Good is Not Nice: A Paladin's Guide

[Oscredwin]

Now I want to play a Paladin1/Warlock2/PaladinX who makes a fiendish pact out of necessity in the first adventure and then rules lawyers (the character, not the player) with his patron, successfully abiding by his pact and his oath.

[EvilAnagram]

Now I want to play a Paladin1/Warlock2/PaladinX who makes a fiendish pact out of necessity in the first adventure and then rules lawyers (the character, not the player) with his patron, successfully abiding by his pact and his oath.

If you can improvise well and are good at rules lawyering, do it, then post about it.

[Demonicattorney]

If you can improvise well and are good at rules lawyering, do it, then post about it.

I agree. I don't think it can be done without your DM being super nice, because the goal of any fiend should be to get you to fall, and no one rules lawyers a fiend, a law degree comes with Imp status. However, that RP could be fun, would love to hear about it.

[Oscredwin]

I agree. I don't think it can be done without your DM being super nice, because the goal of any fiend should be to get you to fall, and no one rules lawyers a fiend, a law degree comes with Imp status. However, that RP could be fun, would love to hear about it.

I would only do this character with DM cooperation. Sadly I don't have time for a regular game right now.

[Sir Jeff]

EvilAnagram,

Very little I would change, pre-spellcasting.

I think Great Weapon Fighting ought to be blue. It ups the average damage on a greatsword by 1.33 damage per hit. Not quite as solid as the dueling damage buff, but with significantly burstier potential that brings it about even for the added utility of those swings that go from 6 damage to 15 because re-rolling is chaos.

Thanks so much for putting in the time on this one. I have a new player who loves the paladin archetype and this is where I'll be sending him to learn.

[Strill]

EvilAnagram,

Very little I would change, pre-spellcasting.

I think Great Weapon Fighting ought to be blue. It ups the average damage on a greatsword by 1.33 damage per hit. Not quite as solid as the dueling damage buff, but with significantly burstier potential that brings it about even for the added utility of those swings that go from 6 damage to 15 because re-rolling is chaos.

Thanks so much for putting in the time on this one. I have a new player who loves the paladin archetype and this is where I'll be sending him to learn.

Great Weapon Style's primary advantage isn't so much burst potential, but the fact that it improves Smite damage by 17%, as well as any other damage dice.

[Ferrin33]

EvilAnagram,

Very little I would change, pre-spellcasting.

I think Great Weapon Fighting ought to be blue. It ups the average damage on a greatsword by 1.33 damage per hit. Not quite as solid as the dueling damage buff, but with significantly burstier potential that brings it about even for the added utility of those swings that go from 6 damage to 15 because re-rolling is chaos.

Thanks so much for putting in the time on this one. I have a new player who loves the paladin archetype and this is where I'll be sending him to learn.

Great Weapon Fighting Style still puts you ahead 1.83 if you compare it to the Dueling Fighting Style. It's a 0.75 increase on top of that per 1d8 added thereafter from Divine Smite and Improved Divine Smite. It's most definitely not just blue.

[EvilAnagram]

In light of its applicability to smite damage, I'm upping the Great Weapon Fighting rating.

Anyhow, I finished most of the spells. I'll finish fifth level when I get some reading done for class. It's done. Feel free to comment to heart's content.

[MadBear]

Just wanted to say, great guide!

Seriously, I wasn't sure what I wanted to play but I think you've swayed me into playing a paladin

[EvilAnagram]

Just wanted to say, great guide!

Seriously, I wasn't sure what I wanted to play but I think you've swayed me into playing a paladin

Thanks!

[Strill]

Branding Smite: Like Thunderous Smite, but it scales and reveals invisible creatures. Not bad, but it's a bit silly to make a spell to reveal invisible creatures that depends on hitting with a melee attack.

It's actually not. Remember you can use Divine Sense to locate invisible creatures. You'll be attacking with disadvantage, but there are ways to fix that.

Lesser Restoration**: Very nice spell, and the Oath of Devotion Paladin doesn't need to prepare it.

I don't agree. You can already heal poison and disease with Lay on Hands. That leaves Blinded, Deafened, and Paralyzed. I honestly don't know if it's worth it to cure those things if it costs a 2nd-level spell slot, AND your action. That's a pretty steep cost, and those things tend to be cured on their own anyway.

Find Steed: If you want a steed, this power is just about mandatory. If you don't, it isn't.

You're missing a lot of big things about this. First, it's a class feature disguised as a spell. It lasts indefinitely. There's no reason not to cast it.

Second, it's a mount that's both intelligent, AND obeys you. Checking the mount rules, that means that unlike normal mounts, it can attack on its own because it's intelligent, but unlike other intelligent mounts, will still go where you direct it to. It's the best of both worlds. This mount is arguably better than the entire Beast Master Ranger subclass. As an added bonus, you never need to make rolls to control your mount either.

Beacon of Hope*: Another awesome spell, though it would be better if you could stack it with Aura of Vitality.

I don't think it's that great. 75% of WIS saves are vs Charm or Fear, which you have immunity auras to. Once that benefit is gone, Aura of Vitality becomes flat-out better. Why give a bonus to death saves when you could just heal them with Aura of Vitality and bring them back into the fight? Why maximize all healing in the hopes that your party *might* get some use out of it, when you can be certain of healing them with Aura of Vitality instead?

Crusader's Mantle: Buff all friendlies with extra damage.

I think you underestimate this one. +1d4 damage to every attack in your entire party is good enough on its own, but the combos with this spell are ENORMOUS. For example, a druid can summon eight wolves, and now they ALL have +1d4 damage. This is a huge boost on its own, and it becomes amazing with the right synergy.

Commune*: You get to talk to your god. It's good for when you really need to talk to your god. It's a situational benefit, but it might be exactly what you need.

How can you think this is bad or situational? Virtually any time you're stuck with incomplete knowledge and need to make an important decision, this spell can trivialize that.

[EvilAnagram]

It's actually not. Remember you can use Divine Sense to locate invisible creatures. You'll be attacking with disadvantage, but there are ways to fix that.

I was referring to the disadvantage when I said that, and I think that point stands.

I don't agree. You can already heal poison and disease with Lay on Hands. That leaves Blinded, Deafened, and Paralyzed. I honestly don't know if it's worth it to cure those things if it costs a 2nd-level spell slot, AND your action. That's a pretty steep cost, and those things tend to be cured on their own anyway.

Your Lay on Hands can cure one poison or disease effect per 5HP spent. This can cure multiple afflictions, specifically afflictions that can keep a player from being effective in combat. I think it's absolutely worth a spell slot to bring someone back into combat when they're having difficulty making a CON save.

You're missing a lot of big things about this. First, it's a class feature disguised as a spell. It lasts indefinitely. There's no reason not to cast it.

Second, it's a mount that's both intelligent, AND obeys you. Checking the mount rules, that means that unlike normal mounts, it can attack on its own because it's intelligent, but unlike other intelligent mounts, will still go where you direct it to. It's the best of both worlds. This mount is arguably better than the entire Beast Master Ranger subclass. As an added bonus, you never need to make rolls to control your mount either.

You make a compelling argument. I'll up it to blue.

I don't think it's that great. 75% of WIS saves are vs Charm or Fear, which you have immunity auras to. Once that benefit is gone, Aura of Vitality becomes flat-out better. Why give a bonus to death saves when you could just heal them with Aura of Vitality and bring them back into the fight? Why maximize all healing in the hopes that your party *might* get some use out of it, when you can be certain of healing them with Aura of Vitality instead?

The healing maximizing is wonderful for parties with two or three members who can cast healing spells, which is likely when you consider that five classes out of twelve cast healing spells. It's meant to combo with these classes and can significantly increase your healing potential. Furthermore, the auras you mention don't have this range until level 18, and there are plenty of damaging spells that depend on WIS saves.

I think you underestimate this one. +1d4 damage to every attack in your entire party is good enough on its own, but the combos with this spell are ENORMOUS. For example, a druid can summon eight wolves, and now they ALL have +1d4 damage. This is a huge boost on its own, and it becomes amazing with the right synergy.

I think you have to build the party from the ground up to take advantage of this spell to the degree that it's worth a sky-blue rating. I will mention that it can combo, though.

How can you think this is bad or situational? Virtually any time you're stuck with incomplete knowledge and need to make an important decision, this spell can trivialize that.

First, purple is not the "bad" color. It means the use you'll get out of a power is situational. Second, this power is situational because it's only useful when you need information that your god knows. You won't constantly be making important decisions, and your god likely won't be able to solve puzzles for you left and right. It's situational because you might run into this situation once or twice a campaign.

[Strill]

Your Lay on Hands can cure one poison or disease effect per 5HP spent. This can cure multiple afflictions, specifically afflictions that can keep a player from being effective in combat. I think it's absolutely worth a spell slot to bring someone back into combat when they're having difficulty making a CON save.

It can only cure one affliction.

[Ferrin33]

It can only cure one affliction.

Usually you won't be needing to cure more than one at a time though.

[EvilAnagram]

It can only cure one affliction.

You are correct. I still think it's Blue simply because it can bring a struggling party member back into the fight.

[MadBear]

I'm a bit confused by one of your spell reviews.

Hunter's Mark*: You don't have to prepare it, and it's a solid damage boost against the target of your Channel Divinity powers. An okay boost to the damage of Divine Favor, but it doesn't continue after your enemy falls.

First, it's a solid damage boost against whoever you use it against, (which might be against the target of your channel divinity power). But more to the point, why do you say it doesn't continue after your enemy falls? The spell itself states:

If the target drops to 0 hit points before this spell ends, you can use a bonus action on a subsequent turn of yours to mark a new creature.

doesn't this suggest that it would continue as long as you used your bonus action to maintain it.

[Spinward Bound]

In light of its applicability to smite damage, I'm upping the Great Weapon Fighting rating.

Anyhow, I finished most of the spells. I'll finish fifth level when I get some reading done for class. It's done. Feel free to comment to heart's content.

http://thesageadvice.wordpress.com/tag/paladin/

I don't think it is intended for GWF to apply to smite damage.

[EvilAnagram]

http://thesageadvice.wordpress.com/tag/paladin/

I don't think it is intended for GWF to apply to smite damage.

He specifies that he would rule it that way, but I have to go by RAW, and according to RAW it's cool.

[EvilAnagram]

I'm a bit confused by one of your spell reviews.



First, it's a solid damage boost against whoever you use it against, (which might be against the target of your channel divinity power). But more to the point, why do you say it doesn't continue after your enemy falls? The spell itself states:



doesn't this suggest that it would continue as long as you used your bonus action to maintain it.

Well, you see, grad school involves quite a bit of something I like to call sleep deprivation, which means I mess up things like that in my free time. Fixed.

[Spinward Bound]

Sacred Weapon (assuming 20 CHA) and Vow of Enmity seem like they would have great synergy with Great Weapon Master's -5/+10. Both would basically negate the penalty to hit.

[MadBear]

Well, you see, grad school involves quite a bit of something I like to call sleep deprivation, which means I mess up things like that in my free time. Fixed.

Well as a recent grad school graduate, I'll just say, the light is at the end of the tunnel. It's also why I asked, because I assumed I was equally likely to have missed something somewhere.

[Strill]

http://thesageadvice.wordpress.com/tag/paladin/

I don't think it is intended for GWF to apply to smite damage.

If it's not then there is no reason to use 2-handed weapons as a Paladin, and that's really really dumb. GWF style is the only thing keeping 2-handed weapons worthwhile.

[Spinward Bound]

GWF style is the only thing keeping 2-handed weapons worthwhile.

Disregarding GWF and smite interaction, you don't think GWM and Sacred Weapon or Vow of Enmity are worthwhile?

I've been considering the idea of taking Defense Style, GWM, and using a longsword in two hands Great Sword for the -5/+10 while either Sacred Weapon or Vow of Enmity are active and using a shield and single hand longsword the rest if the time.

I'm not trying to squeeze the most optimization out of this but it looks kinda fun to me.

(Trying to fit this on an elf chassis is a pain though)

Edit: turns out Longswords aren't Heavy and I can't read.

[MaxWilson]

I've been considering the idea of taking Defense Style, GWM, and using a longsword in two hands for the -5/+10 while either Sacred Weapon or Vow of Enmity are active and using a shield and single hand longsword the rest if the time.

Longswords aren't heavy weapons so you don't have the Power Attack option (-5/+10).

[Spinward Bound]

Longswords aren't heavy weapons so you don't have the Power Attack option (-5/+10).

Thanks for pointing that out.

[Oscredwin]

If it's not then there is no reason to use 2-handed weapons as a Paladin, and that's really really dumb. GWF style is the only thing keeping 2-handed weapons worthwhile.

I kind of like the idea of Barbarians working best with a THF, Rangers working best with a bow, Rogues working best with TWF (only attacking with their offhand if their mainhand misses), and Paladins working best with SnB, and Fighters can work well as any of these.

[Strill]

I kind of like the idea of Barbarians working best with a THF, Rangers working best with a bow, Rogues working best with TWF (only attacking with their offhand if their mainhand misses), and Paladins working best with SnB, and Fighters can work well as any of these.

That's an arbitrary limitation that just restricts character concepts. Vengeance Paladins, for example, fit best thematically with 2-handed weapons.

[Oscredwin]

That's an arbitrary limitation that just restricts character concepts. Vengeance Paladins, for example, fit best thematically with 2-handed weapons.

Each class has an optimal weapon load out, this is going to happen as long as the mechanics for each is different. I'm glad the optimal weapon load out is different for different classes instead of being TWF for almost everyone (like in the 3.X days).

[Gnomes2169]

Each class has an optimal weapon load out, this is going to happen as long as the mechanics for each is different. I'm glad the optimal weapon load out is different for different classes instead of being TWF for almost everyone (like in the 3.X days).

It was THF in 3.5, but yeah, this is a good change indeed...

[Ferrin33]

Each class has an optimal weapon load out, this is going to happen as long as the mechanics for each is different. I'm glad the optimal weapon load out is different for different classes instead of being TWF for almost everyone (like in the 3.X days).

The difference is relatively small for some though.