Are Paladins really not that bad?

[Longknife]

I rate being a Paladin higher than a fighter because of the roleplaying element. I especially like that I don't have to JUST do things in line with my order. But if I go contrary then I have tow ork even harder to compensate.

 

It is very unfortunate that Paladins arguably bring the most roleplay potential into the game, and yet they're hands down the worst, most neglected class. Am I the only one whose first character was a Paladin in hopes the roleplaying would be fun, then quickly abandoned the class when I realized my Priest (and basically anything) was going through the game faster?

 

With the proper boosts, Paladins could be a lot of fun. They basically need all their skills boosted up across the board, with tweaks to their effects to make them less situational and more universal. AKA, less "activates when you get a kill" and single-target buff effects, more universally applicable abilities or AOE effects on buffs. Liberating Exhortation for example could be fixed just by making it an AOE that hits multiple party members, then make it 3 per rest instead of 2 per encounter (NEVER needed this often anyways) and viola.

[dukefx]

The focus should be less on paladins and more on the fighter vs dragon example provided.  The video shows a fighter eating all attacks of the dragon, even the meant to be avoided, high damage breaths, and coming out on top with room to spare.  Now this is as seen, and as stated with no consumables, potions, pausing, changing of position, etc.  He also stated that the rolls were terrible and this was likely a worst-case scenario.  That is a problem.  There are far too many topics complaining about Path of the Damned being too easy for it not to be a problem.  All it takes is imagining a party supporting that fighter, and then the fight becomes a total landslide victory in favor of the party.  This against one of the hardest hitting creatures in the game, outside of the Adra Dragon.  How is buffing any class going to make this game more difficult?  If the problem is with the game being too easy then the result is that some classes are overtuned rather than some being undertuned.

It's not just fighters and on top of that not every fighter build can do that. That dragon requires heavy armor, decent accuracy and really good deflection/saves if you want to go melee. A paladin can get all that except constant recovery. Even Unbending isn't a problem, you can take something with Second Chance instead if you get bad rolls. In other words the paladin lacks sustain. The only class in worse shape is the ranger. I couldn't possibly imagine how to kill the sky dragon with a ranger.

 

PotD is far from easy. If you look closely it's a game of misses and grazes with some occasional hits. If it were any harder I'd say fk this s**t, but I'm probably done with PotD anyways. 1 playthrough was enough. "There are no bad builds" doesn't apply to PotD.

 

As for the paladin itself I'd start with buffing auras except speed (I'd replace that altogether with something else). +6 accuracy is joke (make it 10-12), +5% hit to crit conversion is an even bigger joke (make it 10), +3DT isn't that terribly bad, but not worth it imo (make it 5). Add a talent that upgrades Z. Endurance to regenerates endurance or something similar. Currently taking multiple auras and switching based on what is needed is also not an option because it's a non-factor vs a non-factor. In other words make it worth taking a paladin with me. If it's meant to be a jack of all trades support class then make it shine at least in 1 aspect (in support). This not only helps the entire party but also the paladin itself if you solo. Commands are okayish, but some require minor tweaks, especially Reviving Exhortation. With such changes I could ask myself, should I take a chanter or a paladin with me.... tough choice. Taking both would also be a good choice since their abilities do not overlap each other. If 1.05 doesn't bring any reasonable changes then it'll be the last time I bring Pallegina along. She's just a burden. I'm not a big paladin fan, so I don't play one as a main, but I don't hate them. I'd like them to be viable.

[b0rsuk]

It seems that we went from "PotD is the correct way to play" to "PotD solo is the correct way to play". I wonder what comes next.

 

By the way, there are plenty of Guarding weapons in the game. There is a rapier, a warhammer, a pollaxe at least. That's no less than 3 weapon groups.

Edited April 20, 2015 by b0rsuk

[gkathellar]

By the way, there are plenty of Guarding weapons in the game. There is a rapier, a warhammer, a pollaxe at least. That's no less than 3 weapon groups.

 

And Guarding isn't useful on any of them!

[b0rsuk]

And Guarding isn't useful on any of them!

 

 

Wait a second -- I thought someone was complaining Paladin can't increase his engagement limit ? If you don't care about damage at all, and this is what tank builders do, what does it matter what kind of weapon it is ?

[gkathellar]

 

And Guarding isn't useful on any of them!

 

 

Wait a second -- I thought someone was complaining Paladin can't increase his engagement limit ? If you don't care about damage at all, and this is what tank builders do, what does it matter what kind of weapon it is ?

 

 

Engagement limit doesn't meaningfully improve your ability to tank (not least of all because a dedicated tank's attacks are piddling and so their disengagement attacks are also piddling). Guarding is a useless property.

[b0rsuk]

Do monsters in this game EVER disengage ??

[gkathellar]

Rarely, but it wouldn't matter if they did. They also don't care about your tank's engagement limits, trivializing Guardian even more completely.

[b0rsuk]

Rarely, but it wouldn't matter if they did. They also don't care about your tank's engagement limits, trivializing Guardian even more completely.

 

You mean they attack him anyway ? In that case, engagement prevents them from switching targets.

[Crucis]

What's the point of this "Engagement" thing? 

 

 

Side note: For quite a while now, when people were talking about "engagements" in PoE, I thought that they were taking about battles, not this "zone of control" thingie.It's only in the past couple days that I came to realize that was really meant, and only because of the context in which whatever post opened my eyes was in.  I think that it'd be wise to not assume that everyone knows what is meant be "engagement" because quite frankly, to me, an engagement in the context of an IE-style game is a battle, not a zone of control.  And I'm sure that there are plenty of other newbies to PoE who may get confused on this point.

[b0rsuk]

Information about engagements comes up in tooltips/pop-up tutorial, so people who don't click through everything know about it. That said, the game could use an obnoxious "disengagement attack" notification. That's because some still play it like an ARPG. I've seen youtube videos where people are surprised they get hit when disengaging.

Edited April 20, 2015 by b0rsuk

[Racker]

I chose to make a Paladin for RP purposes, knowing about their reputation on the forums and such.  I figured that on the easy and normal modes that I'd be playing on, the companion party members make a fine party on their own even without the PC so I might as well go with one that I'd enjoy the conversing side of.  I was pleasantly surprised by how much fun I have in combat with him though.  He makes a decent secondary tank after Eder and his heals have helped me through more than one sticky situation.

 

I also geared him towards fighting undead for RP reasons, with anti-vessel weapons and talents.  Since vessels are fairly common and powerful bad guys in PoE, that helps a lot too. 

[Gromnir]

 

 

A fighter with Wary Defender has +15/+10/+10/+10 Defenses (one talent, one ability).

 

A paladin with Cautious Attack and maxed F&C has +21/+22/+22/+22 defenses (one talent). With Deep Faith, that's +23/+27/+27/+27 (two talents).

 

Fighters are grand. They have great CC and recover quickly from all kinds of crap.

 

Paladins are a poorly-designed, discordant mess. Their abilities do not make sense. Many are useless. Paladins deserve a serious fix, and I hope they get it in 1.05.

 

They still make for the best 100% pure damage-sink tanks, however, due to their strong defenses.

 

 

I wouldn't say Paladins are better tanks, keep in mind that Fighters can use Vigorous Defense (turning their defenses to +35/+30/+30/+30 for 15 sec) once per encounter, but more importantly is that Fighters have Critical Defense (turning 20% of incoming crits into hits and 10% of hits into grazes) which is a ridiculously powerful talent.

 

Anyway, I'm willing to concede the point only for the fact that some of the most staunch defenders of the Paladins class, calling the Paladin "A great class that simply plays different from other classes and that people are playing them wrong", have brought up your exact quote about Paladin tanks as "proof" to back their claims. That you're disagreeing with them yourself is simply amusing to see.

 

am recalling what you reference.  is more eub obtuseness.  the link to beta comments were specific tailored to respond to the observation that 95% o' current posters were finding the fighter to be the clear best tank.  we noted that in the beta, after many months o' gameplay, folks were split regarding best tank.  fighter v. paladin had no consensus winner, and a few beta backers actual suggested that chanters were best. think paladins have design problems?  sure.  we noted that we personal find paladins to be boring.  nevertheless, the observation that fighter were a clear win over paladins in the tank department as proven by boardie feedback is not only ridiculous but it is rejected by beta backer experience.

 

nevertheless, we do find your posts to be amusing in a doggedly myopic kinda way.  keep at it.  

 

that being said, we will once again observe that the requests for improvement o' the paladin is typical misguided.  give paladin better dps and better tank capabilities ignores the point that it is s'posed to be a support class.  there is already a fix that gives people what they is clamoring for from the paladin: play a monk.  the folks who want their paladin to be a durable knight that can also do some serious dps is playing the wrong freaking class.  play a monk instead.

 

paladins could use improvement, but some folks can't let go o' the notion that the poe paladin is not a d&d 3.5 paladin or a bg2 paladin.  

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/63968-update-56-paladins-and-wild-orlans/?p=1342013

 

experience proves our efforts to be futile, but am gonna keep posting the link til folks read it.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Kaigen42]

As for the paladin itself I'd start with buffing auras except speed (I'd replace that altogether with something else). +6 accuracy is joke (make it 10-12), +5% hit to crit conversion is an even bigger joke (make it 10), +3DT isn't that terribly bad, but not worth it imo (make it 5). Add a talent that upgrades Z. Endurance to regenerates endurance or something similar. Currently taking multiple auras and switching based on what is needed is also not an option because it's a non-factor vs a non-factor. In other words make it worth taking a paladin with me. If it's meant to be a jack of all trades support class then make it shine at least in 1 aspect (in support). This not only helps the entire party but also the paladin itself if you solo. Commands are okayish, but some require minor tweaks, especially Reviving Exhortation. With such changes I could ask myself, should I take a chanter or a paladin with me.... tough choice. Taking both would also be a good choice since their abilities do not overlap each other. If 1.05 doesn't bring any reasonable changes then it'll be the last time I bring Pallegina along. She's just a burden. I'm not a big paladin fan, so I don't play one as a main, but I don't hate them. I'd like them to be viable.

 

The tricky bit about the Paladin auras is that I think they are balanced with Priest spells in mind. Zealous Endurance doesn't stack with Armor of Faith and is slightly worse, balancing an always on effect vs. something with a duration that your Priest has to take time to cast. Similarly, Zealous Focus doesn't stack with the Accuracy buff from Blessing (though either will stack with Inspiring Radiance or Devotions of the Faithful). In that case, Zealous Focus is slightly better, but doesn't come with the damage buff of Blessing. Honestly, I think auras are in a decent place right now; they're not flashy, but they take on some of the minor buffing duties of the Cleric in a passive way that allows you to shift your focus elsewhere. If the Paladin is going to get a balance adjustment, I'd rather it focused on their support abilities and class talents, rather than messing with auras.

 

Rarely, but it wouldn't matter if they did. They also don't care about your tank's engagement limits, trivializing Guardian even more completely.

 

In my experience, enemy melee attackers retargeting your back line when not Engaged by tanks is pretty common, while Disengagements are pretty rare apart from certain enemies (mainly teleporters and fampyrs). That said, there's an upper limit to the meaningful number of engagements your tanks can have, considering there's only so much room adjacent to them and big enemy groups tend to crest around them after the vanguard makes contact. In my mind, the real advantage of Defender is that it frees the Fighter up to skip/put off Hold the Line and Guarding weapons (or alternately use those and skip Defender to preserve their attack speed).

[CriticalFailure]

God forbid that people have read the link and don't agree 100% with you. No one is denying that they are supposed to have support abilities, but they're also a warrior class. Those on-kill abilities, for example, are also part of the class, so it's reasonable to ask for something that helps activating them. Do you want to improve their support skills too? Sure, but you can't just support your enemies to death.

 

Now, I don't see the point of arguing what's the absolute best class at whatever. And if fighters are better at fighting... well, they're called FIGHTERS for a reason.

[MadDemiurg]

Paladins are a tank/support hybrid technically, since if you compare them to a full support like priest their support skills are laughable. They do the tank part relatively well, support part leaves a lot to be desired imo even considering they are a hybrid.

Edited April 20, 2015 by MadDemiurg

[Gromnir]

Paladins are a tank/support hybrid technically, since if you compare them to a full support like priest their support skills are laughable. They do the tank part relatively well, support part leaves a lot to be desired imo even considering they are a hybrid.

call 'em laughable as support, but that is s'posed to be the role they fulfill.  trying to redefine them 'cause you do not like how they currently perform in a support role is foolish.  Your definition o' what paladins is and should be runs smack up against what the developers has said that paladins are.  they is low-maintenance support characters with excellent defensive qualities that are particularly adept at providing single target heals, debuffs and cleanses.  your redefining is pointless.  make the paladin better at support sounds like a worthy goal, but make'em better at tanky and dps is misguided at best.  

 

btw, a couple per kill abilities, ones that get use perhaps once every 15 seconds is hardly transforming paladins into a dps class.  you can use talents to make paladins perfect capable o' getting a couple successful hits per battle, particularly as you have potential 5 other party members that can render foes prone, paralyzed, petrified, blind, and a host o' other status effects that makes 'em easy pickings.  not need to improve the Paladin to get a couple hits per battle.  oh, and is not as if you need take those abilities as they is optional. weak.

 

regardless, if you think paladins is a support/tank hybrid, then the improvements o' the paladin should obviously be focused on the support aspects o' the class, 'cause you already concede, and the beta backers know, that particular given that the paladin is a support character, it is very durable. nopt need to improve the tankyness o' the support character that is already at least arguable on par with a fighter.

 

 

God forbid that people have read the link and don't agree 100% with you.

 

 *chuckle*

 

disagree with Gromnir?  no.  disagree with the developers.  is not a link to a Gromnir post after all.  critical failure indeed. 

 

as to the naming o' fighters, we agree that the name choice is stoopid.  we have mentioned numerous times that if the obsidian folks wanted fighters to be low-maintenance tanks (and they were more so before beta backers complained that fighters couldn't kill good enough) then obsidian should not have used same name as the ie class.  paladins and rogues and other classes has been suffering many complaints that have no basis save for the expectations created by their naming.  you is preaching to the choir if you suggest that the names is misleading... but you aren't.  you don't seem to get that while the poe paladin is named same as bg2 paladin and the fighter is named same as bg2 fighter, their roles is intended to be different.

 

and around we go... again.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited April 20, 2015 by Gromnir

[taek]

Soloing feats might be a poor way of gauging a Paladin because the very nature of the class as described by the devs is a combat class that is best when fighting along with other classes.

 

We also wanted their mechanics to be distinctive from the other classes while reinforcing their role in the world.  Area designer Bobby Null has always liked the marshal class from D&D 3.5, which is conceptually similar to the warlord in 4E: combat leaders who are at their best when they are augmenting their teammates.  This is the approach that I took when developing Project Eternity's paladins.  They have persistent modal auras, strong single-target healing and buff abilities (contrasting the broad AoE effects of clerics), and can passively grant bonuses to teammates in close proximity.

 

 

 

That being said, I don't feel like the overall buffs a Paladin brings moves the needle much for my party. 

 

I've played groups with & without a Paladin and don't notice a difference.

I certainly notice if a Priest is or is not present.

I certainly notice if a Chanter is or is not present.

 

I agree w/ everyone else, the only slot a Paladin really fulfills for me is Tank. As for its support abilities...you could probably replace the class with some consumables.

 

 

[dukefx]

@Kaigen42 if you compare auras with level 1 priest spells (the ones I never ever use) then what do you compare the priests level 2-6 spells with? 

Lets see...

- A bunch of good AoE heals vs Lay on hands that can be used twice. If we are also considering casting time then the paladin fails yet again: LoH is average, priest heals are fast.

- Buffs: always on vs all at once for a limited duration. They both fail in this case, but the priest has way better higher level buffs.

- Flames of Devotion vs lets say Divine Mark. The priest has a far better arsenal, AoE included.

- Exhortations vs similar spells. The priest performs either equally well, but a bit different or far better.

- Tanking: probably the only thing where the paladin is better. Honestly I never used a priest as a frontliner, but I don't think it'd perform very well.

 

Lets talk about those auras again, do you still think the paladin shouldn't be better at anything other than tanking than a priest?

Edited April 20, 2015 by dukefx

[MadDemiurg]

 

Paladins are a tank/support hybrid technically, since if you compare them to a full support like priest their support skills are laughable. They do the tank part relatively well, support part leaves a lot to be desired imo even considering they are a hybrid.

call 'em laughable as support, but that is s'posed to be the role they fulfill.  trying to redefine them 'cause you do not like how they currently perform in a support role is foolish.  Your definition o' what paladins is and should be runs smack up against what the developers has said that paladins are.  they is low-maintenance support characters with excellent defensive qualities that are particularly adept at providing single target heals, debuffs and cleanses.  your redefining is pointless.  make the paladin better at support sounds like a worthy goal, but make'em better at tanky and dps is misguided at best.  

 

btw, a couple per kill abilities, ones that get use perhaps once every 15 seconds is hardly transforming paladins into a dps class.  you can use talents to make paladins perfect capable o' getting a couple successful hits per battle, particularly as you have potential 5 other party members that can render foes prone, paralyzed, petrified, blind, and a host o' other status effects that makes 'em easy pickings.  not need to improve the Paladin to get a couple hits per battle.  oh, and is not as if you need take those abilities as they is optional. weak.

 

regardless, if you think paladins is a support/tank hybrid, then the improvements o' the paladin should obviously be focused on the support aspects o' the class, 'cause you already concede, and the beta backers know, that particular given that the paladin is a support character, it is very durable. nopt need to improve the tankyness o' the support character that is already at least arguable on par with a fighter.

As I see it, paladins definitely need improvements, and these can go 2 ways:

• Capitalize on being tank/support hybrid
• Capitalize on being full support

The 2nd option would require much more changes to the current game tbh.

 

For option 1 I would do the following changes:

• Improve aura radius and let them stack with spells
• Add more uses or a way to regain them for LoH/FoD
• Turn on kill abilities to on crit as some suggested here or maybe to on lose x% endurance (would not synergize well with extreme tankiness though)

For option 2 I would say:

• Drop FoD
• Drop on kill abilities
• Add global exhortation pool
• Allow paladin to pick up exhortations as spells (2 every odd level and 1 every even level) and add a lot of new ones with unique effects
• Decent non exhortation abilities like righteous soul and auras turned to class talents

Since exhortations are single target and generally still less powerful than priest spells, but paladin is more tanky, I think this would be a balanced option

 

This is how I see it anyway.

[mazeltov]

I certainly notice if a Chanter is or is not present.

 

Huh. Kana could have been replaced with an autoturret on a tripod in my playthrough, and I wouldn't have known the difference. Talk about low maintenance. Probably used ten invocations over the course of 80 hours, most from accidentally glancing at his Phrase meter.

 

Priests are wonderful, of course, but that's mostly due to the fact that a handful of their spells are too good, greatly overshadowing the rest of the support options in the game, including Paladin's, which are piecemeal by comparison. Unlimited rest exacerbates the problem even more.

 

"How about +20 Accuracy and some Might for my party and -20 Accuracy and some Might for their party, for the whole fight, with the cast of a single spell?" "Sounds balanced."

[CriticalFailure]

disagree with Gromnir?  no.  disagree with the developers.  is not a link to a Gromnir post after all.  critical failure indeed.

The abilities that are in the actual game were put there by the developers too. You seem to be ignoring that part. Mistaking them with their counterparts in other games is not the issue; I'm just looking at other things besides your link. If you improve solely their support, they'll still have problems, unless you just revamp the whole class from their current state (which is about the same as in DnD in practice, regardless of the original intention).

 

If you want to quote stuff that the devs wrote, this is from their description in game:

 

Paladins are martial zealots, devoted to a god, a ruler, or even a way of life. They can be found in any culture where a fanatical group of like-minded individuals have formed a warrior society dedicated to advancing their cause.

So I'm not pulling the "warrior" part of the class out of my ass.

Edited April 20, 2015 by CriticalFailure

[Kaigen42]

@Kaigen42 if you compare auras with level 1 priest spells (the ones I never ever use) then what do you compare the priests level 2-6 spells with? 

Lets see...

- A bunch of good AoE heals vs Lay on hands that can be used twice. If we are also considering casting time then the paladin fails yet again: LoH is average, priest heals are fast.

- Buffs: always on vs all at once for a limited duration. They both fail in this case, but the priest has way better higher level buffs.

- Flames of Devotion vs lets say Divine Mark. The priest has a far better arsenal, AoE included.

- Exhortations vs similar spells. The priest performs either equally well, but a bit different or far better.

- Tanking: probably the only thing where the paladin is better. Honestly I never used a priest as a frontliner, but I don't think it'd perform very well.

 

Lets talk about those auras again, do you still think the paladin shouldn't be better at anything other than tanking than a priest?

Well, the short answer is that I compare high level Priest spells to spells of other casters because I don't think you can meaningfully compare those to the abilities of non-casters. You may as well compare Repulsing seal or Pillar of Faith to the Fighter's Clear Out. But to go in order...

• Priest spells are great for having AoE's and being fast casting, but when I compare my 2 Might Paladin to my 19 Might Priest, the Priest has to drop level 4 or better spells to heal a single target as much as the Paladin's Lay on Hands.
• Priest buffs are pretty amazing, as is only proper, considering the Priest is a dedicated spellcaster. The Priest doesn't get any attack speed buffs, though.
• How are we even comparing a 2nd level spell that does flat damage to an encounter ability you get at level 1 that buffs a melee attack? One is equipment dependent and the other isn't. Flames of Devotion deals 50% of the damage dealt by the Paladin's attack before DR is taken into account, like a double-strength elemental lash. Taken as a whole, an FoD attack from a high level, two-handed weapon wieldng DPS Paladin can deal more damage than a Priest's Divine Mark. Of course, Divine Mark has a Deflection debuff and better high level damaging spells, but they've got to be compensated for venturing into melee as a low endurance, low deflection class.
• As I said before, I think the Paladin's support abilities could use some work, especially the exhortations (with the notable exception of Hastening). Liberating Exhortation is too limited to be useful as anything but a delivery mechanism for an accuracy buff as a Darcozzi. Reinforcing Exhortation comes long after the Priest has had access to the superior Circle of Protection. Reviving Exhortation doesn't even work properly, but at least it sort of does something useful

Going beyond Exhortations, Inspiring Triumph provides a laughable buff for the trouble you have to go through to get it. I used Deprive the Unworthy all of once in my PotD run, because most of the tough enemies in the game are tough because they have innately high stats, not from buffs. Sworn Enemy isn't bad for a DPS build, but it only helps the Paladin. I haven't used Coordinated Attacks, but while a passive accuracy bonus is nice, the party member you want to have more accuracy probably isn't the one standing closest to your Paladin. Edit: That's what I get for trying to use the wiki for abilities I haven't personally used, it looks like Coordinated Attacks got cut and instead we have Righteous Soul, which is...okay I guess? It's a nice idea, but my Paladins generally don't get targeted with charms/dominates to begin with, and the other status effects aren't dangerous enough to spend an ability slot on.

 

I'm not saying Paladins don't have problems (though I do think they're more serviceable than some give them credit for being). But I don't think their level 1 abilities or auras are where those problems lie. It's between level 3 and 11 where the Paladin has a lot of issues.

Edited April 20, 2015 by Kaigen42

[b0rsuk]

I think Paladin single target buffs and exhortations should be stronger than Priest's versions in all cases. They are single target. Even the developer post from a while ago supports this line of design thinking:

 

 

strong single-target healing and buff abilities (contrasting the broad AoE effects of clerics),

(see above for full quote)

Edited April 20, 2015 by b0rsuk

[Longknife]

I think Paladin single target buffs and exhortations should be stronger than Priest's versions in all cases. They are single target.

 

 

Exactly. This concisely summarizes why Paladins are considered bad: every ability they have, another class has it too, except their version is more practical. You can tank? Fighter can do that and provide better squad support. You deal decent damage? Cipher and Rogue keep going when Paladin is worn out. You can give an accuracy buff? Priest's buffs can double what a Paladin can give. You can cure ailments or revive? Yours is single target while Chanter and Priest AOE.

 

 

It should be quid pro quo here. For every advantage lost (can't deal high damage as long and as frequently as Rogue), another needs to be gained. (the high damage hits need to be practically a free KO)

 

The reason Paladin gets **** on and Ranger (another lackluster class) doesn't is because Paladin's "advantages" are so blatantly counter-intuitive that it's insane, to the point you have to ask if the developers fell asleep on the job while working on Paladin. Even Ranger only suffers from "why not make a Rogue instead" and otherwise still provides a working alternative; just buff Ranger's pet up a bit and viola it'll be balanced. Damage that only SLIGHTLY falls behind vs. Rogue, but an additional body that tanks and deals some damage in return. Paladin though? Holy crap, this poor guy needs everything boosted.