Lay On Hands (3.P D&D)

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Hi everyone! I'm setting up to make a Paladin that can work primarily in 3.5 D&D but may get ported over to Pathfinder.

My first issue is Lay On Hands, I want to boost this since healing is so sub par it wouldn'thurt to give it a bit of a Oomph.

Lay On Hands (Su)
A number of times per encounter a Paladin can lay their hand upon a creature (themself included) to heal them. Lay On Hands may be used only during battle or within 30 minutes of an encounter*. A Paldin may add their Cha Mod on the number of Hit Points healed by the Lay on Hands. This may be used as a swift action 1/Round.

Level 2: 1/Encounter (Cure Light Wounds)
Level 5: 2/Encounter (Cure Light Wounds)
Level 9: 3/Encounter (Cure Moderate Wounds)
Level 13: 4/Encounter (Cure Moderate Wounds)
Level 17: 5/Encounter (Cure Serious Wounds)

*In an emergency the Paladin may ask their deity to use this ability outside the time frame. If so, the Paladin gains use of Lay On Hands but the deity will ask for a direct favors that must be performed within a time frame set by the deity. This is a free action performed when attempting a Lay On Hands outside of the battle time frame.
==

This allows the Paladin to help heal in and after battle, not be a heal bot, throws some fluff the Paladin's way that isn't about killing, and is pretty useful but not as crazy as free "Heal" Spells.

Some gods may decide that the timeframe to use LoH is different. A god of destruction or war could have LoH work only when not in battle. This is up to the DM and player yo work out but the above rules are the base.

=

Any suggestions?

[toapat]

as it is, PF's LoH is the second strongest and the most abundant healing in the game. Cure Serious wounds (3d8+15), at level 17, will be healing ~28.5 (18-39) hp/cast.

at level 16, the PF paladin already heals 8d6 8+Chamod times per day, or ~28 (6-48) per cast, and it still has 2 dice to add, with enough uses to pretty much account for the same amount of healing as you allow.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

as it is, PF's LoH is the second strongest and the most abundant healing in the game. Cure Serious wounds (3d8+15), at level 17, will be healing ~28.5 (18-39) hp/cast.

at level 16, the PF paladin already heals 8d6 8+Chamod times per day, or ~28 (6-48) per cast, and it still has 2 dice to add, with enough uses to pretty much account for the same amount of healing as you allow.

With this LoH, it can be used any number of times per day. The only restrictions is per encounter. So if you run into a low number of battles then you at end up using this 5 times per day. But if you run into a ton of smaller battles along the way to a big battle then the Paladin may use their LoH (5 x # of encounters). Essentially you would never need a wand of CLW or Leaser Vigor or whatever again. I may reduce the time to 5 min after a battle, 30 seems like to much.

Also unless it is something like "heal" i'm not a huge fan of standard action healing. Swift action healing let's the Paladin contribute to the battle and play a bit of support.

At level 17: CSW: ((3d8 + 15 + Cha Mod) * 5/enc) * (# of encounters)

With a 3 Cha... 13.5 (average) + 15 + 3 = 31 * 5 = 155

This is over the course of 5 rounds (1 swift action per round). So on average it will come out about the same as a Cleric casting Heal once (or a wizard who summoned a unicorn...).

The paladin at level 17 essentially gets (over the course of 5 rounds) the same healing as if he could cast Heal 1/encounter.

That works out pretty well actually.

[toapat]

except that at level 20 the paladin will be healing 60hp/cast guarenteed and still has enough uses that under normal balancing that they can not run out of uses per day.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

except that at level 20 the paladin will be healing 60hp/cast guarenteed and still has enough uses that under normal balancing that they can not run out of uses per day.

Normal balancing with 3.P is horrible, this is the same balance that allows a Wizard to summon a creature that can cast heal a crazy ton times per day.

The Cleric will be getting a boost in stuff also, but for now I'm liking how much a Paladin can actually heal (as a swift action over many rounds).

Thanks for your input.

[toapat]

Normal balancing with 3.P is horrible, this is the same balance that allows a Wizard to summon a creature that can cast heal a crazy ton times per day.

The Cleric will be getting a boost in stuff also, but for now I'm liking how much a Paladin can actually heal (as a swift action over many rounds).

Thanks for your input.

the comparison is "Im nerfing it because i think im right" vs "This is not something thats broken".

The fact is, relatively LoH is broken, thats because most of the game is broken. Paladin is a worse class in PF then in 3.5 because what made paladin a good class in 3.5 has been removed at every turn, leaving it with a horrid role as "guy on a horse" who is outperformed in every single way by the Cavalier or "Fighter with a magic item, no feats, and terrible spells" who is outperformed by a Commoner with the Flaw "Corpse". This does not, however, change the fact that in PF, LoH is much stronger and more abundant then you assume it is, because its tuned to provide the necessary healing for 4 encounters per day.

the Assumption that Resources should be limitless is itself flawed. Nigh Limitless anything makes the game boring because there is no conflict asto whether using something that you are limited on is a mistake or not. LoH is not intended to be limitless in the same manner Smite is supposed to be, its supposed to be something that you have to consider spending because you only have so much you can do with it

[SpawnOfMorbo]

The fact is, relatively LoH is broken, thats because most of the game is broken. Paladin is a worse class in PF then in 3.5 because what made paladin a good class in 3.5 has been removed at every turn, leaving it with a horrid role as "guy on a horse" who is outperformed in every single way by the Cavalier or "Fighter with a magic item, no feats, and terrible spells" who is outperformed by a Commoner with the Flaw "Corpse". This does not, however, change the fact that in PF, LoH is much stronger and more abundant then you assume it is, because its tuned to provide the necessary healing for 4 encounters per day.


Ok you are either trolling me or you don't understand the game. Or maybe both.

But the game is broken, and one of the reasons why is because you give daily resource management to abilities that shouldn't have daily resource management. Healing is not on the same level as other spell casting.

Thanks for your input.

[Cloud]

The ideas that champions of good and light can't heal Joe Blogs the commoner because the commoner fell off a horse and no fight happened is just...well it's something.

Anyway, even as the swift action the healing doesn't scale nearly enough to be worth using, honestly as much as you see it as 'crazy', I'd err towards basically giving them heal, but then you know, make it a limited number of times per day...but make it usable whenever they want to. Instead of just going near infinite healing, make the healing on par with other spell casting.

Also I'd say that toapat is right on the money, and if you don't think so just look at all the alternative class features, feats, and spells Paladins get across all of 3.5. I wouldn't say Paladins are great, but I'd rather play a 3.5 Paladin with Complete Champion and Spell Compendium then touch the Pathfinder one.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

The ideas that champions of good and light can't heal Joe Blogs the commoner because the commoner fell off a horse and no fight happened is just...well it's something.

Anyway, even as the swift action the healing doesn't scale nearly enough to be worth using, honestly as much as you see it as 'crazy', I'd err towards basically giving them heal, but then you know, make it a limited number of times per day...but make it usable whenever they want to. Instead of just going near infinite healing, make the healing on par with other spell casting.

Also I'd say that toapat is right on the money, and if you don't think so just look at all the alternative class features, feats, and spells Paladins get across all of 3.5. I wouldn't say Paladins are great, but I'd rather play a 3.5 Paladin with Complete Champion and Spell Compendium then touch the Pathfinder one.


With enough optimization any class can be crazy powerful... It takes so much help to make the 3.5 paladin worth playing, and then it really isn't that great. The Pathfinder paladin is high tier 4 out of the box and can be tier 3 with little effort.

Sure tHe 3.5 paladin has a higher ceiling but the class itself is pretty bad that it needs so much help just to be competent.

[toapat]

With enough optimization any class can be crazy powerful... It takes so much help to make the 3.5 paladin worth playing, and then it really isn't that great. The Pathfinder paladin is high tier 4 out of the box and can be tier 3 with little effort.

Sure tHe 3.5 paladin has a higher ceiling but the class itself is pretty bad that it needs so much help just to be competent.

Actually, this is Entirely incorrect because PF didnt increase the power or balance of paladin at all.

Smite Evil: Paladins in 3rd are natively the strongest damage dealers in the game, and only can be surpassed by giving Barbarian access to Complete champion which still better supports the paladin then the barbarian, giving them better breath of class features. The only problem here is that Smite is a vastly limited Resource, in both PF and 3.5. Pathfinder didnt fix anything here.

Options: Simply put, the Spell lists and the Item bond/mount in pathfinder are irrelevant. the extra feats are wasted on prerequisites for others, lay on hands is also your source of turn undead charges.

Other: Mercies are better, and i looted them and buffed them for my paladin homebrews long ago.
the pile of auras: you get 4 auras and a party buff. of those, a balanced party would never benefit from the party buff, and the CG paladin in UA gets the effects of the other 4 at second level barring vs extremely rare cases like Rebuke Undead, a non-mind effecting fear effect which due to a long list of rules hops starting in Eberron campaign setting actually effects living similar to Turn undead for undead.

Archtypes vs AFCs and Subsitution levels: none of the paladin archtypes add classfeatures or change their mechanics into something more viable in pathfinder. Paladin in 3.5 is able to go diving into a vast ocean of variety with the 3.5 ACFs and subsitution levels, being able to gain alternate forms of movement, interesting classfeatures, or the ability to compete with the bard for most helpful person to the party.

Using that same series of rule hops that causes rebuke undead to hit living, Paladins also get to use Command living.

[Segev]

This may belong more in the 3.5/PF subforum, but can you explain what about the PF Paladin has been removed to make it weaker than the 3.5 Paladin? What made the 3.5 Paladin so good that the PF Paladin no longer has?

If it's just "C. Champion and the like are 3.5 splats," I'm open to that explanation, too, but I'd like to point out that nothing renders them incompatible with PF. The worst case scenario would require an extra feat to use divine feats, and a reasonable house ruling (and, let's be honest, any real gameplay will involve some level of house ruling) would be to let Channel Energy expenditures fuel things Turn attempts normally go towards.


But especially core-to-core, I cannot see a 3.5 Paladin as stronger than a PF Paladin.

[toapat]

This may belong more in the 3.5/PF subforum, but can you explain what about the PF Paladin has been removed to make it weaker than the 3.5 Paladin? What made the 3.5 Paladin so good that the PF Paladin no longer has?

If it's just "C. Champion and the like are 3.5 splats," I'm open to that explanation, too, but I'd like to point out that nothing renders them incompatible with PF. The worst case scenario would require an extra feat to use divine feats, and a reasonable house ruling (and, let's be honest, any real gameplay will involve some level of house ruling) would be to let Channel Energy expenditures fuel things Turn attempts normally go towards.


But especially core-to-core, I cannot see a 3.5 Paladin as stronger than a PF Paladin.

none of the Substitution levels, while the ACFs either do translate or are superior in third to the PF version. no one would ever touch weapon bond again when they see Paladin, Sword of Celestia.

Smite evil received no relevant buffs because paladin is still a 1 encounter/day class for a long time.

the aura stack doesnt improve over what CG paladin gets outright.

Feat Options also are weaker in Pathfinder as compared to 3.5, often needing 2-3 feats where in 3rd you needed 1, and then piled on 2-4 feats that enhanced that first one.

[Segev]

none of the Substitution levels, while the ACFs either do translate or are superior in third to the PF version. no one would ever touch weapon bond again when they see Paladin, Sword of Celestia.What is "Sword of Celestia," and what prevents a PF Paladin from substituting for it?


Smite evil received no relevant buffs because paladin is still a 1 encounter/day class for a long time.Smite Evil received all sorts of buffs. "One encounter/day" is a semi-legitimate complaint, but Smite becomes something you can use to utterly dominate in that one encounter, and be that champion who takes on the Big Evil toe-to-toe.

I don't know what Smite power you're looking at that you think it got no relevant buffs. Now it boosts AC, to hit, and damage until you beat the foe (or you retreat for more than a day).


the aura stack doesnt improve over what CG paladin gets outright.Er, you're going to have to elaborate on this one.


Feat Options also are weaker in Pathfinder as compared to 3.5, often needing 2-3 feats where in 3rd you needed 1, and then piled on 2-4 feats that enhanced that first one.Please elaborate here, too. Examples of which feats for Paladins are so much weaker in PF. Or is this just part of the "fighters don't get nice things" issue? (Hardly exclusive to Paladins, and I still contend Paladins gained a lot more to the class directly than they lost to general fighter-type feats being nerfed.)

[toapat]

What is "Sword of Celestia," and what prevents a PF Paladin from substituting for it?

Smite Evil received all sorts of buffs. "One encounter/day" is a semi-legitimate complaint, but Smite becomes something you can use to utterly dominate in that one encounter, and be that champion who takes on the Big Evil toe-to-toe.

I don't know what Smite power you're looking at that you think it got no relevant buffs. Now it boosts AC, to hit, and damage until you beat the foe (or you retreat for more than a day).

Er, you're going to have to elaborate on this one.

Please elaborate here, too. Examples of which feats for Paladins are so much weaker in PF. Or is this just part of the "fighters don't get nice things" issue? (Hardly exclusive to Paladins, and I still contend Paladins gained a lot more to the class directly than they lost to general fighter-type feats being nerfed.)

Sword of Celestia is a Dragon Magazine feature that was modified into the horrible weapon bond, and a cross between Weapon Familiar and Ancestral Weapon.

AC isnt that significant, Nor is the ability multitarget, and it doesnt give anything to actually using Attacks of Opportunity.

the CG paladin in UA gets immunity to mind Effecting instead of fear effects.
Barring a complex rule interaction for Turn/Rebuke, i can name no Charm, Compulsion, or fear effect that is not covered.

The easiest example is Improved Sunder, which in the bonus needed to achieve sunder attacks and the removal of AoO from it were split into separate feats. Yes this is "Fighters do not get nice things" turned upto 11, a common counterargument for PF

[Segev]

Sword of Celestia is a Dragon Magazine feature that was modified into the horrible weapon bond, and a cross between Weapon Familiar and Ancestral Weapon.I would be careful about using Dragon Magazine as your point of balance. Weapon bond is okay; I usually prefer the iconic steed.


AC isnt that significant, Nor is the ability multitarget, and it doesnt give anything to actually using Attacks of Opportunity.I can assure you that AC is significant in a toe-to-toe battle against many, many CR-appropriate (and CR-too-high) things in the MM. It would, admittedly, be nice to get a bonus to saves, but Paladins mercifully already have pretty spectacular ones in general. Where do you get it giving "nothing" to AoOs? It gives bonuses to all attacks made against the Smite target until the target is dead or the day passes. AoOs are attacks.

And what do you mean by "ability multitarget?" Are you referring to the ability to share Smite with your whole party for two expenditures of it? That's less useful if you don't have more warrior-types, but it's definitely not insignificant.


the CG paladin in UA gets immunity to mind Effecting instead of fear effects.
Barring a complex rule interaction for Turn/Rebuke, i can name no Charm, Compulsion, or fear effect that is not covered.O...kay? So, a variant paladin out of a book of highly optional rules is better than the core paladin, so the PF paladin is a nerf of the 3.5 paladin? You'd have to modify the PF paladin to make a CG PF paladin; if you feel the CG UA Paladin's power is balanced, you could port it directly.

Please do not compare this year's apples to last year's grapefruits and then say that last year's apples were bigger because last year's grapefruits are bigger than this year's apples.


The easiest example is Improved Sunder, which in the bonus needed to achieve sunder attacks and the removal of AoO from it were split into separate feats. Yes this is "Fighters do not get nice things" turned upto 11, a common counterargument for PFNot really a complaint about the Paladin, so it doesn't really support your claim that the PF Paladin is nerfed compared to the 3.5 Paladin.

[Realms of Chaos]

Of the complaints I've seen:
1. An optional UA (source of flaws and item familiars, I remind you) alternative famous for having one really good class feature got that class feature before the PF paladin does. I raise an eyebrow at this criticism as it's like saying that any ranger fix that can't beat the famously powerful wildshape ranger must be a nerf. :smallconfused:
2. The broad pool of Archetypes for PF paladins don't seem as strong as as those that 3.5 paladins got... except that most of them can be grandfathered into pathfinder.
3. Feats are often split into more worse feats... except that seems like more of a problem regarding PF vs 3.5 than one about the paladin in particular. Further, I challenge someone to show me where this is done outside of special combat maneuvers because everyone always points to those feats, those feats aren't especially vital for most builds, and I can't recall seeing this anywhere else.
4. Less "turn undead" (and divine feat) shenanigans... which is honestly a really good point. You ultimately end up with 7 more lay on hands uses than a cleric gets turn undead uses but a) you have to split those uses between healing and shenanigans, b) extra lay on hands gives you only 2 extra uses instead of the extra 4 extra turning gives, and c) most abilities you could grandfather in that would normally give extra turning uses (like the infamous nightstick) probably won't work for the paladin is technically spending lay on hands uses.

So yeah, PF nerfs the paladin in most of the ways that it was playable in 3.5 but I think that it gives enough back that the class is still usable without shenanigans or ACFs in most games and has a much higher optimization floor, which I for one find very impressive for a minimal-casting core class.

[The Dragon]

It boils down to this:
core only 3.5 paladin < core only 3.p paladin
splat 3.5 paladin >> splat 3.p paladin.

pathfinder cuts off access to a lot of the things that made he paladin suck less. This means it ends up sucking more, despite being more powerful out of the box.

And yeah, you're nerfing healing by doing this. Consider that the "standard" is 4 encounters/d (my group has one on an average adventuring day, but then again, we're special, and fights only really happens if we do something stupid or go in looking for that speciffic fight), the amount of healing a paladin will get out of their LoH per day should look something like below. I'll assume that the paladin starts with 16 cha, and gets a +2 item at level 8th, a +4 at level 12, and a +6 at level 16.

Level 2 - Your paladin gives 4d8+20, avg. 38. Path paladin gives 4d6, avg. 14.
Lvl 4 - 4d8+28 ~46 vs 10d6 ~35.
Lvl 5 - 8d8+56 ~92 vs 10d6 ~35.
Lvl 6 - 8d8+56 ~92 vs 18d6 ~63.
lvl 8 - 8d8+64 ~100 vs 32d6 ~112.
Lvl 9 - 24d8+156 ~264 vs 32d6 ~112.
Lvl 10 - 24d8+168 ~276 vs 45d6 ~157,5.
Lvl 12 - 24d8+180 ~288 vs 66d6 ~231.
Lvl 13 - 32d8+240 ~384 vs 66d6 ~231.
Lvl 14 - 32d8+240 ~384 vs 84d6 ~294.
Lvl 16 - 32d8+256 ~400 vs 112d6 ~392.
Lvl 17 - 60d8+420 ~690 vs 112d6 ~392.
Lvl 18 - 60d8+420 ~690 vs 135d6 ~472,5.
Lvl 20 - 60d8+420 ~690 vs 840.

Going with four fights per day, which I personally find very unrealistic, you've given them more total healing power per day. But take a look at what happens to your daily healing when you get less encounters:
Lvl|1E/d|2E/d|3E/d|4E/d|Norm
2|~9,5|~19|~28,5|~38|~14
4|~11,5|~23|~34,5|~46|~35
5|~23|~46|¨~69|~92|~35
6|~23|~46|~69|~92|~63
8|~25|~50|~75|~100|~112
9|~66|~132|~198|~264|~112
10|~68|~138|~206|~276|~157,5
12|~72|~144|~216|~288|~231
13|~96|~192|~288|~384|~231
14|~96|~192|~288|~384|~294
16|~100|~200|~300|~400|~392
17|~172,5|~345|~512,5|~690|~392
18|~172,5|~345|~512,5|~690|~472,5
20|~172,5|~345|~512,5|~690|840

So in short, if you've given them more healing depends on when in the level progression you're asking, and on how many encounters per day you have, and if people actually take damage through an encounter.

I dislike your method though, because it takes the element of husbanding resources out of playing the paladin - where before you knew how much healing you had, and it was on your head to make it last through the day, it is now entirely up to the amount of encounters you have to determine your healing. It is never going to be a good idea to save your healing for later when you might need it more.

[toapat]

*snip*

quick note, the PF capstone for paladin maximizes LoH, so it should be 60*(10+Chamod), or, by your assumptions, 16*60=840hp/day

[Segev]

It boils down to this:
core only 3.5 paladin < core only 3.p paladin
splat 3.5 paladin >> splat 3.p paladin.

pathfinder cuts off access to a lot of the things that made he paladin suck less. This means it ends up sucking more, despite being more powerful out of the box.

I'm not sure I agree, and don't really have the time or energy to go into why in detail beyond what we already have. I do have one last quibble, though: 3.p splat paladin can have everything 3.5 paladin can have. Did you mean PF-only splat paladin?

[toapat]

3.p splat paladin can have everything 3.5 paladin can have.

it cant. Most of the substitution levels (And all of the levels which grant definitive power) discard class features PF paladin doesnt have.

when people talk about Paladin ACFs, they are only typically thinking about the stuff that replaces the mount. That accounts for about 6 (Charging smite, Sword of Celestia, Divine Spirit, Underdark Knight are the ones i have memorized) ACFs for paladin, most of which are core to specific builds and only one of which, that being the second most powerful, does not translate because of how Lay on hands was changed.

Even with all materials, backdating, The best possible paladin is a CG Human Paladin of Mystra with Divine spirit, levels 5+6 of the Mystic Fire Knight subsitution levels and both of the feats Dynamic Priest and Sword of the Arcane Order.

[The Dragon]

quick note, the PF capstone for paladin maximizes LoH, so it should be 60*(10+Chamod), or, by your assumptions, 16*60=840hp/day

I'm not sure I agree, and don't really have the time or energy to go into why in detail beyond what we already have. I do have one last quibble, though: 3.p splat paladin can have everything 3.5 paladin can have. Did you mean PF-only splat paladin?

Thank you, I'll fix when I can be bothered.

The second part of our discussion seems rather off-topic, so what do you say we keep it in spoilers?

Obviously, if you're allowed to mow through 3.5 for things to stack onto your 3.p paladin, it becomes a better paladin. I'm actually unsure if the substitution levels would be enough of a boost to tip the 3.5 paladin back in power, but it's most likely abut equal.

I'm 90% sure however, that 3.p games that allow 3.5 stuff without it being an exception are very much in minority amongst those games overall.

So no, by default pathfinder homebrew needs not concern itself with how it stacks up to 3.5 classes, in my opinion. It does, however, need to think about how it stacks up to other pathfinder things, such as the wizard.

[Segev]

Thank you, I'll fix when I can be bothered.No problem. I know I like being precise, so I try to help others when I think they meant something else. (I hate misinterpreting people.)


The second part of our discussion seems rather off-topic, so what do you say we keep it in spoilers?

Obviously, if you're allowed to mow through 3.5 for things to stack onto your 3.p paladin, it becomes a better paladin. I'm actually unsure if the substitution levels would be enough of a boost to tip the 3.5 paladin back in power, but it's most likely abut equal.

I'm 90% sure however, that 3.p games that allow 3.5 stuff without it being an exception are very much in minority amongst those games overall.

So no, by default pathfinder homebrew needs not concern itself with how it stacks up to 3.5 classes, in my opinion. It does, however, need to think about how it stacks up to other pathfinder things, such as the wizard.
Sounds like a plan.

I agree, by default, PF homebrew need not concern itself with 3.5 material for balance. However, it has been my (admittedly anecdotal) experience that PF actually tends, in non-official-PF-society games, to allow dipping into 3.5 whenever it helps make a build fit a concept better, at a minimum. It also tends to be treated as default in the 3.5/PF forum around here that recommendations of 3.5 material to aid a PF build request is acceptable unless specified otherwise.

Part of PF's appeal, after all, is that it is heavily backwards-compatible with 3.5.

Anyway, I don't think we'll agree on whether the PF paladin is weaker or stronger than the 3.5 paladin. I honestly compare it core-to-core, because there just isn't as much splat material for the PF paladin yet. And I don't find the UA arguments convincing, as UA is by far the most optional of the splat books - it's fully of variant rules that are not given the theoretical "weight" of other splats as "canon." So when you can mix-and-match those variant rules to make something more powerful, it's not surprising. (I mean, a Gestalt Paladin/Sorcerer is going to be more powerful than a PF paladin, too, right? No, I'm not making this argument seriously; it's meant to illustrate a point about UA material's validity for this discussion.)

All that said, I'm actually playing a PF paladin in a 3.P game, and not using any ACFs or PrCs. He's remarkably more potent than he would have been as a 3.5 Paladin. This is, obviously, anecdotal. And I am not building him at full-bore optimization levels (though I'm not exactly holding back on optimizing my "signature tricks" - most notably TWF used in conjunction with light crossbows, javelins, and sword&board to maximize Smite damage). But he would be significantly weaker with the 3.5 paladin chassis.