Are Paladins really not that bad?

[gochargers2156]

Hello all, I've been playing a solo PotD playthrough as a Paladin and I cannot really fathom all of the hate that Paladin as a class has been getting.  I have completed the playthrough already with a monk and I have to say that the Paladin thus far has been vastly easier, if not entirely effortless for a fair portion of the game.  Linked below is a video of me solo'ing the Sky Dragon on PotD difficutly with said Paladin, without the use of any traps or any real "cheese" tactics that most people would use, even with a full party.  I can't attest to how well a Paladin functions in a group because I haven't played that way, but as a standalone character, they are fairly amazing.  I apologize if the video is terrible, it's the only one I've ever recorded, but I feel like it shows that Paladins are definitely not bad.

 

[Longknife]

I actually wouldn't be too surprised if Paladin does well solo simply because it has a little of everything. A matchup I'd be curious about solo would be Fighter vs. Paladin or maybe Priest vs. Paladin, as those two would highlight if it's the tankiness or the support of the Paladin that you're appreciating.

[b0rsuk]

Paladins are somewhat tricky to discuss all at once, because their order has more impact than Priest faith.

 

1. They can use most or all their buffs practically in the first seconds of combat. A priest has the bottleneck called Recovery Time, which all buffs have to go through.

 

+ Aura has no casting time, and no recovery.

+ On-kill effects don't interfere with auras

+ On-flames effects trigger when you smack things, which you want to do anyway. On-flames effects don't interfere with auras and on-kill effects.

+ Reviving Exhortation is designed in such a way that you don't want to cast it early. Not only you're doing something WRONG if you need to cast it early. But also, you don't pay the price of damage over time if you cast it near the end of combat.

+ Coordinated Attacks is passive, doesn't interfere with anything except non-attacking.

+ You probably don't need to cast Lay On Hands early.

 

You can go exhortation-heavy, and then recovery could be a problem. But Priests don't have the option to build into something as fluid.

 

2. Mobility.

Priests need to spend several "turns" to get their buffs off. But their buffs usually have short range, or even worse - are centered around the priest and immobile, like Consecrated Ground. Having a priest in the middle of a melee group is a bigger risk than with a paladin. So Priest parties are encouraged to fight defensively and hold choke points. You can't buff with short-ranged spells while charging forward. Buffs like Consecrated Ground and Moonwell are a double-edged sword. If someone casts a damage-over-time spell in there, you have to suffer it. With Paladin, you can move away. Switch to Zealous Charge for best results.

 

Paladin's auras work outside combat ! Your party can have the initial ranged volley or sneak attack with accuracy boost. Zealous Charge aura works outside combat, too. You can more easily sneak into positions, it magnifies the effect of stealth and sneak attacks.

 

There are actually only two paladin auras you'd want to use together: Zealous Endurance and Zealous Focus. Other two combinations - Charge+Endurance, Charge+Focus - let you switch practically without penalties.

 

3. Deprive the Unworthy may be a sleeper ability. I'm not aware of any such effect that would work on enemies. If enemy AI is improved and/or expansions come with more buffers, it may become more valuable. Monsters just rarely use buffs intelligently.

Edited April 17, 2015 by b0rsuk

[Longknife]

A plus of Paladins is that they get their buffs off practically straight away, even if they're relatively lower. A priest must spend a few rounds casting them, and with many of them having low range or even being immobile AND centered around the priest (Consecrated Ground), paladin is more mobile support than a priest.

 

 

Yeah I'm moreso interested in Paladin vs. Fighter for that reason. The big thing about the video we saw was that the Paladin could tank. Fighter is an equal in that regard, so I think Fighter vs. Paladin would highlight just how nice the ability to tank can be in solo play.

[Ceranai]

I didnt even pause the game once with my chanter when i soloed the sky dragon... just sayin  (chanters OP)

 

Also all your DPS here came from summons as far as I could tell? surely all this proves is that any class with the right items can solo?

 

Dont get me wrong i dont think paladins are terrible, whats in question is if they can do anything useful besides sit there and tank, and compared to other tanky builds (chanter being the one i have most experience with) I just dont think paladins bring much else to the team other than a meatshield, a heal and some average buffs

Edited April 17, 2015 by Ceranai

[dukefx]

No real cheese.... solo..... are you kidding me? Food, potions, beetles. I managed to solo it with a fighter without using anything but the fighter and its abilities, also no pausing. If the video was meant as a demonstration of how much garbage you have to use to be on par with other classes then you have succeeded.

[Ceranai]

No real cheese.... solo..... are you kidding me? Food, potions, beetles. I managed to solo it with a fighter without using anything but the fighter and its abilities, also no pausing. If the video was meant as a demonstration of how much garbage you have to use to be on par with other classes then you have succeeded.

My point exactly

[Kaigen42]

My playstyle involves sending my tanks in to hold the enemy and then forgetting they exist until they need to reposition. In that context, the Paladin and the Fighter are virtually identical, except that the Paladin provides a party buff and the Fighter has extra engagement. Could I get more performance from my Fighter if I micro'd him a bit? Sure, but I get much more performance by spending that attention on my Cipher or Druid. As it is, I occasionally pop Vigorous Defense on the Fighter if he's taking too much heat, or have the Paladin toss Lay on Hands or a Reinforcing Exhortation on a back-liner taking damage from an archer. Sometimes I like to use Into the Fray just to watch it fail spectacularly because the Fighter is too far away (forcing him to move and break engagements) or because the enemy nicks a hit-box on it's way to the Fighter and breaks free.

[b0rsuk]

While Paladin has a limited subset of abilities, Lay on hands and exhortations are single target. There is a distinct lack of single target buffs and debuffs in this game. Paladin fills a niche. It is difficult to make use of more powerful Priest heals, because to do so you need to distribute damage equally. This also affects Kind Wayfarers. Aside from Lay on hands, there is no option for a strong, single target heal. Similarly, most forms of revival revive several people. So what am I supposed to do - revive one person straight away, or wait until several are downed ? I can think of one fight in the game where mass revival can be useful. I prefer a focused revival with a strong healing effect.

Edited April 17, 2015 by b0rsuk

[Ouroboros226]

How are the deities you can represent?

I mostly RP powerhungry and villanous characters. I'm wondering if any deities fit the fanatically and bordeline "evil" archetype. As in: A zealous paladin with no regard for doing the right thing, killing anyone he deems a heretic to his faith.

[b0rsuk]

Paladins are not very religious in PoE. They are tied to orders, and each order has a philosophy. Bleak Walkers favor Cruel and Aggressive behavior, hate Diplomatic and Benevolent. The idea is that by being brutal and terrifying they can stop more conflicts from happening just by showing up.

[Longknife]

Paladins are not very religious in PoE. They are tied to orders, and each order has a philosophy. Bleak Walkers favor Cruel and Aggressive behavior, hate Diplomatic and Benevolent. The idea is that by being brutal and terrifying they can stop more conflicts from happening just by showing up.

 

 

I wish there was more roleplaying tied into this. It'd be nice to see the method work and encounter multiple scenarios where people recognize you as a Bleak Walker and thus they resort to diplomacy with you rather than trying to fight you.

[Longknife]

 Sometimes I like to use Into the Fray just to watch it fail spectacularly because the Fighter is too far away (forcing him to move and break engagements) or because the enemy nicks a hit-box on it's way to the Fighter and breaks free.

 

 

Just an FYI, even if it fails to pull the target towards you, it will successfully pull their attention towards the Fighter, at the very least giving the spellcaster a window to back away with if you fear the target might soon redirect attention back.

[Ceranai]

My playstyle involves sending my tanks in to hold the enemy and then forgetting they exist until they need to reposition. In that context, the Paladin and the Fighter are virtually identical, except that the Paladin provides a party buff and the Fighter has extra engagement. Could I get more performance from my Fighter if I micro'd him a bit? Sure, but I get much more performance by spending that attention on my Cipher or Druid. As it is, I occasionally pop Vigorous Defense on the Fighter if he's taking too much heat, or have the Paladin toss Lay on Hands or a Reinforcing Exhortation on a back-liner taking damage from an archer. Sometimes I like to use Into the Fray just to watch it fail spectacularly because the Fighter is too far away (forcing him to move and break engagements) or because the enemy nicks a hit-box on it's way to the Fighter and breaks free.

so what you are saying is that you are content with paladins as tanks because you only use them as meatshields.

 

That's fine for you i guess its a SP game play as you want; but by that reasoning is there really much point giving them a weapon at all? Why bother with a paladin at all, why not send a sword and shield barbarian in? 

 

Im quite in the middle of this debate generally as I think paladins are decent support tanks but have a terrible DPS but this is probably the worst defense of a class I've seen. Fighters barely take any microing in the first place for one thing but evaluating how good different classes are based on what happens when you just click attack and leave them at it is a terrible way to talk about the class' potential.

 

I mean to take it to an extreme that's like saying that priests are a bad class if you just give them a want and get them auto attacking...... Also as for into the fray not working for you im not sure whats going wrong there, ive never had a problem with it.

[Exoduss]

 

My playstyle involves sending my tanks in to hold the enemy and then forgetting they exist until they need to reposition. In that context, the Paladin and the Fighter are virtually identical, except that the Paladin provides a party buff and the Fighter has extra engagement. Could I get more performance from my Fighter if I micro'd him a bit? Sure, but I get much more performance by spending that attention on my Cipher or Druid. As it is, I occasionally pop Vigorous Defense on the Fighter if he's taking too much heat, or have the Paladin toss Lay on Hands or a Reinforcing Exhortation on a back-liner taking damage from an archer. Sometimes I like to use Into the Fray just to watch it fail spectacularly because the Fighter is too far away (forcing him to move and break engagements) or because the enemy nicks a hit-box on it's way to the Fighter and breaks free.

so what you are saying is that you are content with paladins as tanks because you only use them as meatshields.

 

That's fine for you i guess its a SP game play as you want; but by that reasoning is there really much point giving them a weapon at all? Why bother with a paladin at all, why not send a sword and shield barbarian in? 

 

Im quite in the middle of this debate generally as I think paladins are decent support tanks but have a terrible DPS but this is probably the worst defense of a class I've seen. Fighters barely take any microing in the first place for one thing but evaluating how good different classes are based on what happens when you just click attack and leave them at it is a terrible way to talk about the class' potential.

 

I mean to take it to an extreme that's like saying that priests are a bad class if you just give them a want and get them auto attacking...... Also as for into the fray not working for you im not sure whats going wrong there, ive never had a problem with it.

Why would you want barbarian with a shield in the first place? Thats a Fighter for you , and as already discussed thousand times Fighters and Paladins both are good tanks with different purpose , i mean fighter is totaly useless after he engages 4 enemies , while paladin can still heal / buff / revive 

[Ceranai]

 

 

My playstyle involves sending my tanks in to hold the enemy and then forgetting they exist until they need to reposition. In that context, the Paladin and the Fighter are virtually identical, except that the Paladin provides a party buff and the Fighter has extra engagement. Could I get more performance from my Fighter if I micro'd him a bit? Sure, but I get much more performance by spending that attention on my Cipher or Druid. As it is, I occasionally pop Vigorous Defense on the Fighter if he's taking too much heat, or have the Paladin toss Lay on Hands or a Reinforcing Exhortation on a back-liner taking damage from an archer. Sometimes I like to use Into the Fray just to watch it fail spectacularly because the Fighter is too far away (forcing him to move and break engagements) or because the enemy nicks a hit-box on it's way to the Fighter and breaks free.

so what you are saying is that you are content with paladins as tanks because you only use them as meatshields.

 

That's fine for you i guess its a SP game play as you want; but by that reasoning is there really much point giving them a weapon at all? Why bother with a paladin at all, why not send a sword and shield barbarian in? 

 

Im quite in the middle of this debate generally as I think paladins are decent support tanks but have a terrible DPS but this is probably the worst defense of a class I've seen. Fighters barely take any microing in the first place for one thing but evaluating how good different classes are based on what happens when you just click attack and leave them at it is a terrible way to talk about the class' potential.

 

I mean to take it to an extreme that's like saying that priests are a bad class if you just give them a want and get them auto attacking...... Also as for into the fray not working for you im not sure whats going wrong there, ive never had a problem with it.

Why would you want barbarian with a shield in the first place? Thats a Fighter for you , and as already discussed thousand times Fighters and Paladins both are good tanks with different purpose , i mean fighter is totaly useless after he engages 4 enemies , while paladin can still heal / buff / revive 

 

I wasnt seriously suggesting using a sword and shield barb I was trying to say that if you dont care about getting the most out of your characters by min maxing thats one thing, if you cant be bothered to micromanage and base your decisions on that then thats something else. The guy i quoted was saying that less micromanaging was somehow an advantage of paladins over fighters, which a) I contest to be true and b) isnt representative in any way of which class is better

[Kaigen42]

I'm not saying less micromanaging is an advantage of the Paladin over the Fighter, I'm saying that if you don't micromanage, then they are more or less even in terms of tanking. I fully admit that the Fighter has more potential, but I don't think they have enough potential to reward micromanaging them. I get what I need out of them, which is holding enemy attention and not dying, and that frees me up to squeeze everything I can get out of my casters and DPS.

 

As far as whether there's any point in giving them a weapon at all, I feel you on that. My current run has a 2 Might Paladin and a 19 Might Fighter. The Fighter has twice the total damage done of the Paladin, but only a quarter of the damage done of my actual DPS characters, and an eighth of the damage my Cipher has done. Tank damage just does not matter in this game. So you're left with the Fighter having a few short duration CC abilities and extra engagements, the Paladin having an aura and some single-target support, and both of them are great at not dying. So while, yes, the Fighter is a better class than the Paladin, if they're tanking, the difference is negligible.

 

Now, if I wanted to run a tank that would benefit from micromanagement, I'd take a Monk (and I might do just that on my next playthrough).

[b0rsuk]

You know, Defender talent is not the only option for Fighter. He has knockdowns, weapon specialization, mastery, armored grace, vigorous defense etc. All these can be put on a damaging fighter, without sacrificing his damage output. I killed the Adra Dragon with Eder who had these talents and abilities, but no Defender or Weapon&Shield style. It's possible and not that hard. I can pull it off five times in a row, without using Paralysis or Petrify, just my suboptimal first party. My Eder is quite offensive. If you put offensive talents on a fighter, he's still quite tough. Also, there are abilities which make your defense almost irrelevant, for example Weakening Interdiction. All you need is a few weakening spells and enemies are chopped into pieces.

[Ceranai]

I'm not saying less micromanaging is an advantage of the Paladin over the Fighter, I'm saying that if you don't micromanage, then they are more or less even in terms of tanking. I fully admit that the Fighter has more potential, but I don't think they have enough potential to reward micromanaging them. I get what I need out of them, which is holding enemy attention and not dying, and that frees me up to squeeze everything I can get out of my casters and DPS.

 

As far as whether there's any point in giving them a weapon at all, I feel you on that. My current run has a 2 Might Paladin and a 19 Might Fighter. The Fighter has twice the total damage done of the Paladin, but only a quarter of the damage done of my actual DPS characters, and an eighth of the damage my Cipher has done. Tank damage just does not matter in this game. So you're left with the Fighter having a few short duration CC abilities and extra engagements, the Paladin having an aura and some single-target support, and both of them are great at not dying. So while, yes, the Fighter is a better class than the Paladin, if they're tanking, the difference is negligible.

 

Now, if I wanted to run a tank that would benefit from micromanagement, I'd take a Monk (and I might do just that on my next playthrough).

Monks>all

 

Edit I forgot:

Chanter>monk>figher>paladin>>riposte tank rogue>tankpriest>tankmage

 

I think tank chanters are stupid broken because prtty much nothing alters their chants/invocations meaning you can build them 100% tanky and still do insane damge/buffs/summons with them

Edited April 17, 2015 by Ceranai

[Kaigen42]

 

I think tank chanters are stupid broken because prtty much nothing alters their chants/invocations meaning you can build them 100% tanky and still do insane damge/buffs/summons with them

Every time I try to use a Chanter tank, I get to Caed Nua and they get ripped to shreds by Phantoms. One of these days I need to just grit my teeth and bear with it so I can see how they are once they hit their stride.

[gkathellar]

Paladins make for the best 100% pure damage-sink tanks, due to their strong Defenses.

 

Anything else, bring a monk.

[redneckdevil]

 

 

Paladins are not very religious in PoE. They are tied to orders, and each order has a philosophy. Bleak Walkers favor Cruel and Aggressive behavior, hate Diplomatic and Benevolent. The idea is that by being brutal and terrifying they can stop more conflicts from happening just by showing up.

 

I wish there was more roleplaying tied into this. It'd be nice to see the method work and encounter multiple scenarios where people recognize you as a Bleak Walker and thus they resort to diplomacy with you rather than trying to fight you.

The few times I saw the game recognize my paladin as a bleak walker was with responses of where they were trying diplomacy and the responses were along the lines of "taking no prisoners, will not be swayed "

[Brimsurfer]

Nobody hates Paladins, because if they did nobody would have cared and they wouldn't be complaining.

 

Solo means nothing, if you want to play solo its up to you. People are talking about that Paladins fade in COMPARISON to other classes, when played in a party. In a party every other class does better than Paladins. There is basically no reason to waste a slot on a Paladin, you'll be better off with ANY other class. And now please don't say that its better to have a Paladin than having two of any class, because there is absolutely no reason you should pick two characters of same class, since there are 10 other classes to pick from and only 6 party slots. 

 

Even in Solo games, if a Pally can do it then it means that everyone can do it.

[Exoduss]

Thats complete nosense what you wrote tho :D 

 

 

. In a party every other class does better than Paladins. There is basically no reason to waste a slot on a Paladin,

you could say some classes does better than a paladin solo ,

you could say some parties are better without paladins , 

But any party? you fkin nuts 

[Brimsurfer]

Thats complete nosense what you wrote tho :D 

 

 

. In a party every other class does better than Paladins. There is basically no reason to waste a slot on a Paladin,

you could say some classes does better than a paladin solo ,

you could say some parties are better without paladins , 

But any party? you fkin nuts 

 

You are welcome try yourself......