What is the most M.A.D class?

[killem2]

As the titles says I am looking for the most Multiple Attribute Dependent Class.

Pathfinder only of course, sources are:

Core Rulebook
Advanced Class Guide
Advanced Players Guide
Advanced Race Guide
Psionics Expanded, Unleashed, and Augmented
Ultimate Combat and Magic

I'm running through a character creation process.

[Keneth]

Monk.

And Red Mantis Assassin if we're taking PrCs into consideration.

[Yanisa]

Monk, Str, Dex, Con and Wis (although one could build a monk with armor, then the need is only Str/Dex and Con)

Followed by the gish casters, Magus, Paladin and Melee Rangers, who need Str/Dex, Con and their casting stat.

I retract my earlier statement.

Based on Combat only, Paladin and Magus are the most M.A.D. classes, because they both can only dump one stat without suffering a combat penalty. That is intelligence for Paladins, and charisma for Magus. An negative ability modifier in any other state leads to a penalty on a combat relevant skill. (Granted both classes have a high natural will save and can probably easier dump wisdom then say a fighter, regardless it still is a combat penalty.)

Besides that, yeah Inquisitor, Monk, Ranger, Magus, Paladin, those five top the charts.

[13ones]

Monk (unless you're a Zen archer, only slightly less MAD), with Inquisitor following shortly behind it.

[Ssalarn]

Since it's Pathfinder, Fighter takes it, particularly if you want to do combat maneuvers, since he needs STR, DEX, CON, WIS, and INT. WIS may not seem that important but he's got crap saves and a decent WIS is the only thing preventing him from being a bigger danger to the party than the enemy. High DEX is necessary to actually benefit from his Armor Training Class Feature, INT needs at least a 13 for skills and combat maneuvers. Some builds will cause variation.

Monk floats back and forth between 2nd and 1st needing STR, DEX, CON, and WIS. Higher skill points and some ability to skip pre-reqs helps him avoid needing INT too badly, and sometimes you can strike a balance with the other stats. Still rough though. I have a hard time seeing most monks work on anything less than a 20 point buy, though some archetypes like the Sensei and Zen Archer can help you cut the MADness way down.

Rogue's probably 3rd, though really he needs most of the same stuff as the Monk. With the right builds you can get away with a low STR score, but you still probably want DEX, CON, something in WIS for saves and Perception, possibly INT though you can do without with 8 skills a level, and you may also want Charisma depending on build.

Those three could all be pretty interchangeable on exactly where they fall, because they're all pretty MAD. Bard and Magus would probably be next needing at least 3 good stats each, and then pretty much everyone else can get by with one or two good stats depending on the build you run with.

[Metahuman1]

Monk has feats for it to let it dump Wis in favor of another stat, I tend to favor Int for this of the two options since I can get everything save the profession skill and get skill points out of the deal.


I'm gonna go with the 3.5 Paladin assuming you can't get the Serenity feat and/or either a dip into Shiba Protector or the Intuitive Strike feat.

[T.G. Oskar]

The Pathfinder Paladin can still be quite MAD, particularly if you play its traditional stereotype (Sword & Board), as it needs large amounts of Dexterity to work. Otherwise, it's either Strength or Dexterity (yes: a Paladin can choose to go high Dex instead of high Str), then Charisma, then Constitution. No idea why a Paladin wouldn't dump Wisdom except for Will saves and that Sense Motive is a class skill, but other than that, Wisdom offers as much as Charisma does to the Fighter (Intimidate is based on Charisma, and unless you take one trait and one feat, you'll need a decent score). Note that a Two-Handed specialized Paladin only needs three good stats (Str, Con, Cha; the middle one can be kept at 14 rather nicely), so it doesn't fall into MAD status as would the 3.5 Paladin.

The Pathfinder Fighter can also be MAD, save for a Two-Hand Fighter who can go pretty much Strength and Constitution and call it a day. If you intend to go Sword & Board, or use Trip, you'll need Dexterity (and with the latter, Intelligence as well).

Monks at the beginning remain as MAD as ever, with need of Strength, Dexterity, Constitution and Wisdom. Wisdom is slightly more important now because of various feat options that depend on this feat.

I don't see Inquisitor as requiring that much, though. Good Wisdom to cast spells, Strength or Dexterity based on where you're aiming at, decent Constitution and not-sucking Charisma (a 10 is fine, so does a 12). If you're aiming for WHICH stats are most important, Dexterity and Wisdom, actually.

The best way to put it is: which builds are the most MAD, since every class needs Constitution and caster classes don't need physical stats that badly (exception: Magus and Druid). Of those, Sword & Board (high Strength, high Dexterity, good Constitution, plus whatever is necessary for the class itself) and 3.5-style Lockdown (high Strength for the CMB, high Dexterity for Combat Reflexes, good Intelligence for Combat Expertise to get Improved Trip/Improved Dirty Trick, and good Constitution). Less so is TWF (good Strength and high Dexterity, plus high Constitution to survive).

[Keneth]

Based on Combat only, Paladin and Magus are the most M.A.D. classes, because they both can only dump one stat without suffering a combat penalty.

lolno

Both paladins and magi can drop up to three stats without serious combat implications. Tried and tested.

[Yanisa]

lolno

Both paladins and magi can drop up to three stats without serious combat implications. Tried and tested.

Like T.G. Oskar pointed out, it various from build to build, I was mostly assuming the most iconic use of the class. Can you make a sword and board Paladin with 3 dumped stats?
But that was beside my point, I said there 5 stats that lead to penalty in combat, how minor it may be. Or to turn my point on its flipside, there are five stats a Paladin could have a 18 in and benefit from, whereas a monk only has 4 stats. General speaking a 18 in int or cha does nothing for a melee combatant, unless that is your spellcasting stat as a gish. Like Paladin or Magus.

Like wise, a Wizard also benefits from having a 18 in four stats, just like a monk. :smalltongue:

[Keneth]

Every class can benefit from every stat in combat, otherwise you're doing it wrong.

Plus, I don't think of a sword and board paladin as any more iconic than a greatsword paladin, or a lucerne hammer paladin, or even an archer paladin. :smallconfused:

Type paladin into google images. Most of them aren't portrayed with a shield.

And yes, you can make a sword and board paladin by dumping three stats if you absolutely need to.

[stack]

Archery paladins are fairly MAD, needing everything but wisdom and intelligence, even needing INT if you want any skills.

[Keneth]

You don't really need Strength or Constitution to be an efficient archer paladin. It's cool if you can afford to invest in Strength, but you get plenty of damage from other sources. They're probably the least MAD of the paladin types.

[stack]

I play mostly at low levels, so 1 smite/day doesn't go far for damage, but point taken.

[AttilaTheGeek]

If you're talking about specific builds, I'd have to give it to the sword and board Paladin, who needs Strength for damage, Dexterity for dual-wielding, Constitution for hit points, and Charisma for casting. Intelligence and Wisdom help too, but they're not strictly necessary.

As a class overall, definitely the monk. The default monk needs Strength for damage, Dexterity for AC, Wisdom for AC, and Constitution for not dying. Here, Intelligence helps for skill points, but Charisma has to go down the drain if you're doing any sort of point buy.

[Yanisa]

Every class can benefit from every stat in combat, otherwise you're doing it wrong.
I rarely, if not never, have seen a single character uses all stats in combat. Int and Cha are rarely used because they rarely are needed.


Plus, I don't think of a sword and board paladin as any more iconic than a greatsword paladin, or a lucerne hammer paladin, or even an archer paladin. :smallconfused:
You seriously want to argue me over every point? :smalltongue: First picture in my google: sword and board (http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20050731100137/wowwiki/images/6/6a/Paladin_silver_hand.jpg). Judging from my google, its a 50/50 between sword and shield and other weapons. And not a single lucerne hammer in sight. But why I do feel shields are more suitable then two handed weapons? Paladins are defenders of the people, defending implies shield.

Also Pathfinder's official paladin is portrayed as a sword and shield. So by RAW the iconic paladin is sword and board. :smalltongue:

Regardless both are melee types and both get a bonus from Str, Dex, Con, Wis and Cha


And yes, you can make a sword and board paladin by dumping three stats if you absolutely need to.
And yes, you can make a monk by dumping four stats.

Nothing changing my main points:
Paladins (and Magus) benefit from Str, Dex, Con, Wis and Cha(Or Int)
Monks benefit from Str, Dex, Con and Wis.
Monks, Paladins, Magus, Rangers and Inquisitors are the most M.A.D. classes with their most straight forward melee builds.
(And Int and Cha are useless in combat unless you are a caster)

I was deliberately not weighing any stats and avoiding to answers how much a class benefits from it (I did state paladins barely benefit from wisdom). There are so many builds, archetypes and whatevers that I think you can build a S.A.D. character of any class. How else can we determine madness if not looking to the stats that a character benefits in their most basic form? It's quick and dirty way, but who wants to spit out all possible most used builds and value the abilities scores of those builds to see which class needs the most ability scores and benefits more from that then any other class? (I would seriously do that, but I don't feel that is worth the time of any reader. Edit: The answer is also probably monk.)

[Ssalarn]

I really don't see Paladin's needing WIS. They've got good Will and Divine Grace. CON is also an option thanks to swift action heals, they've got a pretty good pool of hp to draw from there. I suppose if you want to TWF with a shield than there's an argument for DEX, but that's contingent on build, not any of the actual class abilities or features. Most Paladins need STR and/or DEX and CHA. Everything else is pretty optional. Given how few feats the Pally gets I probably wouldn't spend more feats on TWF than the first instance and the prereqs for Shield Master. With the attack and damage bonuses from Smite you can probably wait to even pick that (TWF feat) up until late enough in the game to get a Belt of Physical Might, so no need to start with higher than a 12 or 13 DEX.

Similarly, Rangers get to skip prereqs for their combat style feats, so they're pretty much STR and/or DEX and WIS, and maybe CON since their healing options come on line later and aren't as good as the Paladin's.

Inquisitors are in the exact same boat as the ranger, only they've got even better stat consolidation and healing and recovery or defense options right from 1st level. While some builds may dictate differences, you can build great inquisitors with only two good stats (WIS and STR or DEX).

I wouldn't put any of those three anywhere near the top of the top of the MAD classes, as there are lots of ways to build perfectly functional versions of both classes that are still very iconic and only use 2 good stats.

Monk is MAD. He has to have WIS for his class features, many of his skills are DEX reliant and his AC bonuses don't scale as well as actual armor, he still needs STR to deal decent damage, and his squishy little d8 demands CON because his recovery option comes in late and isn't very good at all.

Fighter is also pretty MAD, as his Armor Training has to be matched by a high DEX to continue to scale, he doesn't get to skip prereqs for feats, he has no built in recovery option so CON is a must, and he needs STR more than pretty much any other class to be effective. He also has terrible saves, poor skills, and is theoretically one of the masters of Combat Maneuvers which raises the need for WIS and INT both.

Rogues are the other class that vies for a position as most MAD. DEX is a must because of their poor proficiencies, light armor and d8s combined with no recovery options other than UMD mean CON is fairly important, they've got a lot of CHA related talents and skills, and they generally still need at least a 14 STR to do the things they are generally expected to do, though that one can be negotiated.

Magus probably comes in just behind those three, though spellcasting means that he has much more versatility and options for finding ways around. STR and/or DEX and INT definitely, and he won't say no to CON, but you can get around it a bit by diversifying which spells you prepare and keeping defensive options on hand. He's got good Will and the only class skill he has that uses WIS is Profession, so he doesn't need that, and since UMD is a class skill and he's got high INT he can skip CHA as well. So 3-4 decent stats, but still very doable on a 20 point buy, 15 if you play conservatively and are willing to pay a feat tax on something like Weapon Finesse.

[GhorrinRedblade]

Special shout-out to the psionic class Tactician. Some expectation of melee, Int for manifesting, Wis because c'mon, you're not gonna pass on Psionic Meditation, and Cha for strategies.

Boom. A class that's begging for one of those "all rolls of 16 or higher that your buddy would put on the table when you were both twelve" specials.

Ghorrin

[Sartharina]

Monk remains most MAD class because it also requires INT - 4 skill points doesn't cut it on a d8 HD noncaster chassis.

Actually... they don't need DEX or WIS, really. Just STR, CON, and INT. Yes, their AC sucks, but trying to boost their AC through DEX and WIS is a trap. Make the most use out of getting 2x STR on every full attack action against a 2-handed user's 1.5x STR.... but they're still MAD because they require DEX and WIS to be raised by magic items, though they're not critical to start.

[PsyBomb]

Among core classes, fully optimized under Point-Buy for combat, assuming you can use any build you choose...

Monk is easily the most MAD, needing four stats to be good (Str>Wis>Dex=Con). However, they can greatly reduce stat reliance if they are Zen Archers starting after level 3. Still MAD, but the lowered absolute numbers make it less painful.
Paladins can make due with three good (Str>Con=Cha) and can get away with 12 Dex.
Magi are basically in the same boat as Paladins, though they can actually Dex focus and settle for 10 strength in certain builds.

Now, if you need people who are able to do things other than variations on "smash it", assuming classes capable of doing so (I'm looking at you, Fighter), then the Monk is the big winner, only being able to dump Charisma.

[Ssalarn]

Among core classes, fully optimized under Point-Buy for combat, assuming you can use any build you choose...

Monk is easily the most MAD, needing four stats to be good (Str>Wis>Dex=Con). However, they can greatly reduce stat reliance if they are Zen Archers starting after level 3. Still MAD, but the lowered absolute numbers make it less painful.
Paladins can make due with three good (Str>Con=Cha) and can get away with 12 Dex.
Magi are basically in the same boat as Paladins, though they can actually Dex focus and settle for 10 strength in certain builds.

Now, if you need people who are able to do things other than variations on "smash it", assuming classes capable of doing so (I'm looking at you, Fighter), then the Monk is the big winner, only being able to dump Charisma.

Do you really think Paladins need CON? I ask because I've almost never bothered raising the CON of any Paladin I've played above 10 and it's never been an issue. Lay on Hands for swift action heals is so good, I've just never felt like 1 or 2 more hit points a level was worth my precious, precious stat points.

[T.G. Oskar]

Every class can benefit from every stat in combat, otherwise you're doing it wrong.

Erm, the whole reason why MAD exists is because not everyone can benefit from every stat in combat. There must be priorities, and some classes' priorities are easier to fulfill than others. A Wizard only needs Intelligence to work; Dexterity and Constitution are there to make it survive. On a 10-pt. build, or a set of rolls where only one stat is good and the rest is average (and I don't say a stat of 18; a stat of 14+, while the other stats barely reach 12, much like elite array in D&D), a Wizard can do well with the high stat on Intelligence because its spells do all the work. A Fighter with a two-handed weapon will probably put it in Strength instead. A Paladin needs to balance Strength AND Charisma, while a Ranger needs to balance Dexterity AND Wisdom, and a Monk needs to balance Strength, Dexterity AND Wisdom. If your ability scores are limited, then a class that depends, rather than benefits, from many ability scores is at a disadvantage. If your ability scores are all maxed, then the latter may be of advantage, but you can't be sure to always have the greatest scores.

Thinking that you're doing things wrong because you're not taking advantage of every ability score is irresponsible, at best, because it necessarily assumes you can. If you can, great; if not, then you're risking a build with serious problems just because of suboptimal choices. That is, IF you're thinking of optimization.


Plus, I don't think of a sword and board paladin as any more iconic than a greatsword paladin, or a lucerne hammer paladin, or even an archer paladin. :smallconfused:

Type paladin into google images. Most of them aren't portrayed with a shield.

The only thing more iconic than a Sword & Boarder is a Mounted Combatant. Even they wield shields. I mean, if what you mean is the Paladin as a knight, who usually uses one-handed weapons because it fights on a mount, or polearms because it fights on foot. I've rarely, if ever, seen a Knight wielding a Longbow; maybe an English Longbowman on horse, but even they wore lighter armor. I'd half expect a Knight with a crossbow (one reason why it was "banned" for the noble knight; see to it if it actually worked). Thus, I could probably accept the Lucerne Hammer, but might as well go with a bladed polearm (Glaive, Guisarme, Halberd, Bardiche). Rarely a greatsword, and definitely NOT an Archer (which is a construct viable only on PF).


And yes, you can make a sword and board paladin by dumping three stats if you absolutely need to.

Strength, Dexterity and Charisma? How do you expect to have good hit points for when you get hit (because you'll get hit, that's for sure)? Ah, probably Favored Class bonus...but you're also competing for skill points there. So...human and 2 skill points/level, then? If that, then surely it's possible, but only with a specific build that locks race and feats, rather than one that locks only feats (as you're doing the build to fit the class). That, or Str/Con/Cha and forget about using a shield as a weapon...which isn't the most ideal method at all. At least until 11th level and if you have lots of ways to impose penalties to saving throws.

[Ssalarn]

I really don't get the idea that the Paladin needs CON. He's got swift action self-heals and the best armor proficiencies, not to mention AC bonuses during Smite and spectacular saves. He's like the only frontliner class that doesn't need CON.

[VoxRationis]

A polearm is not an iconic knightly weapon. Infantry polearms are for peasant rabble. A two-handed sword is much better (though it still tends to scream "mercenary" rather than "noble"). Sword and shield, or shield and another kind of weapon, is much more knightly still.

[squiggit]

Plus, I don't think of a sword and board paladin as any more iconic than a greatsword paladin, or a lucerne hammer paladin, or even an archer paladin.

Type paladin into google images. Most of them aren't portrayed with a shield.

Google image seems to consist primarily of sword and shield, greatsword, hammer+book (warcraft) and greathammer. There's a single picture each of crossbow, spear and TWF. There's two with bows on their person, though not wielding them.

Greatsword and weapon+shield(a couple have hammers and shields instead of swords and shields) seem to be the most popular.

edit: after digging a bit more I found two more TWF paladins (one of which has some sort of short spear in one hand) and two more polearm paladins (one with a spear and one with a halberd).


Every class can benefit from every stat in combat, otherwise you're doing it wrong.
Poor charisma has no universal benefit (other than improving skills). Strength can fall into a similar role for finesse martials, archers and spellcasters, especially if the DM is lenient with carrying capacity roles. Dex/con/wis seem like, overall, the hardest to divest yourself.

[T.G. Oskar]

I really don't get the idea that the Paladin needs CON. He's got swift action self-heals and the best armor proficiencies, not to mention AC bonuses during Smite and spectacular saves. He's like the only frontliner class that doesn't need CON.

Let's see:
Let's give you the first one: the hold-out from 3.5 that every class needs Constitution. More hit points per level means you can survive. Specifically at 1st level, where even with good armor, you can't afford Full Plate early on, so a lucky shot kills you.
Your "self-heals" are only worthwhile at 20th level, where the healing is maximized. At 2nd level, when you get your first few uses of Lay on Hands, you heal only 3-4 hit points. That increases for an additional 3-4 hit points every two levels, when your average HP increase is 11. That means you heal only...what, 33% of your full HP with each heal? That's good, but if you don't spread those uses, that extra HP won't help you. Even if you get 1/2 level + Charisma modifier uses (about 2-3 uses at 2nd level, going by conservative calculations?)
Paladins don't get the bonuses from armor that Fighters get. Specifically, they can't take advantage of Dexterity as Fighters get.
The AC bonus from your mark (because I refuse to call that class feature a Smite, for semantical reasons) is a deflection bonus, which doesn't stack with Ring of Protection or Shield of Faith. The only advantage is that you get more...against ONE creature, while a Ring of Protection or Shield of Faith works against all creatures. If you're hit by someone you haven't marked, then you don't have that awesome AC you sport, particularly if you don't wield a shield.
You're taking down Constitution AND Wisdom. Spectacular saves involve having two stats applying at once. Even with good saves and high Charisma, there is a chance that you're at most equaling others in saves, rather than exceeding them. Unless you have great Dexterity scores as well, your Reflex saves aren't as high as a Ranger or Rogue would.
You can't rely on having hit points if you're dumping Intelligence, unless you intend to care little about skills.

Constitution is STILL an important score for all classes. Whether you transition from 3.5 or started as a native Pathfinder player, thinking that Constitution can be dumped is a mistake. In fact, considering that no self-respecting Wizard or Sorcerer dumps Constitution entirely, that means you can't afford frontliners to dump it either. At most, you need Constitution to be at its minimum of 10, but you can afford to get it better (and you should). If you have Strength and Dexterity as key scores, you're engaging in competition to get good Constitution scores, whereas the Fighter doesn't get that hassle, has more Hit Points than you, more AC than you, and probably enough feats and bonuses to deal more damage than you, making him a threat. When all those swift action self-heals (which you can't do if you have an immediate action or swift action ability in use) are gone, you're left almost defenseless, and the last line of defense you have (HP) will be smaller than before.

That's why Constitution is important. It's important because the system itself, from its roots, deems it so. It's a balancing act, after all: if you specialize in turtling (and I mean turtling; you don't have a way to apply your mark to non-evil creatures, and early on you only have ONE use of that mark, so use it wisely!), you probably won't contribute as much as you'd like, whereas other classes can do and still afford enough for Constitution.

[Ssalarn]

1st level is about the only place where this is an issue, so I can see that to a certain extent, though I don't agree it's totally necessary as you'll still have the same hit points as many 3/4 BAB classes who successfully take part in melee.
Totally disagree. In fact, I will flat out say you are wrong here. 4 or so uses of lay on hands is an extra 14 points of healing during the day, which kicks the snot out of 4 extra hit points from CON. You also don't have anything competing for your swift actions at that point so they're much more effective and better targeted. And since we're not wasting stat points on CON, we've got better saves and more uses of LoH, meaning we're taking less spell damage and have a great resource that doesn't interfere with anything else we may want to do
Paladins don't get as much Dex from their armor as Fighters do, but they take less spell damage, consistently, they get bonuses to AC from Smite Evil that are likely to apply at the most dangerous moments in combat, and starting at 5th level they get spells like protection from evil, hero's defiance, and (the more situational) veil of positive energy. Considering the Fighter has to keep pumping his Dex to keep his AC up and the Paladin can instead focus on a stat that feeds all of his other abilities like spellcasting, saves, and healing, I think this more an indictment of the Fghter than the Paladin. The Paladin only needs enough Dex for TWF, if that, and again, needs CON less than the Fighter.
Good thing Paladins have access to other types of AC bonuses. A Paladin can even focus on using a Ring of Force Shield instead of a Ring of Protection for substantially more synergy (and it frees that hand up, further obviating the need for DEX).
I get to apply one stat that also feeds my other abilities to all three saves and have two good base saves. I'll also pick up a slew of immunities as I go along. I'll still rub the Fighters face in the dirt when it comes to all saves, I don't see the fact that the two classes who specialize in being highly mobile are going to have higher Reflex saves as being a weakness.
Umm.... Are you referring to favored class bonuses? I just don't have to dump and I'll still be good, though generally I don't bother using the favored class bonus for hp for a Paladin, except maybe at 1st level for that little extra oomph.

You could do a human Paladin on a 20 point buy with 16's in STR and CHA for a total stat spread of 18,10,10,10,10,16 and have a great character with high combat effectiveness, good saves, and good defenses, at all levels of play. PF just isn't 3.5, and the Paladin has a great chassis now.

[Yanisa]

Yet you did not go for 20,7,7,7,7,18. :smalltongue:

Even when you don't need an ability, people rarely take low numbers in the scores that can provide penalties. Hence my conclusion that an Paladin has the most ability scores to keep up, five to be exact, hence they are the most M.A.D.. (And Magus, but he seems to be forgotten in this discussion)

Yes that is a flawed conclusion, but most classes have 1 or 2 scores they need to keep high, and 1 or 2 scores they want to have high. Easily leading to wanting to have four positive ability modifiers. It's rare to build a character around one stat and accepting a penalty to all other stats. Classes that pull that off are truly the S.A.D. kings. However most classes dabble in the realm of wanting or needing 2-3 scores, so the want for four or five stats must be the point of M.A.D.ness. (The king of insanity however is the Tactician it seems, wanting the full array at it's highest.) And I say Paladins and Magus want five stats whereas the Monk only wants four. But the Monk needs his four stats more then the Paladin/Magus want the 2 extra stats. A paladin wouldn't say no to a belt of +2 Dex/Con/Wis, but a Monk would beg for it.

Also I should mention the Fighter and Rogue. But I don't see Fighter's as class, and I despise Rogue's due personal trauma so I tend to forgot they exist.
But Rogues can easily reach that want for six Ability Scores if you want to be useful in combat and be the smooth talking criminal outside of it, although TWF edges that to five. Fighter's are just more confronted with minimal requirements for mental stats. I still dismiss them as M.A.D. kings, because most high ability scores don't scale well with the classes.

Besides, it's the variety of build that makes it hard to truly call a class M.A.D.. You could easily argue for a wisdom only zen archer monk that would work, but that doesn't make Monks S.A.D. Likewise you could build a Melee Touch Wizard and suddenly need four stats, but that doesn't make a Wizard M.A.D.. I still say Paladin and Magus want the most stats, Monks need to most stats. That why monks are M.A.D. (D for dependend and all that) but Paladins and Magus deserve a honorable mention, even though the last two want to most positive stats and should be the true M.A.D. kings. (And the Tactician, but ssst.)

In the end your M.A.D.ness may vary.

[PsyBomb]

Besides, it's the variety of build that makes it hard to truly call a class M.A.D.. You could easily argue for a wisdom only zen archer monk that would work, but that doesn't make Monks S.A.D. Likewise you could build a Melee Touch Wizard and suddenly need four stats, but that doesn't make a Wizard M.A.D.. I still say Paladin and Magus want the most stats, Monks need to most stats. That why monks are M.A.D. (D for dependend and all that) but Paladins and Magus deserve a honorable mention, even though the last two want to most positive stats and should be the true M.A.D. kings. (And the Tactician, but ssst.)

In the end your M.A.D.ness may vary.

Just a quibble, but ZAM monks still need a minimum of 13 DEX (for prereqs on non-Bonus feats) and as much STR as they can get away with, in addition to Wisdom stacking. Any good Archery build, no matter the class, needs to rack up bonuses on the individual arrows. Int and Cha can be true-dumped, and Con can be left at 10 for someone not on the front line... but given the amount of damage they deal the line will come to them frequently.

I think we are arguing circles around the same points, though.

[Yanisa]

Just a quibble, but ZAM monks still need a minimum of 13 DEX (for prereqs on non-Bonus feats) and as much STR as they can get away with, in addition to Wisdom stacking. Any good Archery build, no matter the class, needs to rack up bonuses on the individual arrows. Int and Cha can be true-dumped, and Con can be left at 10 for someone not on the front line... but given the amount of damage they deal the line will come to them frequently.

I think we are arguing circles around the same points, though.

I do tend to forgot feat requirements. I just remembered that dex archers (and dex melee) can be the most S.A.D. of all the non casters. I figured it was the same for zen archers who swap out dex for wis, but no, feat recruitments, derp on my side. (Even then a strength penalty sucks and a bonus rocks, ranged power attack and all that.)

I can change Wis Zen Monk into Archer Spellless Paladin, to keep my argument somewhat in tact. :smalltongue:

[Ssalarn]

I have a personal philosophy that loathes the idea of dump stats, so I don't consider someone not wanting a negative number to be part of the MAD equation. I think one of the only characters I've actually seen in fantasy with a dump stat was Raistlin Majere. Caramon may have been the dumb one, but only because he was an average guy (which I would think would be a 10).

Anyways, as others have mentioned there are lots of archetyes and stuff that take MAD classes and make them something more closely resembling SAD, so probably the best way of looking at it is "Using just the base class without archetypes, how many stats does my character need regardless of build?".

I think just about every class other than the Fighter, Rogue, Magus, and Monk from the core line, and the Tactician from DSP, can get away with 2 or less and still do their job effectively thanks to either stat consolidating abilities (like the Paladin's Divine Grace or the Inquisitor's Cunning Initiative and Monster Lore), or options that allow them to plug up holes left by not having a bonus in a given stat (see very spell list ever).

On a slightly tangental note, why does the Zen Archer care about feat requirements? Monks don't need to meet the prereqs for their bonus feats and he has pretty much every archery feat you could want on that list. Starting with Flurry and a bonus feat at first level I'm not sure what he'd need that he wouldn't get through his natural bonus feat progression or be able to substitute with a class ability. Deadly Aim I guess?

[VoxRationis]

Yes, well, some people don't have awesome rolls all the time, and I like the idea of playing characters with notable weaknesses, such as a wizard of incredible frailty or a thief whose poor personality makes him incapable of surviving in normal society. Dump stats are important, both mechanically and thematically.

[Yanisa]

I have a personal philosophy that loathes the idea of dump stats, so I don't consider someone not wanting a negative number to be part of the MAD equation. I think one of the only characters I've actually seen in fantasy with a dump stat was Raistlin Majere. Caramon may have been the dumb one, but only because he was an average guy (which I would think would be a 10).

Anyways, as others have mentioned there are lots of archetyes and stuff that take MAD classes and make them something more closely resembling SAD, so probably the best way of looking at it is "Using just the base class without archetypes, how many stats does my character need regardless of build?".

I think just about every class other than the Fighter, Rogue, Magus, and Monk from the core line, and the Tactician from DSP, can get away with 2 or less and still do their job effectively thanks to either stat consolidating abilities (like the Paladin's Divine Grace or the Inquisitor's Cunning Initiative and Monster Lore), or options that allow them to plug up holes left by not having a bonus in a given stat (see very spell list ever).

On a slightly tangental note, why does the Zen Archer care about feat requirements? Monks don't need to meet the prereqs for their bonus feats and he has pretty much every archery feat you could want on that list. Starting with Flurry and a bonus feat at first level I'm not sure what he'd need that he wouldn't get through his natural bonus feat progression or be able to substitute with a class ability. Deadly Aim I guess?

First off, You can build a almost any melee type in a dex weapon finesse type, reducing stat need to Dex + Con + maybe a casting stat. Most of these builds can ran around at 2 stats by leaving con at 10 and boost that casting stat, whether that is a Magus (int) or Monk (dex).

Secondly, dumping might be the wrong word. The question I want to impose is would you still be able to focus on two stats, when the four other stats are penalties. Whether that is by point buy and design, or by crappy rolling 3d6. If you can only focus on one stat and have penalties in all others then you are truly S.A.D.. If you can't then you need more stats then you realized. The fact you cannot function with a penalty in said stat means you need that ability score. Like minimal requirements for feats. That why dump stats are important to test whether a class is M.A.D. or S.A.D.. It's not to exploit the point buy system, even though many people do that. (Including me*)

*Yanisa Personal Fun Fact: I often take dump stats for character dept. When I build my Syntheist, I had a background of a young sick girl making a deal with the devil to be cured and live life normal. when my DM offered point buy the first thing I did was lower my Str/Dex/Con to show that she was frail and without her eidolon would easily die... Later I learned that was a dirty trick that a lot of syntheist use to exploit point buy. :smalltongue:

[Ssalarn]

Secondly, dumping might be the wrong word. The question I want to impose is would you still be able to focus on two stats, when the four other stats are penalties. Whether that is by point buy and design, or by crappy rolling 3d6. If you can only focus on one stat and have penalties in all others then you are truly S.A.D..

This is a new definition for MAD for me.

That being said, I still don't think a poor roll or a concious decision to dump constitutes a wekness of the class. A Paladin with a 20,7,7,7,7, 18 spread is still going to be playable and functional, and still as good or better than any other class with the same basic spread who isn't a full caster. That Paladin willl still end up with a positive modifier for all of his saves, decent AC, a pool of recovery resources, etc. I certainly wouldn't play any other non full casters with that spread.

I also think there's a big difference between "I want to role play a slow guy (low Dex)" and "I want to play a handicapped individual whose really strong and everybody likes (the proposed Paladin with 4 dump stats)", so my response to Yanisa isn't really related to your protest Vox.

[Yanisa]

This is a new definition for MAD for me.

That being said, I still don't think a poor roll or a concious decision to dump constitutes a wekness of the class. A Paladin with a 20,7,7,7,7, 18 spread is still going to be playable and functional, and still as good or better than any other class with the same basic spread who isn't a full caster. That Paladin willl still end up with a positive modifier for all of his saves, decent AC, a pool of recovery resources, etc. I certainly wouldn't play any other non full casters with that spread.

I also think there's a big difference between "I want to role play a slow guy (low Dex)" and "I want to play a handicapped individual whose really strong and everybody likes (the proposed Paladin with 4 dump stats)", so my response to Yanisa isn't really related to your protest Vox.

It's all about the D for Dependent for me. If you depend on having a 10 because else you suffer penalties you need that stat. If you can suffer trough that penalty you don't need it. But if a stat provides a bonus you want that stat. You start to get great when you take a penalty in stat that should provide a bonus and shrug it of like a leave. And for that, you made a good case for the Paladin. Maybe he is little less depended, but that doesn't change he still could use five ability score.

[Marcelinari]

Nothing changing my main points:
Paladins (and Magus) benefit from Str, Dex, Con, Wis and Cha(Or Int)
Monks benefit from Str, Dex, Con and Wis.
Monks, Paladins, Magus, Rangers and Inquisitors are the most M.A.D. classes with their most straight forward melee builds.
(And Int and Cha are useless in combat unless you are a caster)

It occurs to me that, by this measure, Wizards, Sorcerers, and Witches all tie with the Monk:
Wizards and Witches (and Sorcerers) benefit from Dex, Con, Wis, and Int (Or Cha)
Druids and Clerics benefit from Dex, Con, and Wis (and Str, if they're interested in a melee role)

Simply benefiting from a stat in combat doesn't make a class M.A.D.

[Ssalarn]

It occurs to me that, by this measure, Wizards, Sorcerers, and Witches all tie with the Monk:
Wizards and Witches (and Sorcerers) benefit from Dex, Con, Wis, and Int (Or Cha)
Druids and Clerics benefit from Dex, Con, and Wis (and Str, if they're interested in a melee role)

Simply benefiting from a stat in combat doesn't make a class M.A.D.

I lean much more towards this interpretation of "MAD". Dependent, to me, means "I need positive modifiers of 14+ in these stats to be able to do my job effectively", not "Having a negative modifier in this class would hurt me". Negative modifiers hurt every class. A wizard with all 7's except for his Int and Dex is still probably not going to live to see 3rd level without a lot of people picking up the slack and throwing their bodies in the line of fire. And that's true of just about any class.

I like to think of MAD as "How many of these scores do I need to raise (and how high) to use this cool bundle of goodies attached to my class?"

[T.G. Oskar]

1st level is about the only place where this is an issue, so I can see that to a certain extent, though I don't agree it's totally necessary as you'll still have the same hit points as many 3/4 BAB classes who successfully take part in melee.

So you're comparing the Paladin, who's meant to be a definite frontliner, with a Rogue or a Monk, rather than with a Fighter. I would have agreed with Ranger, because it has the same Hit Die but its lack of good armor makes HP more important, but not with a class that depends on subterfuge or another who relies on mobility, rather than standing still and dishing as much damage as they take OR combining Combat Maneuvers with damage (eventually, as you don't start with those many feats, sadly). Even with a d8 Hit Dice, a Rogue that remains still and can't pull off its Sneak Attack will die in a heartbeat.

Or maybe you mean Magus and Inquisitor? Both have spells straight from 1st level, and some can cast them before battle, which is a plus that the Paladin doesn't have straight from 1st level. The Magus' arcana pool has slightly more uses than a Paladin's mark, and the Inquisitor's judgment, albeit a daily ability like the Paladin's mark, plays nicer. A Paladin facing an animal, an elemental, or just about any non-evil creature will have to rely on the same tricks as a Fighter, and that involves good hit points to survive.


Totally disagree. In fact, I will flat out say you are wrong here. 4 or so uses of lay on hands is an extra 14 points of healing during the day, which kicks the snot out of 4 extra hit points from CON. You also don't have anything competing for your swift actions at that point so they're much more effective and better targeted. And since we're not wasting stat points on CON, we've got better saves and more uses of LoH, meaning we're taking less spell damage and have a great resource that doesn't interfere with anything else we may want to do.

Well, consider that you have to spread those uses. Just like you can't mark a target every battle until 10th level, you can't trust to have 4-5 uses of Lay on Hands in battle. As for better saves...perhaps more Reflex and Will, but Fortitude (a saving throw that involves most of the disabling effects like daze, stun, sicken and whatnot) will be simultaneously increased and decreased, remaining at a standstill. Certainly, it'll be a standstill that leaves them with an advantage, but not a standstill that allows them to have "great saves" as you'd have if you stack two scores instead of one as early as possible.

Note, also, that you're spreading your stats too thin. In fact: I looked at a bit later, and I noticed you use 20-pt. buy. I'm using 10, because that's the absolute lowest you can build off (just like saying, responsibly, that on a 4d6b3 roll as presented you can rely on two stats being 14 and most all other stats being 11 (you get an overall of +3 and the highest stat is a 14, so it's playable). That's the problem of relying on specific point buys; if you build thinking on the best stats you can possibly have, you'll end up with your build somewhat weaker because you can't approach the desired stats. Reaching 16 in two stats cost you 10 points: with anything below 20 points, you'll have to rely on two stats costing 7 each (15 each?), leaving you with one point. 10? 14 in both stats.


Paladins don't get as much Dex from their armor as Fighters do, but they take less spell damage, consistently, they get bonuses to AC from Smite Evil that are likely to apply at the most dangerous moments in combat, and starting at 5th level they get spells like protection from evil, hero's defiance, and (the more situational) veil of positive energy. Considering the Fighter has to keep pumping his Dex to keep his AC up and the Paladin can instead focus on a stat that feeds all of his other abilities like spellcasting, saves, and healing, I think this more an indictment of the Fghter than the Paladin. The Paladin only needs enough Dex for TWF, if that, and again, needs CON less than the Fighter.

So I presume I can mark all targets all time, because I have infinite uses of the Paladin's mark, right? No, until 10th level, I can mark a target once, twice or thrice a day, and that's only ONE mark, against an Evil creature, spread through battles. That works if you have only one battle per day (is that how it is in PF now? One battle per day so that everyone goes nova?). Until then, you can't rely on the Paladin's mark as effective enough to replace a Ring, or the effect of Shield of Faith.

Also: Protection from Evil works against evil creatures only, and doesn't stack with your mark's deflection bonus. Hero's Defiance consumes one of your slots, which could be used to work better offensively, unless you could wand it (honestly, I think it'd be better if wanded, rather than prepared on your spell slots because otherwise you could use it only ONCE per day). Veil of Positive Energy is slightly more situational but it probably merits a slot if you're facing a heavy amount of Evil creatures.

So, no undead or evil creatures? Only one of those spells works, and if I prepare THAT spell in a spell slot rather than another that could work with more creatures, I'm intentionally shooting myself in the foot to prepare for eventualities. Which is the whole reason why you want more AC and eventually find ways to get miss chances and immunities to those effects that you don't want to get hit with (like, say, Dazed).

Your position works well if you're facing Evil creatures constantly, but you also have to counter for when non-Evil creatures face you, and in the case of Good creatures, when they have a reason why to fight you despite being an exemplar of Good (it can happen). Most creatures that happen to be the nastiest to fight are neutral (Constructs, Elementals, Oozes, Plants), and against them you can't rely on your Evil-bashing powers. If you don't prepare against THEM, then how can you expect to contribute effectively?


Good thing Paladins have access to other types of AC bonuses. A Paladin can even focus on using a Ring of Force Shield instead of a Ring of Protection for substantially more synergy (and it frees that hand up, further obviating the need for DEX).

So do most classes. Why can't a Fighter use a Ring of Force Shield; it also needs a Ring of Protection as well? Besides the deflection bonuses to AC from the mark (which work against Evil creatures) and the sacred bonuses to AC against undead, what else? A Ranger has less AC because of its light armor, but it can afford the Dex bonus to AC, and also has access to Natural Armor bonus that frees up a slot (Barkskin), something that Paladins lack at all. Stating that only Paladins have access to other types of AC bonuses necessarily implies that nobody else has means to access them, which is wrong. The large bunch of feats a Fighter has allows them greater access to some feats that boost their defenses, some of which are unique to them. So that position is at most incomplete, because it relies on conveniently forgetting that what's equal isn't an advantage (or a disadvantage).


I get to apply one stat that also feeds my other abilities to all three saves and have two good base saves. I'll also pick up a slew of immunities as I go along. I'll still rub the Fighters face in the dirt when it comes to all saves, I don't see the fact that the two classes who specialize in being highly mobile are going to have higher Reflex saves as being a weakness.

Here's a thing: it's easier to raise two stats than to raise one. A Constitution and Charisma of 14 are better than a Charisma of 16, if you're speaking about Fortitude saves exclusively. A Constitution and Charisma of 14 allows for more survivability because you lose ONE use of Lay on Hands to gain extra hit points per level which may compensate for that loss by saving you daily uses. I find that useful.

Immunity to disease is fair, but with a good Fortitude save, it becomes irrelevant. Immunity to fear; same with high Will saves (though you can protect yourself from being panicked). Immunity to charm only applies to SEVEN spells, most of which are low enough that your Will save, even without Wisdom, can pass them. Immunity to compulsion means you say bye-bye to spells like Heroism, Good Hope and other Enchantment spells (did you know most buffing Enchantment spells have the compulsion descriptor?). That's the whole bunch of all FOUR immunities that you get. At most, you'll have the same Fortitude saves as a Fighter, and if you have them the same, then that means the Fighter is pretty much resilient (note: not immune, but resilient) to the same effects you do. Will saves can be pretty nasty, yes, so that I can give you.

As for Reflex saves: when I hear "great saves", I think of a combination of good save bonus + good ability score, not poor save bonus + good SINGLE ability score. A combination of Dexterity and Charisma means you can have a much nicer Reflex save than others save for the specialists in it (and you can approach them!), which can approach "great". As it stands, it's a "decent" save, which contrasts greatly with the "great saves" statement you say. This makes Dexterity useful, but you're putting it on a bare minimum. Personally, I don't mind having "good", but not "great", Reflex saves; however, that's just me. That way, I know that I'll eat that Fireball entirely, and I know that I want something to survive that Fireball...which means more Hit Points and fire resistance to reduce the damage. How is that hard to understand?


Umm.... Are you referring to favored class bonuses? I just don't have to dump and I'll still be good, though generally I don't bother using the favored class bonus for hp for a Paladin, except maybe at 1st level for that little extra oomph.

So, you're relying on those 5-6 HP you get per level to stand up for all your bonuses...

Wait a second. Did you say "I just don't have to dump?" Didn't you mentioned that you don't need CON? And then you state the idea of not liking Dump Stats?

Coming from a player used to a system where all base stats on a point-buy start on an 8, having lower ability scores on stats that you don't necessarily require isn't really bad. Thus, noticing that I don't need Wisdom as I needed it before, I could easily drop it to 8 and still be functional. That's my gauge when I say "I need Con", because I wouldn't drop it to 8. So it seems you would.

The difference, it seems, is that you don't mind having an average Constitution (10), while I consider "average" anything above 11 but below 15 (so, anything between 12-14). To me, that's a perfectly worthwhile amount of Constitution, because my priorities are my key offensive modifier and Charisma. On a 10-pt. buy, I could take more advantage of a 12 Con than a 10 Wisdom, therefore I can take 14 in my key stats and add 2 points to Constitution while having 2 points less in Wisdom (poorer Will and a very slight penalty to Sense Motive, but I get to survive that first level). On a 15-pt. buy, chances are I can toy with Constitution just the same. On a 20-pt. buy, chances are I can also toy with Dexterity and keep Wisdom intact. In all three, by the moment I reach 2nd level, I have a great Fortitude save, and despite the loss of Will, I have three immunities that carry me (and if I seek for more immunities, I make Will saves irrelevant, which is the point of an immunity, not having redundant effects applying at once).

Since the most important levels are the first four (as they are the deadliest; I still reckon an Orc with a Greatsword or Falchion can one-hit kill a player in PF, right?), having enough chances to survive an encounter at those levels makes a difference, and even if it's just one measly HP, that can make a world of difference. Particularly if I am to spread my resources and not waste them in my first encounter just to find that the third one was the most difficult (not the fourth, though). Later on, then MAYBE I could afford to have less Constitution than Charisma, but it still remains as useful as before.


You could do a human Paladin on a 20 point buy with 16's in STR and CHA for a total stat spread of 18,10,10,10,10,16 and have a great character with high combat effectiveness, good saves, and good defenses, at all levels of play. PF just isn't 3.5, and the Paladin has a great chassis now.

So you're good at melee combat, self-healing and saves, but your ranged combat is non-existent (there's no flying mounts now unless you equip Horseshoes of a Zephyr, or you spend magic items to fly), your AC is slightly lower (and that Strength really asks for a two-handed weapon, so no shield either until you spend money on a specific ring, why not on an animated shield instead, and attempt to defeat the opponent in 4 turns or less, if you're so combat-capable?), and less Hit Points than the people that are meant to be front-liners. You rely a lot more on magic items than someone with spread stats, as well, something that's not necessarily fixed as part of the Paladin's new chassis. You rely a lot more on swift actions, so you can't get anything that relies on a swift OR immediate action or you're deprived of our self-heals, when saving those could be more of an asset than wasting them (particularly since, at the moment a monster surpasses your average healing through LoH, you're in trouble).

Yes, PF isn't 3.5, but that doesn't mean you can't make a pretty good Paladin in 3.5. It requires more system mastery, yes, which is probably about the only advantage the PF Paladin's chassis has over its 3.5's incarnation, but with enough system mastery, the two are nearly equal in power, surprisingly. I can say, though, that building a PF Paladin is simpler (and even then, that's debatable).

[Seerow]

there's no flying mounts now unless you equip Horseshoes of a Zephyr, or you spend magic items to fly

Um... what? Can I get a clarification on this? Why are there no longer flying mounts in Pathfinder?

[T.G. Oskar]

Um... what? Can I get a clarification on this? Why are there no longer flying mounts in Pathfinder?

Unless I've read wrong, a Paladin can't get a flying mount via its Divine Bond as it did on 3.5, because the special mount Divine Bond is treated as the Druid's animal companion in terms of progression, and it has only a specific choice of mounts (I haven't seen on the PF SRD anything that mentions you can get a Pegasus or a Gryphon or a Hippogriff as a special mount).

You can have a flying mount, just not one with the bond. And, unless the gryphons and pegasi here are buffed to no end (or you spend feats on Indomitable Mount to treat your Ride check as one saving throw per round), you won't attempt to choose a flying mount without enough resilience to face the flying creatures you want defeated ASAP. Though, maybe it's only a 3.5 thing that mounts without a HD increase by means of classes suck, and PF has mounts that work better?

[Marcelinari]

Oskar, as far as I understand Ssalarn's argument, he wasn't claiming that CON is a useless stat, which you seem to be arguing against. I think everyone agrees that CON is universally useful - but of all classes, Paladin is possibly the only one that is not dependent on CON.

A paladin stands and takes his hits - but a rogue, having made a sneak-full-attack, is also sitting pretty and waiting to be slaughtered.

CON protects against nasty fort saves, but for most classes, only fort saves protect against that - Paladins can rely on Cha, and their immunities, and their mercies.

Paladins have less AC than Fighters with points to spare for Dex, and can only mitigate that shortcoming in certain circumstances - but full plate is still full plate, and paladins CAN mitigate that shortcoming. Wow, fighters are better at something than paladins. Sometimes.

I think Ssalarn and I are on the same page when it comes to this 'Dependent-On' a stat means that said stat is firmly in the positives, 'dumping' the stat puts it in the negatives, but a paladin can certainly afford to keep it in the 10-11 range, despite being a front-liner most of the time. I'm actually getting rather alarmed at the amount of people who think that any investment in a stat means that you consider that stat required. Not that you're playing the game wrong - I'm just unused to people with such an all-or-nothing mindset.

P.S. I probably should have quoted you, but I'm hella lazy.

[Ssalarn]

Oskar, as far as I understand Ssalarn's argument, he wasn't claiming that CON is a useless stat, which you seem to be arguing against. I think everyone agrees that CON is universally useful - but of all classes, Paladin is possibly the only one that is not dependent on CON.

A paladin stands and takes his hits - but a rogue, having made a sneak-full-attack, is also sitting pretty and waiting to be slaughtered.

CON protects against nasty fort saves, but for most classes, only fort saves protect against that - Paladins can rely on Cha, and their immunities, and their mercies.

Paladins have less AC than Fighters with points to spare for Dex, and can only mitigate that shortcoming in certain circumstances - but full plate is still full plate, and paladins CAN mitigate that shortcoming. Wow, fighters are better at something than paladins. Sometimes.

I think Ssalarn and I are on the same page when it comes to this 'Dependent-On' a stat means that said stat is firmly in the positives, 'dumping' the stat puts it in the negatives, but a paladin can certainly afford to keep it in the 10-11 range, despite being a front-liner most of the time. I'm actually getting rather alarmed at the amount of people who think that any investment in a stat means that you consider that stat required. Not that you're playing the game wrong - I'm just unused to people with such an all-or-nothing mindset.

P.S. I probably should have quoted you, but I'm hella lazy.

Exactly. There is, in my mind, a huge step between "dependent on" and "it'd be nice to have but I can get by without it".

And (no longer talking to Marcelinari) saying we're going off a 10 point buy is ridiculous. No one in the game recommends you should play that way. Pathfinder's lowest recommendation is a 15 point buy, and 20 is the expectation of all of their organized play and every AP and Module printed in the last 2 years (it used to be 15).

A 10 point buy means you get 2 14's or a single 16 if you don't dump, and you know what? The Paladin still performs better than just about any other class who isn't a SAD full caster under those circumstances. You can't even play a Fighter, Monk, Rogue, Magus, or Tactician on that buy, and no official game designer anywhere expects you to, unless they're putting together some kind of level 0 pre-training thing.

[Snails]

The Con argument does not make the Paladin less MAD than the Monk, because the Monk more easily avoids sitting in a melee grind. Paladin healing is only significantly better than Monk healing if we presume a high Cha and/or a high Wis on the the part of the Paladin.

The original concept of MAD was that the designers implicitly erred by making too many simultaneous "well, the PC could have a 12+ in that stat, if they really want to" arguments, when it came Major Class Abilities.

[Snails]

I lean much more towards this interpretation of "MAD". Dependent, to me, means "I need positive modifiers of 14+ in these stats to be able to do my job effectively", not "Having a negative modifier in this class would hurt me". Negative modifiers hurt every class. A wizard with all 7's except for his Int and Dex is still probably not going to live to see 3rd level without a lot of people picking up the slack and throwing their bodies in the line of fire. And that's true of just about any class.

I like to think of MAD as "How many of these scores do I need to raise (and how high) to use this cool bundle of goodies attached to my class?"

Use your definition and try these stat arrays:
14, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10
14, 14, 10, 10, 10, 10
14, 14, 14, 10, 10, 10
14, 14, 14, 14, 10, 10

But do not just compare the Monk and the Paladin. Look at the Fighter, Paladin, Monk, Rogue and see their strengths and weaknesses. For extra credit, consider a balanced Fighter/Monk and a FighterX/Cleric1.

Until we get up to 14, 14, 14, 14, 10, 10, the Paladin and Monk are both rather painful and pointless classes, when compared to obvious alternatives.

What is implicit in this discussion is your S&B Paladin might be stander right next to a S&B Fighter. The Fighter sporting the Str 14, Con 14, Dex 14 is probably going to die much less often than your Str 14, Cha 14, Wis 14 Paladin (and your LoH is not going to save your life often enough, either).

[Ssalarn]

I disagree. If you put all classes on that array none of them are as effective as the Paladin at the two 14s range. Including full casters. Paladins are very functional with two good scores, more so than almost any other class, especially if those stats are 14s. A wizard with 2 14s and all 10s won't live past 1st level. The Paladin will be able to do everything you expect the Paladin to do.

You might be confused with the 3.5 Paladin. The Pathfinder Paladin doesn't need Wisdom.

[Seerow]

A wizard with 2 14s and all 10s won't live past 1st level.

[Citation Needed]

[Ssalarn]

[Citation Needed]

A single bonus spell, no defense to speak of outside of very limited spells per day, crap hd, etc.

A Paladin has much higher efficiency and effectiveness on a 14 point buy, capable of good defense and with a sufficient attack stat that can be boosted against the right enemy. By 2nd level the Paladin will have the best possible saves of any character running this ridiculous 2 14 s and the rest 10s test, along with 3-18 points of healing he can benefit from without breaking into his standard combat action economy.
The wizard's DCs, defenses, limited spells/day, etc. mean he needs to be building a shrine to that Paladin because in their world of puny heroes he's the wizard's only chance at making it a day. The wizard could potentially do more with an 18 and all 10s, but with the crap DCs and terrible everything else of the dual 14 build, I'd take a Paladin any day.

[Seerow]

A single bonus spell, no defense to speak of outside of very limited spells per day, crap hd, etc.

NO Wizard at 1st level is getting more than one bonus spell. (Okay no Wizard without one of the rare handful of races with a +2 int. And even then they have to start with a natural 18 and get it boosted to 20).

The real penalty of losing out on that extra int is the higher save DCs, but that can be worked around. Also at level 1 everyone's saves tend to be low anyway, so even if your DC is 13-14 instead of 15-16, you're still going to land most of your spells.

And level 1 wizard defenses are always crap. Yet most manage to survive anyway. We're talking about a difference of 2 hp or 2 AC. The odds of either of those things being the deciding factor between life and death is so tiny it's barely worth noting.

A Wizard doesn't mind getting better stats, because it does let him have slightly better defenses. But it is hardly going to stop him from surviving.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Ninja.

You need high dex. At least 16, ideally 18+.
You need at least a 14 charisma, ideally higher b/c the ki points go by so fast
You need good str for melee, unless finding a way to replace it w/ dex and even then you want at least a 10.
You have a d8 and poor HD but are expected to melee, so yeah...14+ Con or have the backup character ready to go.
You need at least 10 wis, ideally 10-14, just b/c of the whole "worst saves in the game" problem...
And if you drop Int below 10, you're throwing one of your primary features (lots of skill points) out the window.

Monk is horribly MAD, but at least he gets to dump charisma. A Ninja is like a Monk who can't dump charisma.

[Marcelinari]

Hmm, another person who considers 'M.A.D.' to mean 'cannot bring said attributes below 10'. Maybe I've been misinterpreting the phrase.

Still, I disagree about the ninja on a couple of points. Dexterity and Charisma are certainly necessary, but a ninja has a far easier time setting up sneak attacks - especially ranged sneak attacks - than a rogue, thanks in large part to the Vanishing Trick. This reduces the need for Strength, and if relying more on ranged attacks (admittedly an if), also reduces the necessity for Constitution. Wisdom is as necessary for the Ninja as it is for most other non-casting classes, and I know that I've played my share of wisdom-impaired fighters, rogues, and... well, the other one was a paladin. He was alright. You say intelligence must stay at a 10, else the ninja is throwing away his many skills, but I say that 7 points/level is sufficient for many types of ninja. It's certainly more skill points than nearly every other base class.

If pushed, you could certainly make a... I won't say viable, but maybe a non-incompetent ninja at 10/14/10/10/10/14. With more stats, things are nicer for the ninja, of course. Same with everyone.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Using Vanishing Trick to get one sneak attack apiece is just far too costly in ki. It's not viable to make ranged sneak attacking easy until level 10 when you get Invisible Blade to make it Greater Invisibility. And you can make ranged SA viable way earlier than that if you want to so badly anyway. It's called "Obscuring Mist + anything* that lets you see through fog/mist + liberal use of 5 ft steps back." Since at 10 ft away, you can't be seen through the mist.

*There's a one level Oracle dip for Water Sight; there's fog cutting lenses; some other eyewear that does the same thing; probably more options...

And even if you are getting sneak attack all the time, you still need Str to hit. You can replace it with dex with the right feats/items, but...so can Monk. Con is needed whether melee or ranged. You do not have a wizard's defenses (spells) and the poor Fort save is a concern even if the subpar hp isn't. Yeah, wisdom is needed for other martials for the same reason, but the point was...ideally that'd be the stat you dump for Ninja, since he can't dump anything else. He needs two-three (Dex, Con, maybe Str) great stats, one pretty good (Con) stat, and the other two can't be negative. Very few other builds actually have no true dump stat nevermind also needing multiple stats to be high. I'm hard pressed to even think of any. Rogue is pretty MAD as is Monk, but both of them can dump charisma.

[Marcelinari]

A monk needs Str not just to hit but also for damage, which is why is becomes an actual necessity. The ninja relies on sneak-attack for damage, in a way that the monk can't match. Using Dex to hit, either with weapon finesse or ranged attacks, basically removes the need for a 'great' Str score.

With the count at 2 'great' stats (Dex and Cha), 1 'pretty good' (Con), and Str, Int, and Wis all useful, the Ninja looks about as well-posed as any given non-caster. A ninja CAN be viable dumping Str, or Int, or Wis. But perhaps not all 3.

[squiggit]

I've always seen MAD as "I have to invest points/money into these attributes or I'm gonna suck". Not being able to dump anything sucks too, but it's not quite the same as being dependent (the D in MAD) on a ton of things, plus under the latter definition nearly every mundane (and any melee character who needs CHA for something) would qualify because melees who aren't finessing (or have some other sort of stat conversion feature) have four stats that are at least somewhat meaningful to their combat effectiveness and probably don't wanna dump int either.

[Ssalarn]

The real penalty of losing out on that extra int is the higher save DCs, but that can be worked around. Also at level 1 everyone's saves tend to be low anyway, so even if your DC is 13-14 instead of 15-16, you're still going to land most of your spells.
.

If by "most" you mean "statistically less than 50% against equal CR and Lord help them if the GM decides to throw a Challenging CR+2 at them" that would be right. They need those higher DCs, and at low levels they need every spell they can scrape together. Your best bet is to spend your 2 open slots on Color Spray and pray that nothing makes the save (to be fair, Will is the worst low level save, so maybe).

Anyways, the point being the Wizard suffers way more from a dual 14s and everything else 10 spread than a Paladin, who still has a solid chance to hit level appropriate challenges, more hp, better defenses, etc. And the Paladin will continue to perform better with that starting spread until at least 5th level (3rd level spells are really good...).


Anyways, there's definitely a segment of this thread that is using a definition of MAD that is pretty far afield from my own definition, so I'm just going to leave it at "Paladin is probably the least MAD Pathfinder class outside of full casters, because he is only dependent on having two good stats to be a functional character. He needs CON, DEX, and WIS less than any other class that typically engages in weapon-based combat, and his basic functions don't require him to be specifically skill heavy, so raising INT is an option as opposed to a necessity as well".

I know it's easy to shift the goalposts when everyone has their own particular interpretation of MAD, but mine, and my assertions, assume that a MAD class will probably have to make choices about which of its class features and potential roles it actually wants to utilize on a 15 point buy (what Pathfinder core considers standard fantasy), whereas a SAD class will be able to use all of its class features and fill any of its expected roles with a fair modicum of success.

[StreamOfTheSky]

I've always seen MAD as "I have to invest points/money into these attributes or I'm gonna suck". Not being able to dump anything sucks too, but it's not quite the same as being dependent (the D in MAD) on a ton of things, plus under the latter definition nearly every mundane (and any melee character who needs CHA for something) would qualify because melees who aren't finessing (or have some other sort of stat conversion feature) have four stats that are at least somewhat meaningful to their combat effectiveness and probably don't wanna dump int either.

They're related. If you have no stat to dump, it's a lot harder to *have* multiple good scores.

And how many melee DO need charisma? Paladins do, but they can dump stat Int to 7 or even 5 (racial penalty) and get the same skill points as they would with Int 9 (1 plus 1 for favored class, maybe another +1 for human), they can wear heavy armor and get a mount (to circumvent the drop in speed) to avoid needing much Dex, and they have good base will saves and Cha to all saves, making Wis 7 completely not painful.

Cavalier "needs" charisma...sort of, not really. A 12-14 is plenty, they get much less out of it than a Paladin does. He can also go with 10-12 in Dex. He can't dump int to hell like Paladin w/o actual consequences, though. d10 HD and good fort at least make Con slightly less dire of importance, especially if they're lance charging more turns with Ride-by Attack.

Don't know of any other cha-dependent mundane characters. If you want to count Bards, they can dump stat Wis at least.

[TuggyNE]

A note on some math that has not been properly critiqued yet:
Totally disagree. In fact, I will flat out say you are wrong here. 4 or so uses of lay on hands is an extra 14 points of healing during the day, which kicks the snot out of 4 extra hit points from CON. You also don't have anything competing for your swift actions at that point so they're much more effective and better targeted. And since we're not wasting stat points on CON, we've got better saves and more uses of LoH, meaning we're taking less spell damage and have a great resource that doesn't interfere with anything else we may want to do

This appears to be a comparison between the total value of one resource and the marginal value of another, which is quite bogus. The proper way to look at this sort of opportunity cost is the marginal value of additional Con vs the marginal value of additional Cha (or other stats). And in such a case, increasing the Con mod by +2, which gives 4 HP at 2nd level and a higher Fort save, is arguably quite comparable to increasing the Cha mod by +2, which gives an additional 7 HP (average) as a pair of swift actions on your turn and higher saves all around. Cha is certainly a good deal better for saves, and even (by a much smaller margin than incorrectly indicated in the quote) for HP quantities, but for HP Con is better in quality: healing does you no good if you are unable to act, or unable to act in time, and the potential for one-shotting is still quite high at that level range.

It is also useful to consider the difference in point buy calculations between increasing a stat that is very low, and increasing a stat that is already rather high; increasing Con from 10 to 14 is a mere 5 points, but increasing Cha from 14 to 18 is fully 12, which would be enough to bump Con all the way to 16 (reducing the HP difference to a mere -1, and boosting Fort save by another +1), and even 12 to 16 is 8 points. (Needless to say, increasing Cha from 16 to 20 cannot be done with standard point buy at all.)

So, rather than dumping Con, it is better to strike a happy medium, with Cha somewhat higher than Con, but no Con 7 weaklings, thanks.

[Marcelinari]

I agree that dumping Con is generally a bad move, even for Paladins. I think that the disconnect is coming when I (and Ssalarn too) are saying that Con doesn't need any particular investment for a Paladin, and that Cha can adequately take its place. Not perfectly, mind. Just adequately.

Other people (I think - these are assumptions, of course) have a more definite view of Multiple Attribute Dependency. They think that an attribute is non-dependent when it has no bearing on a character's efficiency at all. When a stat has no impact on the character, it is entirely safe to disregard it and repurpose the points being used there for other stats.

The problem with that interpretation, I find, is that at least 3 stats have incontrovertible use for every character - Dex, which applies to AC and saves, Con, which applies to HP and saves, and Wis, which applies to saves. Int applies to skills, which improve a character's out-of-combat utility, and is therefore also of use to all characters, especially as those classes with more base points are more reliant on them.

That leaves Cha and Str, which are the only stats from which some characters do not benefit. Any character dealing physical damage will find a use for Str, so only casters will really be able to dump Str. Cha is a stat without direct application - you use it for class features, or in conjunction with skills. It is therefore the most common actual dump stat. Even Wis- or Int-based casters only really have 2 possible dump stats, Str or Cha.

I just think there's a more valuable conversation to be had by identifying stats to be focused on, rather than the stats to be neglected in favour of others.