Are Paladins really that bad?

[Ruminate]

Chanter is specialized, but has action economy on its side.  Their chants just keep on going and going regardless of if they're attacking, using a scroll, tanking, casting an invocation after the 20 second mark, etc.

 

Paladin doesn't have that luxury and maybe equals some of the effects toward end game without the nice 20+ second game changer the chanter has.  Chanters also don't interfere with priest buffs, so currently the least bugged support along with priest class.  Additionally, the paladin has very limited usage of abilities that don't impact the support role heavily unless +10 to 16 accuracy (that maybe overridden by priests) is exciting as their helpful support abilities are either working as intended and suck, or not working as intended and still suck, or just don't have enough uses in the game (pick one, all 3 apply).

 

Chants have the same action economy as Zealous Auras. You can't have more than 1 aura up, but you can't have more than 1 chant up without eating the duration of another chant. Invocations have the same action economy as other Paladin abilities. You only notice the action speed economy on the Chanter because their invocations are rarely used. Rarely being able to utilize one of their defining class features is not an advantage.

 

Some Chanter buffs do interfere with Priest buffs. For example, their +stat invocations are completely suppressed by the priest's +stat spells. On the otherhand, a Darcozzi Paladin's +10 accuracy stacks with everything. Zealous Focus also stacks with Inspiring Radiance and Devotions of the Faithful. Blessing is suppressed by Zealous Focus. Both are suppressed by Eldritch Aim. I've repeated this multiple times throughout the thread.

[Longknife]

A firearms buff to a character that isn't using firearms, or is quick switching multiple firearms, is not an advantage. A 3x per rest attack speed buff on melee DPS or casters is a different kind of advantage. A +10 deflection buff to a character that is not getting hit is not an advantage

 

Then don't get it? That's the beauty of it. Chanter has like 20-30 buffs and you can choose the ones your squad needs the most. On the other hand, you can legitimately build a squad around a Chanter and make a pure firearms team thanks to that chant. The same cannot be said for Paladin.

 

 

 

Their 90 degree cone paralyze lasts 8 seconds at base.

 

 

Do you realize Paralyze means -40 deflection and -40 reflex? That's why you would bring a Chanter: because in the same way a Priest can reliably provide +20 accuracy to a Wizard for help with critting, a Chanter indirectly provides +40% chance of critting for the whole team. 8 Seconds of -40 deflection and -40 reflex is huge. Stupidly so. That's more than enough time to wipe out the entire enemy team. I've also had multiple fights where my Chanter was responsible for a successful getaway, either via distracting the enemy with a summon or stunning so everyone could bail out. Neither the Priest nor the Chanter checkmate one another because they provide similar benefits via seperate methods. For example, a squad that can provide Chanter time to get invocations has little reason not to bring one. Likewise, a Rogue will prefer the Chanter's Paralyze to a Priest's direct accuracy buff because he also gets Sneak attack from Paralyze. The Chanter is also more durable, able to continue casting invocations infinitely without a need to rest. The Priest on the other hand can use his spells more directly and urgently when neccesary, even if they are limited and not always as strong. Same for resurrection: both classes can do it, but the Chanter's is infinite whereas the Priest's is finite. Having both of them side by side is nice because it means the Priest can save some casts for his most powerful spells for something else, OR vice versa (the Chanter can save his invocations for a summon or the like, which btw, the summons definitely live long enough to survive until another invocation is ready, basically making a summon a permanent ally for the battle so long as you protect the Chanter). The same can only minimally be said for Paladin, who gets ONE resurrect to cover for the Priest, and then he cannot do it again and the Priest is going to need to immediately heal the res'ed person because Paladin's res sucks **** and almost kills them again if they don't heal back up.

 

 

The "why take a Chanter instead of a ____" argument doesn't work the same way it does with Paladin. Whereas Paladin is providing 6 accuracy while the other two provide 20+, the other classes all have numbers that can compete. Whereas Paladin has his two +50% Fire attacks per fight, Chanter can provide the entire team with a semi-permanent +25% as long as he's up. He can also provide a Frighten effect without specific conditions needing the be met. You can directly spec a Chanter however you like. Personally, if I were to make my ideal squad, it would be Fighter, Monk, Cipher, Chanter, Priest and Wizard. Druid could possibly replace Wizard but I'm far more familiar and experienced with Wizards, nor would I cry a river if Rogue came in place of Cipher or Chanter; I simply prefer Cipher and Chanter because they have more control skills to help keep the battle in order, whereas a Rogue merely brings solid damage. I would never even contemplate replacing any class with a Paladin. Paladin would be the very last pick, for a multitude of reasons.

 

 

 

I gotta be blunt, I'm getting rather sick of this. Why? Because if I'm blunt, you seem to have some irrational love of Paladins that's driving you to be hostile towards me simply for suggesting they're not God's gift to man in Pillars of Eternity. They're not. Just look at the numbers, look at what they're capable of, look at how other classes have their exact same skills, except more powerful, with more range and with more variety amongst the other classes in general.

 

A Paladin gets a +50% burn damage skill twice a fight? A Monk has a +50% crush damage skill that can be spammed twice a second. A Paladin has a single target heal spell? A Priest and Druid both have multiple AOE heals. A Paladin can temporarily disable status ailments that eventually come back? A Priest can permanently remove them with an AOE that hits multiple people. A Paladin can provide the team with accuracy or defense buffs with limited range? A Priest can do this without the range problems, as can a Chanter. A Paladin can resurrect singular targets that'll quickly die again if not healed soon after? A Priest and Chanter can AOE res with no problems whatsoever. A Paladin can, under very specific circumstances, Frighten enemies?  A Wizard, Chanter, Priest or Cipher can do this on command, while a Barbarian can provide Sickened just by....existing. A Paladin can increase his damage and attack speed vs. a specific foe 3 times per rest? A Barb can do this universally for every fight and every enemy, a Priest can buff a specific target to up it's damage.

 

The list goes on. Hell, I challenge you to find something Paladin has that's universally superior to anything any other class has. Aside from it's superior defenses which fall flat due to it's inferior control skills to Fighter (and Fighter being able to temporarily get superior defenses aswell, plus the passive regen which definitely helps) so allow those defenses to be best utilized, there's nothing.

Edited April 16, 2015 by Longknife

[Ruminate]

 

A firearms buff to a character that isn't using firearms, or is quick switching multiple firearms, is not an advantage. A 3x per rest attack speed buff on melee DPS or casters is a different kind of advantage. A +10 deflection buff to a character that is not getting hit is not an advantage

 

Then don't get it? That's the beauty of it. Chanter has like 20-30 buffs and you can choose the ones your squad needs the most. On the other hand, you can legitimately build a squad around a Chanter and make a pure firearms team thanks to that chant. The same cannot be said for Paladin.

 

 

 

Their 90 degree cone paralyze lasts 8 seconds at base.

 

 

Do you realize Paralyze means -40 deflection and -40 reflex? That's why you would bring a Chanter: because in the same way a Priest can reliably provide +20 accuracy to a Wizard for help with critting, a Chanter indirectly provides +40% chance of critting for the whole team. 8 Seconds of -40 deflection and -40 reflex is huge. Stupidly so. That's more than enough time to wipe out the entire enemy team. I've also had multiple fights where my Chanter was responsible for a successful getaway, either via distracting the enemy with a summon or stunning so everyone could bail out. Neither the Priest nor the Chanter checkmate one another because they provide similar benefits via seperate methods. For example, a squad that can provide Chanter time to get invocations has little reason not to bring one. Likewise, a Rogue will prefer the Chanter's Paralyze to a Priest's direct accuracy buff because he also gets Sneak attack from Paralyze. The Chanter is also more durable, able to continue casting invocations infinitely without a need to rest. The Priest on the other hand can use his spells more directly and urgently when neccesary, even if they are limited and not always as strong. Same for resurrection: both classes can do it, but the Chanter's is infinite whereas the Priest's is finite. Having both of them side by side is nice because it means the Priest can save some casts for his most powerful spells for something else, OR vice versa (the Chanter can save his invocations for a summon or the like, which btw, the summons definitely live long enough to survive until another invocation is ready, basically making a summon a permanent ally for the battle so long as you protect the Chanter). The same can only minimally be said for Paladin, who gets ONE resurrect to cover for the Priest, and then he cannot do it again and the Priest is going to need to immediately heal the res'ed person because Paladin's res sucks **** and almost kills them again if they don't heal back up.

 

 

The "why take a Chanter instead of a ____" argument doesn't work the same way it does with Paladin. Whereas Paladin is providing 6 accuracy while the other two provide 20+, the other classes all have numbers that can compete. Whereas Paladin has his two +50% Fire attacks per fight, Chanter can provide the entire team with a semi-permanent +25% as long as he's up. He can also provide a Frighten effect without specific conditions needing the be met. You can directly spec a Chanter however you like. Personally, if I were to make my ideal squad, it would be Fighter, Monk, Cipher, Chanter, Priest and Wizard. Druid could possibly replace Wizard but I'm far more familiar and experienced with Wizards, nor would I cry a river if Rogue came in place of Cipher or Chanter; I simply prefer Cipher and Chanter because they have more control skills to help keep the battle in order, whereas a Rogue merely brings solid damage. I would never even contemplate replacing any class with a Paladin. Paladin would be the very last pick, for a multitude of reasons.

 

 

 

I gotta be blunt, I'm getting rather sick of this. Why? Because if I'm blunt, you seem to have some irrational love of Paladins that's driving you to be hostile towards me simply for suggesting they're not God's gift to man in Pillars of Eternity. They're not. Just look at the numbers, look at what they're capable of, look at how other classes have their exact same skills, except more powerful, with more range and with more variety amongst the other classes in general.

 

A Paladin gets a +50% burn damage skill twice a fight? A Monk has a +50% crush damage skill that can be spammed twice a second. A Paladin has a single target heal spell? A Priest and Druid both have multiple AOE heals. A Paladin can temporarily disable status ailments that eventually come back? A Priest can permanently remove them with an AOE that hits multiple people. A Paladin can provide the team with accuracy or defense buffs with limited range? A Priest can do this without the range problems, as can a Chanter. A Paladin can resurrect singular targets that'll quickly die again if not healed soon after? A Priest and Chanter can AOE res with no problems whatsoever. A Paladin can, under very specific circumstances, Frighten enemies?  A Wizard, Chanter, Priest or Cipher can do this on command, while a Barbarian can provide Sickened just by....existing. A Paladin can increase his damage and attack speed vs. a specific foe 3 times per rest? A Barb can do this universally for every fight and every enemy, a Priest can buff a specific target to up it's damage.

 

The list goes on. Hell, I challenge you to find something Paladin has that's universally superior to anything any other class has. Aside from it's superior defenses which fall flat due to it's inferior control skills to Fighter (and Fighter being able to temporarily get superior defenses aswell, plus the passive regen which definitely helps) so allow those defenses to be best utilized, there's nothing.

 

 

I can make a squad built around a Darcozzi Paladin that specifically tackles PotD's increased defenses.

 

Paralyze Invocation has to hit first. Not only does it have to hit first, but Invocations also have lower spell accuracy than the typical spell. It also requires a long ramp up time. We are talking about effectiveness on PotD and not on hard, right? Again, why not just replace the Chanter with someone else that can provide paralysis... or even better: petriy? I'm just using the exact same logic that you use on the Paladin. So if you think that kind of logic is irrational, well...

 

I don't have an irrational love for Paladins. Ive been explaining their strengths and weaknesses throughout the thread. You, on the otherhand, have an irrational hate for Paladins and have been spreading misinformation about how their abilities work. When i'm using same exact logic as you against the Chanter, you get even more irrational and spread even more misinformation.

Edited April 16, 2015 by Ruminate

[Longknife]

I can make a squad built around a Darcozzi Paladin that specifically tackles PotD's increased defenses.

 

Paralyze Invocation has to hit first. Not only does it have to hit first, but Invocations also have lower spell accuracy than the typical spell. It also requires a long ramp up time. We are talking about effectiveness on PotD and not on hard, right? Again, why not just replace the Chanter with someone else that can provide paralysis... or even better: petriy? I'm just using the exact same logic that you use on the Paladin. So if you think that kind of logic is irrational, well...

 

I don't have an irrational love for Paladins. Ive been explaining their strengths and weaknesses throughout the thread. You, on the otherhand, have an irrational hate for Paladins and have been spreading misinformation about how their abilities work. When i'm using same exact logic as you against the Chanter, you get even more irrational and spread even more misinformation.

 

 

 

Again, why not just replace the Chanter with someone else that can provide paralysis... or even better: petrify?

 

Which class does this?

 

Exactly. Whereas I've named examples of things Paladins do and things other classes do better, you're just saying "why isn't Chanter even better than it already is" without naming examples of superior performance. The only classes that provide a paralyze like Chanter are Cipher and Wizard. Cipher's is more single-target with a small chance of hitting more targets, but it's unreliable in that regard. I have no idea where you're getting that Chanter's invocation is unreliable. Show me where it says "this has low accuracy" or the like on that skill, because it doesn't; it can be expected to work as frequently as any other ailment attempt. It may miss some, but it's a freaking AOE. You can expect it to hit AT LEAST 60% of it's targets, usually 80%, which would be far too many for a Cipher to keep under control. Coincidentally, a Cipher's paralyze ability will dwindle as the battle carries on and his focus lowers, making it so Chanter and Cipher synergize perfectly in this regard, with both buying time for the other to get their paralyze off. Wizard? His is legit learned at level 10 or 11. Hardly something to rely on for the full game, though very very strong once you get it, though by that same time you'll have replaced the Cipher's paralyze (or rather found something better to focus on) as well.

 

 

And what "misinformation" have I spread?

 

That you even suspect I have some irrational hatred of Paladins? That kinda just reinforces my point you love them. I posted constructive criticism about clear flaws I see. Unless you can cite a list of me providing misinformation or something, then I don't think your claim carries much weight. My first class I went to make when I got the game was actually Paladin, but I quickly rerolled into another class because it felt underwhelming. As time went on, it not only felt underwhelming, but it became clear that Paladin had underperfomed compared to every other class I'd tried, and the forums were ripe with threads pointing out said fact. All I did was take common knowledge about the Paladin class and attempt a concise list of problems the class had that made it weaker than others, while suggesting ways to fix it.

 

 

I'd also be curious how a Darcozzi Paladin would be tweaked for defenses vs. PoTD. Darcozzi gives a flame shield. That's it. 5 DT vs. Freeze is the difference between a Paladin being pro for PotD and Chanter (and presumably several others) being a no-go...?

Edited April 17, 2015 by Longknife

[Ruminate]

 

I can make a squad built around a Darcozzi Paladin that specifically tackles PotD's increased defenses.

 

Paralyze Invocation has to hit first. Not only does it have to hit first, but Invocations also have lower spell accuracy than the typical spell. It also requires a long ramp up time. We are talking about effectiveness on PotD and not on hard, right? Again, why not just replace the Chanter with someone else that can provide paralysis... or even better: petriy? I'm just using the exact same logic that you use on the Paladin. So if you think that kind of logic is irrational, well...

 

I don't have an irrational love for Paladins. Ive been explaining their strengths and weaknesses throughout the thread. You, on the otherhand, have an irrational hate for Paladins and have been spreading misinformation about how their abilities work. When i'm using same exact logic as you against the Chanter, you get even more irrational and spread even more misinformation.

 

 

 

Again, why not just replace the Chanter with someone else that can provide paralysis... or even better: petrify?

 

Which class does this?

 

Exactly. Whereas I've named examples of things Paladins do and things other classes do better, you're just saying "why isn't Chanter even better than it already is" without naming examples of superior performance. The only classes that provide a paralyze like Chanter are Cipher and Wizard. Cipher's is more single-target with a small chance of hitting more targets, but it's unreliable. I have no idea where you're getting that Chanter's invocation is unreliable. Show me where it says "this has low accuracy" or the like on that skill, because it doesn't; it can be expected to work as frequently as any other ailment attempt. It may miss some, but it's a freaking AOE. You can expect it to hit AT LEAST 60% of it's targets, usually 80%, which would be far too many for a Cipher to keep under control. Coincidentally, a Cipher's paralyze ability will dwindle as the battle carries on and his focus lowers, making it so Chanter and Cipher synergize perfectly in this regard, with both buying time for the other to get their paralyze off. Wizard? His is legit learned at level 10 or 11. Hardly something to rely on for the full game, though very very strong once you get it, though by that same time you'll have replaced the Cipher's paralyze (or rather found something better to focus on) as well.

 

 

And what "misinformation" have I spread?

 

That you even suspect I have some irrational hatred of Paladins? That kinda just reinforces my point you love them. I posted constructive criticism about clear flaws I see. Unless you can cite a list of me providing misinformation or something, then I don't think your claim carries much weight. My first class I went to make when I got the game was actually Paladin, but I quickly rerolled into another class because it felt underwhelming. As time went on, it not only felt underwhelming, but it became clear that Paladin had underperfomed compared to every other class I'd tried, and the forums were ripe with threads pointing out said fact. All I did was take common knowledge about the Paladin class and attempt a concise list of problems the class had that made it weaker than others, while suggesting ways to fix it.

 

 

I'd also be curious how a Darcozzi Paladin would be tweaked for defenses vs. PoTD. Darcozzi gives a flame shield. That's it. 5 DT vs. Freeze is the difference between a Paladin being pro for PotD and Chanter (and presumably several others) being a no-go...?

 

 

 

Invocations do not have an accuracy bonus. They use the chanter's base 25 accuracy.

Cipher spells have a bonus accuracy of 5-10 and their base accuracy is 25.

Wizard spells have a bonus accuracy of 10 and their base accuracy is 20.

Druid spells have a bonus accuracy of 10 and their base accuracy is 20.

Priest spells have a bonus accuracy of 10-15 and their base accuracy is 20. The exception are their traps, but those have even better accuracy due to the mechanics skill.

 

Cipher's version casts faster, you don't need to wait 20+ seconds, its more accurate, and you can cast it more often. They can also charm and stun enemies.

Wizard can also paralyze. You don't need to wait 20+ seconds, its more accurate, and you can cast it more often. They can also confuse, petrify, and knockdown enemies.

Druids can't paralyze, but they can knockdown, petrify, and stun enemies without waiting 20+ seconds. They're also more accurate and apply their spells more often.

Priests can't paralyze, but they can knockdown enemies. They don't need to wait 20+ seconds either. A high mechanics skill makes their knockdown so accurate that they can crit most enemies on PotD and have them on the floor for 20+ seconds.

 

You're spreading the misinformation that the Cipher's version is more unreliable than the Chanter's version.

 

You also started this thread claiming Paladins suck:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/77333-paladins-why-the-suck-and-how-to-un-suck-them/

 

In that very thread, on the first page, I pointed out that Lay on Hands heals for a lot more than 30 endurance.

On the third page, you were telling someone that Lay on Hands heals for 30 endurance.

Later on the third page, I correct you again by saying Lay on Hands actually heals for a lot more than 30 endurance.

Edited April 16, 2015 by Ruminate

[Laz0r]

Compared to others in this thread, I don't think Paladins are terrible, I just think they get out-shined in mostly every role by another class. To be honest with you, I think a quick fix would be to increase the range of their aura from ~3 meters to 15 meters. Paladins can definitely be a good tank if you're playing as the PC because of the defensive bonuses you get from role-playing, but their auras are just about useless. The only good one is the +3 DR because it can benefit the other tanks, but their accuracy aura has no purpose because it only has a 3 meter radius. Essentially you're giving accuracy to units who don't even make use of it (tank), unless of course you have a melee DPS in the area.

 

And before someone says "But what about Paladins who are in the DPS role", no... just no. Literally every class in the game can out-damage a paladin, they are probably the worst DPS class in the entire game at this point. The role they were intended to fill is the off-tank support role, but I just think they need a little bit more help before there is a merit to take them over another fighter.

Edited April 17, 2015 by Laz0r

[Longknife]

Invocations do not have an accuracy bonus. They use the chanter's base 25 accuracy.

Cipher spells have a bonus accuracy of 5-10 and their base accuracy is 25.

Wizard spells have a bonus accuracy of 10 and their base accuracy is 20.

Druid spells have a bonus accuracy of 10 and their base accuracy is 20.

Priest spells have a bonus accuracy of 10-15 and their base accuracy is 20. The exception are their traps, but those have even better accuracy due to the mechanics skill.

 

Cipher's version casts faster, you don't need to wait 20+ seconds, its more accurate, and you can cast it more often. They can also charm and stun enemies.

Wizard can also paralyze. You don't need to wait 20+ seconds, its more accurate, and you can cast it more often. They can also confuse, petrify, and knockdown enemies.

Druids can't paralyze, but they can knockdown, petrify, and stun enemies without waiting 20+ seconds. They're also more accurate and apply their spells more often.

Priests can't paralyze, but they can knockdown enemies. They don't need to wait 20+ seconds either. A high mechanics skill makes their knockdown so accurate that they can crit most enemies on PotD and have them on the floor for 20+ seconds.

 

You're spreading the misinformation that the Cipher's version is more unreliable than the Chanter's version.

 

You also started this thread claiming Paladins suck:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/77333-paladins-why-the-suck-and-how-to-un-suck-them/

 

In that very thread, on the first page, I pointed out that Lay on Hands heals for a lot more than 30 endurance.

On the third page, you were telling someone that Lay on Hands heals for 30 endurance.

Later on the third page, I correct you again by saying Lay on Hands actually heals for a lot more than 30 endurance.

 

 

Please quote me where I stated the Cipher's Paralyze is more unreliable. I think you'll find I stated Cipher's Paralyze can sometimes paralyze multiple targets, but unreliably so. How is this not reasonable and accurate? Perhaps you misunderstood.

 

And if you're also implying I at some point stated Chanters get an accuracy bonus for casting their AOE paralyze, please quote that as well.

 

As for the only other example, please cite where Lay On Hands heals for more than 30 endurance. The only pool of knowledge about the game that we have lists the basic Lay On Hands as healing for 30 endurance. Might can increase that amount, but the base amount is 30, at least according to the wiki. If you've got some other source that shows otherwise, by all means.

 

If you're claiming my thread is "misinformation," again this sounds absurd and I'd like to hear concrete examples.

 

 

 

 

To imply I am "blatantly spreading misinformation" is nothing short of absurd. You've cited two examples that I'd love to see a quote on and a third where I simply want to hear a source or reason as to why you're so sure.

 

If you want to know why I'm accusing you of having some emotional investment in Paladins for some reason, this is it. You're accusing me of having some agenda against Paladins for some reason, to the degree to which I'm running around purposefully lying about them in some strange scheme to...what? Keep people from playing them? Ask yourself how absurd that sounds. Furthermore I'm familiar with this tactic: it's called an ad hominem. Where you attack the person behind the argument when you find difficulty attacking the argument itself. Listen, I don't sit here accusing you of lying about things to further some strange agenda. All I said was I'm getting the sense you're a bit too emotionally invested in Paladin....which still seems to be the case for me. All that was meant is just look at the numbers, compare them by classes, and focus purely on the numbers and I think you'll find Paladin difficult to defend.

 

 

 

So I'll ask again:

 

1) Please name a class that has such amazingly superior paralyze/petrify ability to Chanter. Please do not name Cipher as I already addressed that and how the two synergize quite well together.

 

2) Please quote me where I've "spread misinformation" in regards to Ciphers or anything really.

Edited April 17, 2015 by Longknife

[Ruminate]

 

Invocations do not have an accuracy bonus. They use the chanter's base 25 accuracy.

Cipher spells have a bonus accuracy of 5-10 and their base accuracy is 25.

Wizard spells have a bonus accuracy of 10 and their base accuracy is 20.

Druid spells have a bonus accuracy of 10 and their base accuracy is 20.

Priest spells have a bonus accuracy of 10-15 and their base accuracy is 20. The exception are their traps, but those have even better accuracy due to the mechanics skill.

 

Cipher's version casts faster, you don't need to wait 20+ seconds, its more accurate, and you can cast it more often. They can also charm and stun enemies.

Wizard can also paralyze. You don't need to wait 20+ seconds, its more accurate, and you can cast it more often. They can also confuse, petrify, and knockdown enemies.

Druids can't paralyze, but they can knockdown, petrify, and stun enemies without waiting 20+ seconds. They're also more accurate and apply their spells more often.

Priests can't paralyze, but they can knockdown enemies. They don't need to wait 20+ seconds either. A high mechanics skill makes their knockdown so accurate that they can crit most enemies on PotD and have them on the floor for 20+ seconds.

 

You're spreading the misinformation that the Cipher's version is more unreliable than the Chanter's version.

 

You also started this thread claiming Paladins suck:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/77333-paladins-why-the-suck-and-how-to-un-suck-them/

 

In that very thread, on the first page, I pointed out that Lay on Hands heals for a lot more than 30 endurance.

On the third page, you were telling someone that Lay on Hands heals for 30 endurance.

Later on the third page, I correct you again by saying Lay on Hands actually heals for a lot more than 30 endurance.

 

 

Please quote me where I stated the Cipher's Paralyze is more unreliable. I think you'll find I stated Cipher's Paralyze can sometimes paralyze multiple targets, but unreliably so. How is this not reasonable and accurate? Perhaps you misunderstood.

 

And if you're also implying I at some point stated Chanters get an accuracy bonus for casting their AOE paralyze, please quote that as well.

 

As for the only other example, please cite where Lay On Hands heals for more than 30 endurance. The only pool of knowledge about the game that we have lists the basic Lay On Hands as healing for 30 endurance. Might can increase that amount, but the base amount is 30, at least according to the wiki. If you've got some other source that shows otherwise, by all means.

 

If you're claiming my thread is "misinformation," again this sounds absurd and I'd like to hear concrete examples.

 

 

 

 

To imply I am "blatantly spreading misinformation" is nothing short of absurd. You've cited two examples that I'd love to see a quote on and a third where I simply want to hear a source or reason as to why you're so sure.

 

If you want to know why I'm accusing you of having some emotional investment in Paladins for some reason, this is it. You're accusing me of having some agenda against Paladins for some reason, to the degree to which I'm running around purposefully lying about them in some strange scheme to...what? Keep people from playing them? Ask yourself how absurd that sounds. Furthermore I'm familiar with this tactic: it's called an ad hominem. Where you attack the person behind the argument when you find difficulty attacking the argument itself. Listen, I don't sit here accusing you of lying about things to further some strange agenda. All I said was I'm getting the sense you're a bit too emotionally invested in Paladin....which still seems to be the case for me. All that was meant is just look at the numbers, compare them by classes, and focus purely on the numbers and I think you'll find Paladin difficult to defend.

 

 

 

So I'll ask again:

 

1) Please name a class that has such amazingly superior paralyze/petrify ability to Chanter. Please do not name Cipher as I already addressed that and how the two synergize quite well together.

 

2) Please quote me where I've "spread misinformation" in regards to Ciphers or anything really.

 

 

You said, and I quote, "Cipher's is more single-target with a small chance of hitting more targets, but it's unreliable. I have no idea where you're getting that Chanter's invocation is unreliable."

If you call the Ciphers version unreliable, yet; have no idea how the Chanter's invocation is unreliable, then it stands to reason that you believe the Cipher's version is more unreliable than the Chanter's version.

If not, then your thoughts are irrational.

 

I never said you were running around lying about Paladins in some grand scheme to do whatever.

I said, "you have an irrational hate for Paladins and have been spreading misinformation about how their abilities work.".

Are you spreading misinformation because you want to "keep people from playing them"? No. I'm not irrational, like you, to think you'd do that.

Are you spreading misinformation because you're ignorant about how the game works? Probably.

 

On the other hand, before I accused you of irrational hate, you said that I "seem to have some irrational love of Paladins that's driving (me) to be hostile towards (you) simply for suggesting they're not God's gift to man in Pillars of Eternity.". Correcting your misinformation does not mean I want you to believe they're "God's gift to man." You were being irrational when you said that.

 

I've already named three classes that have superior petrification or paralysis. You simply refuse to listen.

I've already explained how Lay on Hands heals for more than 30 endurance in your own thread about Paladins. I'm tired of repeating myself.

[Raven Darkholme]

Longknife also repeated his mistaken opinion, that the accuracy bonus of the paladin doesn't stack with priests...

Maybe it's no use to repeatedly preach to him about the paladin, he just doesn't like them, because they are not on a level with the truly strong classes like monk, cipher and so forth, so they have to be bad by default....

[lastpawn]

Paladins are the Bards of this game. Can do a little bit of everything reasonably well. (Even quite well, when it comes to tanking.) Instead of calling them bad, how about we accept that they're jacks of all trades, masters of none, and move on.

[Raz415]

This thread is 12 pages long and filled with garbage tbh, Paladins have absolutely no problem in finishing the game on the hardest difficulty level (even TCS) in more than one role. They're "not THAT bad". Stop feeding the trolls and let the thread rest.

[MoxyWoo]

 

-snip-

 

Paladin doesn't have that luxury and maybe equals some of the effects toward end game without the nice 20+ second game changer the chanter has.  Chanters also don't interfere with priest buffs, so currently the least bugged support along with priest class.  Additionally, the paladin has very limited usage of abilities that don't impact the support role heavily unless +10 to 16 accuracy (that maybe overridden by priests) is exciting as their helpful support abilities are either working as intended and suck, or not working as intended and still suck, or just don't have enough uses in the game (pick one, all 3 apply).

 

-snip-

 

-snip-  On the otherhand, a Darcozzi Paladin's +10 accuracy stacks with everything. Zealous Focus also stacks with Inspiring Radiance and Devotions of the Faithful. -snip-

 

 

While your post is helpful information wise, it does not address the lackluster support provided by paladins.  Only a very specific Dracozzi order which has 2 talents devoted to support and tanking(retaliation early) can be considered "adequate".  Solutions were provided by Longknife in his other thread in a constructive and assertive manner with the unfortunate side effect that he is now being "lynch mobbed" by others as yourself for small points when overall is was a GREAT topic trying to enact change and bug fixes for the class.

[Longknife]

You said, and I quote, "Cipher's is more single-target with a small chance of hitting more targets, but it's unreliable. I have no idea where you're getting that Chanter's invocation is unreliable."

If you call the Ciphers version unreliable, yet; have no idea how the Chanter's invocation is unreliable, then it stands to reason that you believe the Cipher's version is more unreliable than the Chanter's version.

If not, then your thoughts are irrational.

 

I never said you were running around lying about Paladins in some grand scheme to do whatever.

I said, "you have an irrational hate for Paladins and have been spreading misinformation about how their abilities work.".

Are you spreading misinformation because you want to "keep people from playing them"? No. I'm not irrational, like you, to think you'd do that.

Are you spreading misinformation because you're ignorant about how the game works? Probably.

 

On the other hand, before I accused you of irrational hate, you said that I "seem to have some irrational love of Paladins that's driving (me) to be hostile towards (you) simply for suggesting they're not God's gift to man in Pillars of Eternity.". Correcting your misinformation does not mean I want you to believe they're "God's gift to man." You were being irrational when you said that.

 

I've already named three classes that have superior petrification or paralysis. You simply refuse to listen.

I've already explained how Lay on Hands heals for more than 30 endurance in your own thread about Paladins. I'm tired of repeating myself.

 

 

 

As I said, reread and view it with this context: The ability for Cipher's paralyze to hit multiple targets is unreliable. This is 100% true. It'll reliably hit the target itself, but not those near the target, which may or may not get paralyzed.

 

And no, you named a class that I also named. Wizard's paralyze is absolute end-game and not something reliable. Druid and Priest are alternatives. A knockdown =/= paralyze. Paralyze tanks the enemy's deflection and reflexes by 40, knock down does not. Paralyze will make everyone crit happy vs those targets, knock down will not.

 

As for Lay on Hands, don't you think perhaps it's possible I missed the post? SEE HOW I CAN SAY "OH I WAS WRONG" and not have it be this big deal, like I've got some grudge against Paladins and thus I'll refuse to admit any perks Paladins have? But again, I do not feel as though that's enough to validate a Paladin over a Priest. It's, as I've repeatedly stated, a single target once-per-encounter ability, which is what Paladin repeatedly suffers from. Everything a Paladin does, save for auras, is single target and per rest/per encounter. If there's a fight where the team suffers from an AOE, a Priest will save the squad, not a Paladin. It's actually a pretty good heal Paladin has, if only it could be used more. Bumping the per encounter amount up to 2 or 3 would fix this and help make Paladin a viable alternative, able to heal more in the short term but less in the long term. As things stand now, Paladin will quickly be outpaced by Priest the MOMENT more than one target ever needs heals.

 

Again, that's the problem. Paladin is inflexible and doesn't seem prepared for some of the more realistic problems you might encounter. Any Druid for example that casts plague of insects on your squad is going to demand a quick end to the battle or a Priest to heal that status off of the party.

 

 

The issue quite simply is this: name a battle scenario where you think a Paladin and his abilities can save the party from a wipe. If you do, someone can no doubtedly propose another class filling the Paladin's shoes that would remedy the problem the exact same way. (AKA "The paladin temporarily removed Plague of Insects off the Chanter, allowing him to AOE res the party and turn the battle around" could be met with "The priest could both remove the plague of insects and res multiple targets himself;" not talking about countering it with "Wiz would DD enough to avoid that problem")

   We lack an example where Paladin's abilities combine into something truly unique to help keep the squad together and alive. At best it's doing what a Priest does to a lesser degree or being a buffer for the absolute end-game scenario (Level 10+).

 

 

 

Longknife also repeated his mistaken opinion, that the accuracy bonus of the paladin doesn't stack with priests...

 

 

I for one would love to hear some sources on a lot of this. That wasn't my point; go through and read, someone else names that one. I've repeatedly argued that a Priest simply provides superior accuracy benefits in every way, dwarfing the 6 accuracy a Paladin gives.

Edited April 17, 2015 by Longknife

[b0rsuk]

Are Shieldbearer paladins really that bad ? I'm considering running a party with one. +10 deflection in an area sounds nice, and I can combine it with Zealous Focus. Not so nice for a tank, but for a 2nd row fighter with Reach it should be allright. Revival once per encounter, mmmhhh.

 

No, Paladin support abilities are not as great as Priest's, but he can deal damage and tank. There is also no great synergy between paladin abilities. I think they're more generalists, with a bias towards melee parties. Paladin can keep dishing out damage and supporting while under area attacks, something other support classes struggle to do.

Edited April 17, 2015 by b0rsuk

[Brimsurfer]

Are Shieldbearer paladins really that bad ? I'm considering running a party with one. +10 deflection in an area sounds nice, and I can combine it with Zealous Focus. Not so nice for a tank, but for a 2nd row fighter with Reach it should be allright. Revival once per encounter, mmmhhh.

 

No, Paladin support abilities are not as great as Priest's, but he can deal damage and tank. There is also no great synergy between paladin abilities. I think they're more generalists, with a bias towards melee parties. Paladin can keep dishing out damage and supporting while under area attacks, something other support classes struggle to do.

 

You'll be better off as Chanter.....

Edited April 17, 2015 by Brimsurfer

[Ceranai]

God I totally skipped over that paralyse shout......that would have made my solo triple crown run soooooo much easier lol....

 

God chanters are so OP

Edited April 18, 2015 by Ceranai

[eubatham]

Paladins are the Bards of this game. Can do a little bit of everything reasonably well. (Even quite well, when it comes to tanking.) Instead of calling them bad, how about we accept that they're jacks of all trades, masters of none, and move on.

 

Everyone covers multiple roles in this game, the Paladin just happens to be quite bad as the roles he can fill and is (almost) completely overshadowed by a Priest (like, literally when it comes to most buffs).