, what's the point in posting in a topic without reading it or the information that's already been posted before you.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Brimsurfer

[Brimsurfer]

 

 

complete untrue.  all through the beta we had many folks arguing that paladins make for better tanks than fighters.  is not our personal pov, but close to 50% o' the folks who have have been playing poe for many months already were rather adamant that the paladin were a superior choice for tanking.  

 

 

 

*shrug*

 

we think the fighter makes a better tank, but is hardly that we were amongst a 95% group... not even freaking close.  

 

for a party dynamic where you want an off-tank, or two tanks, we personal  wouldn't want 2 fighters.  a paladin and a sword & board monk both work very well for Gromnir filling tank roles in poe, and the paladin has additional support abilities that enhance our ubiquitous priestly support.  

 

our favorite tank is actual the sword & board monk and chances are that class and build is what we recommend for folks who keep trying to make the poe paladin into a tank. poe "monks"  (they ain't monastic, so we have a hard time calling 'em monks) can suck up damage and dish out pain with extreme prejudice.  kung fu monks always strike us as kinda a silly addition on a battlefield with heavily armed and armoured combatants, but a combat friar conceptually matches up very well with the poe sword & board monk.  we got a very nice spear & shield wielding monk that is not only ridiculous durable, but it has archers killing themselves and it is providing serious party damage as well.  am knowing folks like hatchet for most tanks, but the sword & board monk tank is as much about dealing hurt as absorbing, so we like the increased accuracy benefits.   

 

think o' the poe "monk" more in western rather than eastern terms and you got what so many is trying to twist the poe paladin into being-- a very capable tank that also does serious damage.  get added benefit that you need not worry about all those support qualities with a monk tank as the monk is actual the front-line class you desire the poe paladin to be.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

It seems to me world is moving in one direction and you are moving in another, mate. There are hardly any people on this whole forum except may be only a very few who may agree with what you are saying, at least I have yet to come across any of  them........And if there are indeed some who think like you, as you keep claiming, then where are these people?.........I have been reading the whole forum on this and even in this topic......most people are saying the opposite of what you are claiming, and the ones who are saying the positive things about the current state of Paladins are the ones who played the game on lower difficulties that aren't hard enough to stretch the classes to the point where all wrinkles can be exposed and a meaningful comparison can be drawn.

 

And I only wanted to know about the effectiveness of Paladin class within the context of PotD, that was the whole point of starting this thread as I started a new PotD campaign with a Paladin but I didn't want my main character to be the least effective or even a second class member of my party, so I inquired about the usefulness of Paladins and the feedback I have received for the most part is that, PotD is do-able with Paladins, but more or less people consider Paladins to be the underdog class of this game. And the fact that you compare having a Paladin with having a SECOND fighter or second of any other class , is a proof that Paladins are indeed a notch below than other classes that fit within the same role.

 

Because even as off-tank or hybrid front line support class, Paladin is appearing to be weaker than other classes of the ilk. For example, if built properly Priest or Chanter can also hold their own in melee (I am playing a melee priest now, she is doing very well ......stopping the enemies who manage to get past my fighter) while providing much better support than Paladin.

 

So i don't know what to say but in the light of my experience and what most of others are saying, my opinion is starting form against having a paladin in my party....

 

EDIT: And BTW forgive my ignorance but who is 'WE'?.....You keep saying *'WE' think* or *'WE' believe*, is that like a royal WE or what?

 

you aren't even paying attention to this thread if you believe Gromnir is the only personage who sees worth in the paladin as a support class.  therefore, most o' your post is based on a ridiculous premise that is ultimately meaningless anyway.  follow the herd mentality has always been a suspect course o' action.  nevertheless, since you brought up your imaginary 95% figure, we observed that many beta folks , folks with far more experience in the game than the average current poster, were near split on the paladin v. fighter as the best tank... though more than a few suggested that chanters were actual the best in that role.

 

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/71065-480-tank-advice-for-a-main-pc-with-full-party-of-story-companions/?p=1583973

 

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/71286-paladins-support-only/?p=1587993

 

"Yeah, paladins have pretty garbage offense. They make for the best pure tanks, though."

 

is a common enough quote from a beta backer who has been playing the game for over 9 months.

 

is more than a few such threads and quotes.

 

priests as tank, off or otherwise?  HA!  we love our combat priests, but you are showing a fundamental lack o' understanding o' the game mechanics if you are genuine in  suggesting that priests better fulfill an off-tank role in poe.  alternatively, such stuff kinda undercuts whatever claims you could possibly make concerning your rationality and objectivity regarding paladins if you place priests ahead o' the knightly order class insofar as tankyness.  

 

am not sure what axe you got to grind regarding paladins. did pallagenia spit in your caeser salad?  being silly.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

 

I think you are just in denial.......things you are saying don't make sense they are going against experience and the popular opinion (most of this forum and most of reddit community)........there is no point in discussing anything with you because you are not discussing, you are just repeating the same thing over and over again like a stuck recorder disc.

 

But anyway I am playing a Priest now.....so this doesn't matter any more.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Brimsurfer