Oh Great and Powerful Smiter (Paladin Preview)

[SpawnOfMorbo]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?1791-D-D-5E-Paladin!&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Paladin :D



http://www.enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=63138&d=1406665373&stc=1

http://www.enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=63139&d=1406665377&stc=1

[Merc_Kilsek]

I really like the art for the paladin.

[Human Paragon 3]

Extra attack sighting!

I wish they showed the proficiencies.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Extra attack sighting!

I wish they showed the proficiencies.

Only 1 extra attack though, slightly dissapointing.

I like that when you start off as a paladin the first thing you learn to to detect X and to heal. Then at second level you learn to bust faces.

Also apparently you can be an evil paladin, just that it is super rare. Match your alignment with your Oath is tucked away in there but technically not enforced as of yet.

[Callin]

Quite the selection of Deities as well. Spanning multiple pantheons.

[Human Paragon 3]

Only 1 extra attack though, slightly dissapointing.

I like that when you start off as a paladin the first thing you learn to to detect X and to heal. Then at second level you learn to bust faces.

Also apparently you can be an evil paladin, just that it is super rare. Match your alignment with your Oath is tucked away in there but technically not enforced as of yet.

I'm glad they kept it to 1 extra attack. Fighter needs his extra attacks to set him apart. No doubt Barbarian, Ranger, and Monk will also get 1 extra attack.

I want the ranger preview.

[Tholomyes]

Art is pretty good, but that's basically all we get. The chart of class features is basically what we've been expecting: a bunch of class feature names, which mean next to nothing as far as the mechanics of the class, and 5 level spellcasting. We already knew the Noble was the a Background, so not even that gives any new information.

To be honest, by now, I'd like to see more about subclasses (i.e. do they have their own art? What are some of the newer subclasses, like the ninja-esque sounding Way of Shadows for the monk, going to be about?) than these class previews.

On the topic of the Paladin, I sincerely hope that whatever alignment stuff they talk about are more flavor and less rules. I heard somewhere that detect evil just detects zombies and evil outsiders, which hopefully is the case for the Paladin's Divine Sense, if that's the new at-will evil-dar, and that smite is likewise just a boost in damage with possibly a further boost against evil outsiders and undead, and hopefully whatever they talk about alignments in the specific subclasses is no more binding than the flavor paragraphs in the paladin preview.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I'm glad they kept it to 1 extra attack. Fighter needs his extra attacks to set him apart. No doubt Barbarian, Ranger, and Monk will also get 1 extra attack.

I want the ranger preview.

I was expecting at least 2 Extra Attacks for the Paladin. *shrug*

I'm more interesting in the Barbarian, though I have to wait, I want to see how rage works in the final game.

[HylianKnight]

Nice, cool to see that multiple Extra Attacks is strictly a Fighter thing at this point (keeps them special and stops it from slowing the game down too much).

The reference to evil paladins seems weird, but I'll chalk it up to 5e striping Alignments of any mechanical relevance (here, here!) and the rumored Blackguard Oath in the DMG.

[Merc_Kilsek]

Seeing what the paladins get for spells/abilities, two attacks is solid when you improve them.

[Doug Lampert]

I'm glad they kept it to 1 extra attack. Fighter needs his extra attacks to set him apart. No doubt Barbarian, Ranger, and Monk will also get 1 extra attack.

I want the ranger preview.

How do multiple attacks stack over multiclassing? He gets his one extra attack at 5, same as the fighter.
Fighter gets his next extra at 11, if they stack then a Pal5/Ftr5 actually gets more extra attacks than a pure fighter at level 10.
A four way multiclass may be able to get 5 attacks a round, or maybe not. We'll need the full rules.

[Yorrin]

How do multiple attacks stack over multiclassing? He gets his one extra attack at 5, same as the fighter.
Fighter gets his next extra at 11, if they stack then a Pal5/Ftr5 actually gets more extra attacks than a pure fighter at level 10.
A four way multiclass may be able to get 5 attacks a round, or maybe not. We'll need the full rules.

If multiclassing reflects the most recent playtest then multiple attacks is one of the things that doesn't directly translate.

[T.G. Oskar]

If I'm thinking what I'm thinking, Aura of Protection is Divine Grace spread to your allies. Maybe it'll start at 10 ft., then later improve to 20 ft., but granting your Charisma to ALL saving throws for all nearby allies is incredibly powerful. With the Paladin focused on Charisma saves...

Divine Smite, on the other hand, requires spending spell slots. This isn't very fun. Improved Divine Smite adds extra damage as per the Life Domain (just 1d8), which is either Radiant or Necrotic.

For those that worry about Paladin spells, there are spells that are essentially smites with rider effects. Some can frighten, some can stun, some can impose a minor penalty, but there's that.

This is taken mostly from one of the last playtests. Let's see how it changed, though the main difference is Oath of the Ancients returning the "Green Warden" to the Paladin, making it an interesting choice. I'm mostly intrigued by the Aura improvements, though I suppose it'll be an increase in range (doubled range or something like that).

[huttj509]

Hey, I'm just happy that paladin spellcasting comes onboard at level 2!

[SpawnOfMorbo]

If I'm thinking what I'm thinking, Aura of Protection is Divine Grace spread to your allies. Maybe it'll start at 10 ft., then later improve to 20 ft., but granting your Charisma to ALL saving throws for all nearby allies is incredibly powerful. With the Paladin focused on Charisma saves...

Divine Smite, on the other hand, requires spending spell slots. This isn't very fun. Improved Divine Smite adds extra damage as per the Life Domain (just 1d8), which is either Radiant or Necrotic.

For those that worry about Paladin spells, there are spells that are essentially smites with rider effects. Some can frighten, some can stun, some can impose a minor penalty, but there's that.

This is taken mostly from one of the last playtests. Let's see how it changed, though the main difference is Oath of the Ancients returning the "Green Warden" to the Paladin, making it an interesting choice. I'm mostly intrigued by the Aura improvements, though I suppose it'll be an increase in range (doubled range or something like that).

Charisma bonus to all saves, that would make the class feature very very worth it.

I hope Divine Smite is more like adding a Cantrip to a Melee attack roll.

I love rider effects, melee + rider effects + immune to said effects (great saving throws + High AC) = win

I hope they set up smite to work with either a melee or ranged weapon.

[Tholomyes]

Divine Smite, on the other hand, requires spending spell slots. This isn't very fun. Improved Divine Smite adds extra damage as per the Life Domain (just 1d8), which is either Radiant or Necrotic.I'll have to wait and see, but it seems to me that divine smite (for most intents and purposes) functions just as an always-prepared first level spell that scales up by spell slot used. If it's reasonably powerful in that context, I think it'll be alright. You don't always need to smite, and given 5e's assumption of a shorter adventuring day, it might not be all that bad.

That being said, I'd be interested in seeing perhaps a cantrip that gives minor smite-like abilities (if not extra damage, at least make it add radient or necrotic to the damage types) for the cost of a bonus action.

[akaddk]

Non LG paladins.

The world has ended.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Non LG paladins.

The world has ended.

:cool:




Personally, I hope that they kept the ability for a paladin to be an archer; it's a character archetype that I've wanted for a long time and thus far I've only been able to mechanically support it in Pathfinder.

[Callin]

Didnt have to be LG in 4th ed. So I am glad of this holdover.

[T.G. Oskar]

I'll have to wait and see, but it seems to me that divine smite (for most intents and purposes) functions just as an always-prepared first level spell that scales up by spell slot used. If it's reasonably powerful in that context, I think it'll be alright. You don't always need to smite, and given 5e's assumption of a shorter adventuring day, it might not be all that bad.

That being said, I'd be interested in seeing perhaps a cantrip that gives minor smite-like abilities (if not extra damage, at least make it add radient or necrotic to the damage types) for the cost of a bonus action.

Problem is, if going straight with the playtest definition...you NEED to spend a spell slot to activate the smite, to deal 2d8 radiant/necrotic damage. On one hit. And if you want more damage, you need to spend a higher spell slot, a resource which is limited and potentially hotly contested. Improved Divine Smite is a straight addition to damage.

However, this could have changed between the playtest and the final release. If for some reason the Paladin remains the same, Divine Smite would be way too costly, particularly if compared with the spells that effectively grant a smite, which is strange enough. I could expect some sort of ability based on a short rest, thus making it possible to deliver a bunch of damage on one attack, but only on one attack. That's mostly how Smite worked on 3e but as an "encounter" effect rather than a "daily" effect.

Anyways: it all depends on how it actually ends up. Up to 7d8 radiant damage on one attack by spending one spell slot feels weak when a Fighter can pull off 8 attacks on one round, a Wizard can freely hit with 5 dice of damage with cantrips, and a Rogue can pull off 10d6 damage relatively easy, without spending such a scarce resource. On the other hand, a short-rest based boost to damage dealing a respectable, say, 5d8 damage is fair enough. It also depends on Improved Divine Smite AND whether half of the Paladin's spells are variant smites.

BTW: Divine Smite uses "weapon attack" as part of its language at the playtest documents. That means you can use it with a longbow or similar ranged weapon.

[Sartharina]

Holy Beefcake, Batman! That Paladin is an Awesome Half-Orc!

[Person_Man]

Can someone spoiler the image and/or summarize it?

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Can someone spoiler the image and/or summarize it?

Spoiled and for the summary...

Case of badassery

[Lokiare]

I'm going to try to be positive here:

The font isn't too bad and the background color is not straight up white. So that's good. The art isn't horrible. Yep, think positive...

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I'm going to try to be positive here:

The font isn't too bad and the background color is not straight up white. So that's good. The art isn't horrible. Yep, think positive...

Oh please, that Half-Orc face is to die for and you know it.

[Person_Man]

Paladin Pro's:

Looks like its strictly stronger then the 3.5 Paladin, which its clearly based off of. More class features, max 5th level spells.
Level 2-5 Paladin builds look like they will be very solid. Healing, Smite, 1st/2nd level spells, Subclass ability, Ability Score Improvement, Extra Attack, and minor extras (Divine Health, Fighting Style, Divine Sense). This was probably the most heavily play tested part of the class, and it shows. More evidence that 5E will probably play best as an E6 game?
God/Alignment is now worked into subclass features, which removes the default All Paladins = Lawful Good requirement. This will make splatbook expansions for the Paladin very easy.
Artwork is nifty.


Paladin Cons:

1st level class features is Divine Sense and Lay on Hands, which is odd, since its more signature/iconic features are Smite and Divine Grace (which doesn't exist anymore?). Could you imagine a Rogue that didn't get Sneak Attack until 2nd or 3rd level?
Looks like the Paladin will once again be crippled by being a half caster. At 9th level your only class feature is getting two 3rd level spells (when a Cleric/Druid/Bard/Wizard/Sorcerer of the same level is getting 5th level spells. At 13th level your only class feature is getting 4th level spells, when full casters are getting 7th. At 17th level your only class feature is getting just one 5th level spell, when full casters are getting 9th. So unless they've hidden a powerfully scaled Special Mount or some similar class feature somewhere in the subclass features, I'm guessing that high level Paladins will once again suck compared to higher Tier classes.
I'm guessing that Smite will be recharged by a Short Rest (1 hour), which basically limits it to once per adventure location (ok, we've cleared this dungeon, lets take a Short Rest and then move on), unless your DM adopts shorter Rests.

[T.G. Oskar]

Paladin Pro's:

Looks like its strictly stronger then the 3.5 Paladin, which its clearly based off of. More class features, max 5th level spells.
Level 2-5 Paladin builds look like they will be very solid. Healing, Smite, 1st/2nd level spells, Subclass ability, Ability Score Improvement, Extra Attack, and minor extras (Divine Health, Fighting Style, Divine Sense). This was probably the most heavily play tested part of the class, and it shows. More evidence that 5E will probably play best as an E6 game?
God/Alignment is now worked into subclass features, which removes the default All Paladins = Lawful Good requirement. This will make splatbook expansions for the Paladin very easy.
Artwork is nifty.


By definition, anything that I mention is mostly based on one of the playtests, so it's subject to change.

Potentially. It all depends on the choice of subclass and how the Smite works. If LoH works as per the playtest, chances are it won't rely on Charisma anymore, which makes it *almost* diptastic. As strong, but not more, than the Fighter's Second Wind, except the latter can recharge it with a Short Rest while the pool recharges with a Long Rest. It's also mostly because the Paladin was almost always a front-loaded class, in nearly every edition (save for BECMI, for what it was).
Still has a strong inclination to Good. Even the Oath of Vengeance, the "least" good of the options, still makes for a "Good is not Nice" kind of character in a way. They're bringing the "Paladins can be Evil or Neutral" concept from 4e, but they cater to the older players by giving it a VERY strong Good influence, almost overwhelming. I, for once, like that the Paladin remains strongly aligned with Good, and that it's distinct enough from the Cleric (though it depends on subclass overlap).
Yeah, it looks badass.



Paladin Cons:

1st level class features is Divine Sense and Lay on Hands, which is odd, since its more signature/iconic features are Smite and Divine Grace (which doesn't exist anymore?). Could you imagine a Rogue that didn't get Sneak Attack until 2nd or 3rd level?
Looks like the Paladin will once again be crippled by being a half caster. At 9th level your only class feature is getting two 3rd level spells (when a Cleric/Druid/Bard/Wizard/Sorcerer of the same level is getting 5th level spells. At 13th level your only class feature is getting 4th level spells, when full casters are getting 7th. At 17th level your only class feature is getting just one 5th level spell, when full casters are getting 9th. So unless they've hidden a powerfully scaled Special Mount or some similar class feature somewhere in the subclass features, I'm guessing that high level Paladins will once again suck compared to higher Tier classes.
I'm guessing that Smite will be recharged by a Short Rest (1 hour), which basically limits it to once per adventure location (ok, we've cleared this dungeon, lets take a Short Rest and then move on), unless your DM adopts shorter Rests.


Again: Divine Smite is your old-school Smite, and if the developers went with the playtest, chances are Aura of Protection is Divine Grace in an area. That'd make the best 3e Paladin class feature even STRONGER and more useful than before. BTW: 1e Paladins didn't have Smite, nor did 2e Paladins, and even in 3e they only got Smite 1/day at 2nd level, while they had Lay on Hands right at 1st level. It's only after 3.5 that they decided to move Smite to the forefront. I don't see that as bad, anyway, considering 1st level characters can do well without boosts to damage, and 2nd level characters can work with that as well.
Oaths will probably work like Domains, if it works like it did on the Playtest. No uber-special mount, but you might find stuff like adding your Charisma to attack rolls, Turn Undead and Fiends, a nimbus of light that deals radiant damage each turn and advantage on saving throws against fiends and undead; frighten the opponent if it fails a Wisdom saving throw, advantage on attack rolls for 1 minute, move after making an AoO, attack an opponent that an enemy attacked, transform into an Archon for 1 hour (only wings and aura of menace), and a bunch of new spells. Those are spread between the two Oaths, so it's not like you'll get all of them. I'm one who considers giving Bards 9th level spells completely idiotic, because it gives them even more power (considering they fight almost as well as a Fighter even though their Extra Attack was taken away, they have 1 less skill than a Rogue and Expertise), but giving 9th level spells to any class freely doesn't really help. Note, of course, that spell save DC is no longer based on spell slot and that spells no longer scale on their own, and the impact is lessened. Finally: Tiers will be tighter, almost like in 4e, if only because the difference between both will be lesser: a Cleric has 9th level spells and a respectable choice of weapons, but its buffs are restricted and its spells no longer scale freely, and you need to choose the right subclass to add a hint of additional damage to your attacks (also: no Divine Power to be better than the Fighter so far), whereas the Paladin has slightly more powerful spells, a superb defense and a respectable boost to offense (if Imp. Divine Smite works as per the playtest) combined with long-needed mobility (the way move works now). Subclass will also factor in the differences, so Tiers will depend more on Subclasses than on classes themselves.
Hoping that happens, but chances are it'll be spell slot based, which is a worse con than what you suggest. IMO, your suggestion would be a Pro, because it allows for a slightly higher amount of smites per day (for as long as you can rest, anyways), rather than a fixed number per day. Note that the Fighter will look for Short Rests as well to "go nova" (recharge its class features, namely), so that will be no problem for at least another member of the party.

[Person_Man]

Oh, and to add to my list of Paladin Cons, it appears as if Paladins are still MAD.

The most used Ability Scores are Con (hit points, Concentration, some Saves), Dex (Initiative, lots of Saves, Acrobatics, maybe AC, maybe to-hit/damage), and Wis (Perception, mental Saves which tend to be Save or Lose-ish). And in theory a class can get by well just by having 20 in its primary attribute (whatever it uses to make attack rolls with) and a decent Con (for hit points).

But the Paladin is Str and Cha dependent, and will need/want a high Con as well.

That's fine if you roll stats and happen to roll well in at least 3 Ability Scores. But in a point buy or array situation, it'll hurt. It won't hurt as much as 3.5/PF, since Ability Scores are capped at +5. And we can't tell how much it will hurt yet, since its not clear how Smite or Lay on Hands etc are calculated. But its clearly there.

[Human Paragon 3]

Oh, and to add to my list of Paladin Cons, it appears as if Paladins are still MAD.

The most used Ability Scores are Con (hit points, Concentration, some Saves), Dex (Initiative, lots of Saves, Acrobatics, maybe AC, maybe to-hit/damage), and Wis (Perception, mental Saves which tend to be Save or Lose-ish). And in theory a class can get by well just by having 20 in its primary attribute (whatever it uses to make attack rolls with) and a decent Con (for hit points).

But the Paladin is Str and Cha dependent, and will need/want a high Con as well.

That's fine if you roll stats and happen to roll well in at least 3 Ability Scores. But in a point buy or array situation, it'll hurt. It won't hurt as much as 3.5/PF, since Ability Scores are capped at +5. And we can't tell how much it will hurt yet, since its not clear how Smite or Lay on Hands etc are calculated. But its clearly there.

You can have decent Str, Con, and Cha if you play a human using point-buy. It's much easier to do in 5e than it was in 3.5 anyway.

It is MAD. Hopefully the class features are forgiving enough and powerful enough to make up for it. It will mean, practically speaking, that paladins will usually have 1 fewer HP/level than fighter and/or do 1 less damage on a successful hit. Will their class features (such as spells, defensive powers, and lay on hands) make up for this? Quite possibly. We shall see!

[Sartharina]

Paladins are STR>CHA>CON. They don't need Dex or INT, and possibly don't need WIS.

[Human Paragon 3]

Still, by comparison, fighters need STR or DEX and Con. That's one fewer stat, so you have a numerical advantage. It's up to the paladin's class features to balance for this, which is not a difficult task if the designers were savvy and knew to look for it.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Paladins are STR>CHA>CON. They don't need Dex or INT, and possibly don't need WIS.

Depending on how smite and their spell work... You may be able to get away with Cha>Str>Con.

[Envyus]

Paladins have their own spell list as well. Their spells seem to be more for buffing themselves and allies.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Paladins have their own spell list as well. Their spells seem to be more for buffing themselves and allies.

Plus LoH may be a good substitute for a con. There is only a con saving throw (cha to saving throws?) and no con skills. Con also doesn't get involved with death saving throws that I know of...

So really you could have a 10 Con and your effective HP may be like you have a 14+ con (or more!).

Strength >< Charisma > take your pick.

Edit: outright damage may be a bit scary at level 1-4 but eventually that shouldn't be a problem.

[Person_Man]

Is the spell list different in a meaningful and useful way and composed of Paladin only spells (Holy Sword, Knight's Move, Rhino Rush, etc)? Or is it a mostly a collection of lower level Cleric spells with a few token Paladin only spells thrown in?

If its the former, then great. It gives the Paladin a more unique play style, and you could always write 4th-5th level Paladin spells to be more comparable to 6th-9th level Cleric spells. (Although that would be confusing for newer players, and would make scroll pricing difficult).

If it's the latter, then I stand by my statement that the Paladin's half-casting will ensure that it is a much weaker class at higher levels.

Also, if the Paladin's spell lists focuses on buffs (which would make sense), Concentration may become a very serious issue. Though as others have noted, the most of the MAD issues could all be solved by a class ability that says "you may add your Charisma bonus to all Saving Throws and Concentration checks." Combined with well scaled healing and status condition removal from Lay on Hands, that would make the Paladin a very effective Tank class.

[Envyus]

Is the spell list different in a meaningful and useful way and composed of Paladin only spells (Holy Sword, Knight's Move, Rhino Rush, etc)? Or is it a mostly a collection of lower level Cleric spells with a few token Paladin only spells thrown in?

If its the former, then great. It gives the Paladin a more unique play style, and you could always write 4th-5th level Paladin spells to be more comparable to 6th-9th level Cleric spells. (Although that would be confusing for newer players, and would make scroll pricing difficult).

If it's the latter, then I stand by my statement that the Paladin's half-casting will ensure that it is a much weaker class at higher levels.

Also, if the Paladin's spell lists focuses on buffs (which would make sense), Concentration may become a very serious issue. Though as others have noted, the most of the MAD issues could all be solved by a class ability that says "you may add your Charisma bonus to all Saving Throws and Concentration checks." Combined with well scaled healing and status condition removal from Lay on Hands, that would make the Paladin a very effective Tank class.
There are 44 Paladin spells. I only know of one for sure that was in the PHB alpha (It makes it so that you deal an extra 3d10 radiant damage on attacks. I don't remember any other details from it but there were more.) There was also one previewed for the spell cards but the text was too small for me to read it. Though it seemed to be a Pally only spell.

[rlc]

1st level class features is Divine Sense and Lay on Hands, which is odd, since its more signature/iconic features are Smite and Divine Grace (which doesn't exist anymore?). Could you imagine a Rogue that didn't get Sneak Attack until 2nd or 3rd level?



Again: Divine Smite is your old-school Smite, and if the developers went with the playtest, chances are Aura of Protection is Divine Grace in an area. That'd make the best 3e Paladin class feature even STRONGER and more useful than before. BTW: 1e Paladins didn't have Smite, nor did 2e Paladins, and even in 3e they only got Smite 1/day at 2nd level, while they had Lay on Hands right at 1st level. It's only after 3.5 that they decided to move Smite to the forefront. I don't see that as bad, anyway, considering 1st level characters can do well without boosts to damage, and 2nd level characters can work with that as well.

yeah, i'm with oskar here. "most iconic" doesn't necessarily mean "most powerful." when i think of "smite," i don't automatically picture a paladin. but i do when i hear "lay on hands."

[SpawnOfMorbo]

yeah, i'm with oskar here. "most iconic" doesn't necessarily mean "most powerful." when i think of "smite," i don't automatically picture a paladin. but i do when i hear "lay on hands."

I actually like this, it makes it feel like the Paladin starts learning to protect, heal, and help before they learn to destroy.

[Sartharina]

If it's the latter, then I stand by my statement that the Paladin's half-casting will ensure that it is a much weaker class at higher levels. Weaker class than what? The cleric, or the fighter?

It's self-healing, extra attacks, direct damage, high HD, and Fightery-stuff makes it strong on its own compared to the cleric, while its flexible spellcasting makes it compare favorably to the Fighter.

[rlc]

I actually like this, it makes it feel like the Paladin starts learning to protect, heal, and help before they learn to destroy.
same here. it shows that, as a holy warrior, there's just as much of an emphasis on the holy (or unholy, in the case of the blackguard when we get it) as there is on the warrior.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

same here. it shows that, as a holy warrior, there's just as much of an emphasis on the holy (or unholy, in the case of the blackguard when we get it) as there is on the warrior.

Yup.

I'm a huge fan of the idea that each level of the paladin is a trial, and upon reaching level 3 then you are a real paladin. By real I mean that you have all the base abilities and took your oath. Kinda like...

Level 1: Lawyer at a firm
Level 2: Junior Partner at the firm
Level 3: Full Partner at the firm
Level 4+: Senior Partner at the firm

Haha I just compared paladins to lawyers :p

[Person_Man]

Weaker class than what? The cleric, or the fighter?

It's self-healing, extra attacks, direct damage, high HD, and Fightery-stuff makes it strong on its own compared to the cleric, while its flexible spellcasting makes it compare favorably to the Fighter.

So my current read of the Paladin is that it looks like it will be very useful and comparatively potent at low levels, and will become less useful at higher levels when compared to any full caster (1st through 9th level spells) with a big/flexible list of spells that can basically win any encounter and have other game changing effects. (For example, Scry and Die appears to be a viable option). This currently includes the Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer, and maybe the Bard (though I'm reserving judgement on the Bard until I see its spell list).

Full BAB doesn't exist, the differences in hit points are marginal, and differences in AC are basically non-existent, the damage difference from weapon types is meaningless if you don't use weapons. As the Paladin gains levels he's getting and depending on 3rd-5th level spells, whereas other spellcasters are getting access to 3rd-9th level spells, gets more spells overall, and gets them at a faster progression.

Like the Paladin, full casters are also getting high level class abilities, subclass abilities, and Ability Score Increases (although they're getting a slightly smaller number of them). And its worth noting that Ability Score Increases or Feats don't scale. They are exactly as useful/powerful at 4th level as they are at 19th level. So getting an extra Ability Score Increase or Feat at high levels isn't beneficial. You're getting something that will most likely be less useful then high level spells. This is especially true when you consider the existence of items that increase your Ability Scores to a set number that don't require attunement, like the Gauntlets of Ogre Strength. (It's also possible that Extra Attacks don't scale, since Sneak Attack only applies once per round, and I have yet to see anything equivalent to Power Attack or Spirited Charge that would increase the damage from attacks by more then 1-2ish points. So getting an Extra Attack as a capstone may be particularly insulting for the Fighter).

I think its a pretty self evident statement that 9th level spells are more powerful then 5th level spells. Therefore, unless the Paladin's class abilities powerfully scale and/or are more useful/powerful/flexible then the abilities provided by high level spells, I think its a fair statement to say that the Paladin is less powerful and flexible then full casters at high levels.

[obryn]

So my current read of the Paladin is that it looks like it will be very useful and comparatively potent at low levels, and will become less useful at higher levels when compared to any full caster (1st through 9th level spells) with a big/flexible list of spells that can basically win any encounter and have other game changing effects. (For example, Scry and Die appears to be a viable option). This currently includes the Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer, and maybe the Bard (though I'm reserving judgement on the Bard until I see its spell list).
At least during the playtest, Paladins were the high-damage kings with their Smite abilities. Turning spells into extra damage was pretty damn powerful.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Something I threw together.

At level 3, 7, 10, 15, and 18 your dedication to your god is rewarded with the following abilities. For any ability that relies on Paladin level, your effective Paladin level is equal to your Fighter level.

Level 3: Gain Divine Health or Lay on Hands.

Level 7: Gain Sacred Oath

Level 10: Gain Choice you didn't take at level 3 or Aura of Protection.

Level 15: Gain Level 7 Sacred Oath Feature

Level 18: Gain Choice not taken from level 10, cleansing touch, or aura of courage.


Oaths may change up smite... Which would be problematic and make me have to change this up a bit. I don't want the fighter gaining smite from this archetype... I'm making a different archetype that gives the fighter spells and/or smite of the paladin.

[T.G. Oskar]

So my current read of the Paladin is that it looks like it will be very useful and comparatively potent at low levels, and will become less useful at higher levels when compared to any full caster (1st through 9th level spells) with a big/flexible list of spells that can basically win any encounter and have other game changing effects. (For example, Scry and Die appears to be a viable option). This currently includes the Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer, and maybe the Bard (though I'm reserving judgement on the Bard until I see its spell list).

Full BAB doesn't exist, the differences in hit points are marginal, and differences in AC are basically non-existent, the damage difference from weapon types is meaningless if you don't use weapons. As the Paladin gains levels he's getting and depending on 3rd-5th level spells, whereas other spellcasters are getting access to 3rd-9th level spells, gets more spells overall, and gets them at a faster progression.

Like the Paladin, full casters are also getting high level class abilities, subclass abilities, and Ability Score Increases (although they're getting a slightly smaller number of them). And its worth noting that Ability Score Increases or Feats don't scale. They are exactly as useful/powerful at 4th level as they are at 19th level. So getting an extra Ability Score Increase or Feat at high levels isn't beneficial. You're getting something that will most likely be less useful then high level spells. This is especially true when you consider the existence of items that increase your Ability Scores to a set number that don't require attunement, like the Gauntlets of Ogre Strength. (It's also possible that Extra Attacks don't scale, since Sneak Attack only applies once per round, and I have yet to see anything equivalent to Power Attack or Spirited Charge that would increase the damage from attacks by more then 1-2ish points. So getting an Extra Attack as a capstone may be particularly insulting for the Fighter).

I think its a pretty self evident statement that 9th level spells are more powerful then 5th level spells. Therefore, unless the Paladin's class abilities powerfully scale and/or are more useful/powerful/flexible then the abilities provided by high level spells, I think its a fair statement to say that the Paladin is less powerful and flexible then full casters at high levels.

Comparing a Paladin to a Wizard or Sorcerer is unfair, because they don't represent the same aspects: a Wizard uses arcane spellcasting exclusively, whereas a Paladin blends martial prowess with divine spellcasting at limited rates. Comparing Paladin and Cleric, however, is fair game.

So, let's see...going by playtest alone, this is how it goes. The Paladin has a Hit Die higher than the Cleric (so far; it might change, but not for much), but you said the differences in hit points are minimal (at best, 1 HP per HD). The Paladin has native proficiency with martial weapons and heavy armor, whereas the Cleric has none (unless it chooses Life domain, in which case it gains proficiency with Heavy Armor but no Martial Weaponry), but you mentioned AC differences are non-existent (you can't get it higher than 20 without magic items, and Clerics lack both Mage Armor and Shield to work that out). Everyone gets the same Proficiency bonus, but note that this also applies to the choice of skills and tools. Cleric gets a choice of 2 skills out of 5, and it's expected that the Paladin will have said access as well, but their list will be wider: the playtest Cleric has one less skill than the Basic Rules Cleric (BR Cleric has History), while Paladin had a choice of one out of three. We can expect the PHB Paladin to have two choices (as with every class), and their list to be padded out a bit more to be a hybrid between Fighter and Cleric, so expect to see at least Athletics, Insight (it's the equivalent to Sense Motive, you see...), Persuasion (ditto for Diplomacy), Religion, perhaps Animal Handling (though that's debatable), and maybe Medicine. To complete the statement: the Playtest Fighter had 1 out of 3 skills, the BR Fighter has 2 out of 8 skill choices. Between 5 and 8, you can expect the Paladin to have at least 6 or 7 choices (average between the two is 6.5), so if there's a 7th skill, expect History to enter as well. Athletics is a very strong skill, one that a Cleric can gain out of Backgrounds but it effectively limits their background choice, which can be a powerful tool. Speaking of tools: Clerics gain no proficiency with any tool, nor do Fighters, so expect Paladins to have no tool proficiencies either (Playtest rules had proficiency with mounts as "tools", but these were removed).

Going with the class features, the Cleric has 5 ability score increments, and the Paladin does as well (based on the preview). The Cleric has three unique class features: Channel Divinity (you get only three progressions out of it), Destroy Undead (based on their core Channel Divinity option, Turn Undead) and Divine Interference (which is what really worries me about the Cleric, rather than their spellcasting potential in any case). The Paladin, by the preview alone, has almost three times the amount: Divine Sense, Lay on Hands, Fighting Style (shared with Fighter and most likely Ranger), Divine Smite, Divine Health, Extra Attack (worse than Fighter, shared by Barbarian and probably Ranger), Aura of Protection and Aura of Courage. Note that I'm not counting Imp. Divine Smite or Cleansing Hands, though if similar to the Playtest they'd count as separate abilities (IDS acting as a damage booster, Cleansing Hands being a Break Enchantment-esque effect usable a few times per day and separate from Lay on Hands), but they could easily be improvements to Divine Smite and Lay on Hands, so I went safe there. You could also collapse Aura of Protection (the most likely to be "Divine Grace in aura form" ability) and Aura of Courage (which may be full immunity to fear to you and allies, or advantage on fear saves to you and allies, or mix & match) into one, which is 7 unique skills. Even if removing Fighting Style AND Extra Attack, that's still 2 more than the Cleric has. If going with Playtest and Basic Rules and comparing, the key aspect here will be the power of the strongest class features of each, and that essentially means comparing Aura of Protection (a massive boon to all allies within range, if it works as "Divine Grace in aura form") versus the most broken class feature in the entire game, bar none (Divine Intervention). So yeah, the Cleric wins that by a landslide...even if Divine Intervention CAN fail until 20th level and even then it can only be used 1/week when the effect actually works, compared to the "always on" Aura of Protection. I could have gone with Divine Smite vs. Divine Intervention, but Aura of Protection as per the playtest really has that impact.

So it all relates to subclasses, and for the most part, the best way to compare them is to compare their "iconic" subclasses: Life Domain vs. Oath of Devotion. Life Domain grants 10 spells you have always prepared, but mostly through levels 1-5, a second application of Channel Divinity which is essentially a Mass Lay on Hands (that means Lay on Hands is downright beat), Divine Strike which can grant up to 2d8 damage in one attack (comparable to an extent with Improved Divine Smite, except the latter, if based on the playtest, applies to every attack AND can be necrotic energy), boosted healing (2 + spell's level, which eventually ALSO becomes reciprocate) AND Maximized healing. Oath of Devotion ALSO grants 10 spells, access to Channel Divinity (and surprise, it grants Turn Undead; the Cleric is superior in that regard because of extra uses AND Destroy Undead, but Sacred Weapon makes attack rolls easier for the Paladin; you eventually turn Fiends as well, so "advantage: Paladin" there), Banishing Smite (yes, they pulled this off from Pathfinder!) and a THIRD choice of Channel Divinity, that being Holy Nimbus (you generate a nimbus of light that grants advantage on saves against certain creatures AND DoT). Just going by Playtest, the Paladin has far more options than the Cleric in terms of the iconic subclasses' Channel Divinity options, but less uses; the Cleric is a better Healer, but the Paladin is a better combatant against fiends and undead.

Let's expand this, though. The Cleric had the Light AND War domains in the playtest, whereas the Paladin had the Oath of Vengeance. The Light Domain grants a whopping 14 spells (two free cantrips and two additional spells at levels 11 and 15th, corresponding to 6th and 8th level spells), and nearly all of them are blasting spells (Fireball, Burning Hands, Wall of Fire, Flame Strike, Sunbeam, Sunburst), so the Light domain has immense blasting power; it has two Channel Divinity options which are somewhat weak (one dispels magical darkness, the other dispels illusions), a cantrip-like effect that consumes your reaction, and a Corona of Light that works worse than the Oath of Devotion's Nimbus of Light (no DoT, enemies are the ones that have disadvantage against your spells rather than the opposite effect). War Domain is the one that you probably want to compare: it grants proficiency with Martial Weapons and Heavy Armor, grants Extra Attack (limited to your Wisdom modifier, though), a True Strike-esque bonus to attack rolls (much like the Oath of Devotion's Sacred Weapon, except the latter lasts for a minute and depends on your Charisma), and eventually resistance to all physical damage (which means you take half damage from that). Oath of Vengeance (for the Paladin) grants 10 spells as well (just like Oath of Devotion, the Life and War domains); of those, they gain a Ranger spell (Hunter's Mark), four Wizard spells (Dimension Door, Haste, Hold Monster and Misty Step) and spells shared by Clerics and Wizards (Cause Fear, Protection from Energy, Scrying, Hold Person). The only spell the Paladin takes strictly from the Cleric is Air Walk, and chances are the Druid happens to have the spell as well, so YMMV; two Channel Divinity options (either Frighten/slow your opponent or gain advantage on attack rolls against the target, both for 1 minute); the ability to move once you make an opportunity attack, the ability to counter an attack made by a "marked" target, or transform into a celestial creature that grants flight speed and an aura that can cause the frightened condition and imposes advantage.

Going by subclasses alone, the War domain could give the Paladin a run for its money, but the Oath of Devotion could riposte back. From what can be seen, the Paladin's Oaths seem to give a bit more bang for the buck compared to the Cleric's Domains, but the Cleric has more choices (4 improvements over the Paladin's three), you might expect that. To compare: the Life domain originally had three improvements. Blessed Healer is mostly an expansion to Disciple of Life, and Divine Strike was taken from the Cleric's class features and added exclusively to the Life domain, so expect to see the Cleric's 8th level Domain feature to act somewhat similarly. IF the Paladin's Oath-based abilities are as bland as Blessed Healer, then expect the Cleric to win that bout. If the Paladin's Oath-based abilities work as per the Playtest, expect the Paladin to have Channel Divinity somewhat reliably, and Oath abilities to be somewhat stronger than Domain powers.

Yet, this reminds me of a something, and probably the reason why talking about Tiers requires a paradigm shift. Tiering 5e will require Tiering ALL the subclass options on their own, rather than Tiering the class by itself. As you mentioned, the only two distinguishing things that will separate the martials from the casters will be their access to spellcasting (and in what degree), and their subclass options. Look at how different a Life Domain Cleric plays compared to a War Domain Cleric, and cross-examine that to a Devotion Paladin and a Vengeance Paladin. At most, a Life Domain Cleric will be weaker than a Vengeance Paladin and comparable to a Devotion Paladin, whereas a War Domain Cleric will be comparable to both the Devotion and Vengeance Paladins. The Light Domain Cleric, on the other hand, has its focus so removed from the Paladin that it'd be best to compare it with an Evoker Wizard for what it offers. This is why saying "the Paladin will be lower tier than the Cleric based on the spells alone" is folly: the option of Domain or Oath, both of which are remarkably similar on what they offer, throws a wrench on a comparison based on a theoretically similar level of optimization.

You know what I can agree with you, though? Bards and Clerics will be Tier 1, if only because of "I dabble in everything" for the former and "I have my God on Hotline" for the former. A Wizard can't truly compare with that level of firepower, so I expect the Wizard to be downgraded. However, if I were to compare the 5e Paladin with the 3.PF Paladin, chances are the former got insanely close to Tier 3: they are REALLY good on what they do (surviving, as they have self-healing, a solid bonus to ALL saves on a game where Proficiency is king, good HD, good armor proficiencies), and still be good on other things (their spells are better now and their Oaths grant them even more options, they are only less than the Fighter in terms of combat skill), but this is a result of the system itself. The differences between the Tiers will be really close (much like the 4e Tiers), but with extreme variance (the Eldritch Knight Fighter alone will be higher tier than most classes, and dwarf its other Martial Archetypes just by having spells, a combination of combat and swordplay, and Action Surge breaking the action economy).

In short: if the Cleric ends up higher tier, it won't be for its spells, and the Paladin won't be too far behind if you compare the classes. Spells are no longer the sole measure of ultimate flexibility, considering the wild changes to the spell lists as well (Gate, for example, no longer being a Wizard spell).