Good is Not Nice: A Paladin's Guide

[EvilAnagram]

Good is Not Nice
A Paladin's Guide

http://i.imgur.com/EyfPdgh.jpg
Image by Daniel Dos Santos

"My good blade carves the casques of men,
My tough lance thrusteth sure,
My strength is as the strength of ten,
Because my heart is pure."
— Lord Alfred Tennyson, "Sir Galahad"

From the very first edition, the Paladin has been the holy protector of the innocent and the scourge of the guilty. Heavily inspired by chivalric tales and Arthurian legend, the Paladin is a class known for its high RP demands and frequent controversies around what it means to be lawful good. The LG requirement is no longer in place, however. Instead, warriors on the path must dedicate themselves completely to an Oath devoted to certain ideals.

The Oath of Devotion for the classic Paladin feel. Frequently lawful or part of a religious sect, they are excellent against fiends and the undead.
The Oath of the Ancients if you wanted to play a 4e Warden. Protectors of sacred groves as well as innocents, the often-chaotic good Paladins of the Oath of the Ancients devote themselves to protecting the Light from the darkness of the world, which is a pretty vague mission.
The Oath of Vengeance is for those of us who loved playing Avengers last edition. This Oath is dedicated to the single-minded pursuit of the guilty at the cost of all else. Extremely mobile and terrifyingly efficient, Paladins of this Oath will never stop pursuing their prey.



Color Scheme

This is freaking amazing! It provides many options, or will do one thing extremely well.
This is really good, but not quite phenomenal.
This is good. It will regularly be useful, though it won't provide many tactical choices.
Bad. It will be extremely rare that it's useful at all.


Occasionally very useful, but limited in scope or applicability.

Table of Contents:

Crusading Essentials
Candidates for the Oath
Knightly Oaths
Divine Gifts
Feats and Multiclassing

[EvilAnagram]

Good is Not Nice
Crusading Essentials

http://i.imgur.com/6S1IRCH.jpg
Image Copyright WotC

Ability Scores
Strength: Almost all Paladins will want this for their primary stat.
Dexterity: DEX gives you a common save, some skills, and your AC in Medium Armor. However, some people may wish to build DEX-based Paladins, in which case this is sky-blue.
Constitution: Hit Points are good.
Intelligence: You won't need this very much. It's a good dump stat. Still, some saves and skill checks rely on INT.
Wisdom: Good for saves and skill checks.
Charisma: CHA is great for skill checks, and it’s your spellcasting ability. If you can get it to twenty after your STR, do it.

If you want to be a DEX-based Paladin, you’ll be restricted to finesse weapons and bows, but you can pull it off. You can get your AC to a max of 21 with Medium Armor Master and the Defense Fighting style. However, there aren’t really many advantages to doing this. A STR-based Paladin is probably the way to go for most people. CHA should be your second-highest stat no matter what.

Class Features
Hit Dice: 1d10 per level. Hell yes. Same as a Fighter or Ranger. Only Barbarians have it better, and let’s face it, Paladins look down on them. You are definitely melee material.
Armor Proficiency: You are proficient with all armor and shields. Go nuts.
Weapon Proficiency: You get all the weapons.
Saving Throws: WIS is pretty common, but it’s also a dump-stat candidate. CHA isn’t very common, but at least it’s a stat you’ll be beefing up.
Skills/Tools: You have no Tool proficiencies, but some of your skills are decent. Athletics, Insight, Intimidation, and Persuasion are great. Religion comes up occasionally, but if you’re a devotee to a god you’ll want to take it. Medicine will quickly become overshadowed by powers, but it’s still nice for bringing people back from the brink. You can take a feat that bumps this up to black.
Divine Sense: Useful if your campaign involves the undead or fiends. Give your party a heads-up when nasties are around. Not quite indispensible, but it can still be useful. Can also reveal the locations of invisible creatures.
Lay On Hands: Heal people without using a spell slot. I can’t picture a world in which that’s not awesome. At level 20, your pool for this is 100 HP of no-cost healing.
Fighting Styles: Dueling and Protection are for the sword-and-boarders, depending on whether you want to be offensive or defensive (guess which is which). Great Weapon Fighting is obviously for those who want to wield bigger weapons, but it no longer works with smite, as per Crawdad's tweet. Defense is great for tanks, and you’re a great tank. Mariner is a new one from UA. It's not particularly strong, but the +1 AC and side options are nice if you're lightly armored. Really, all the options are worthwhile, depending on how you want to play.
Spellcasting: This is your bread and butter. You won’t be a full caster, but you’ll stab full casters to death.
Divine Smite: Well, it’s competitive with Sneak Attack at the cost of a spell slot. It’s quite often worth it.
Divine Health: Well, not every feature can be amazing. Still, it's better than wasting a slot on a Restoration.
Ability Score Improvement: Obviously good for obvious reasons. The only reason it's not sky blue is that the Fighter gets more.
Extra Attack: Again, it would be nice to have more.
Aura of Protection: This is amazing. If you plan on multiclassing, at least get to this point because holy butt this is good.
Aura of Courage: Continuing the trend of being awesome. Immunity to fear is always nice
Improved Divine Smite: Bonus radiant damage every time you hit at no cost. Yeah, that’s awesome.
Cleansing Touch: At level 14, you get to remove debuffs at the cost of an action. Paladins are officially unfair, and we haven’t even gotten into the Oaths yet.


So, Paladins are seriously awesome. They are an amazing support class that can tank and consistently deal solid damage. Of course, if you stray from your Oath, you won’t get to keep your abilities. Murder hobos need not apply.

It's also worth pointing out that while Paladins are awesome, two Paladins aren't substantially better than one. What I mean is that while a Paladin in your party provides general buffs from which everyone benefits, the auras of two Paladins don't stack. Some overlapping class features get wasted. A Paladin and a Monk working together and to each other's strengths is much better than two Paladins working in tandem. Differentiated parties are often the most successful ones.

[EvilAnagram]

Good is Not Nice
Candidates for the Oath

http://i.imgur.com/zwtr9q3.jpg
Image Copyright WotC

NOTE: If you want to use a particular race, do so. Optimization doesn’t help as much in 5e as it does in others, and all the races offer you something fun.

Player's Handbook
Hill Dwarf: You boost your CON, which is good, and your WIS, which is okay. You also get resistance to poison and some extra HP, which is nice. Still, you need that STR.
Mountain Dwarf: Plus 2 to STR and CON? Well, that’s awesome all by itself, but it has more dwarfy features to go with it.
High Elf: All Elves get great features, but there’s no Ability score cohesion here at all, and you don’t really need cantrips based off your dump stat.
Wood Elf: A DEX-based Wood Elf Paladin wouldn’t be terrible. The WIS is always useful, as are the basic Elf features and the boosts to Hide and Speed.
Drow: Perfect Ability scores for a DEX Paladin, plus Improved Darkvision and CHA-based spells! Sunlight Sensitivity sucks, but you should be able to get around it most of the time. The biggest drawback would probably be all the racism you’d face everywhere you went.
Lightfoot Halfling: Perfect Ability scores for a DEX Paladin, and you have Lucky, Brave, and Halfling Nimbleness. You can be the stealth Pally.
Stout Halfling: If the Mountain Dwarf had one less CON bonus and was stupidly Lucky, you’d have a Stout Halfling. The big drawback to both Halflings is your limited weapon choices, but you’ll be DEX-based anyways.
Human: Plus one to every stat? Sure.
Variant Human: Feats are fun.
Dragonborn: You get stat boosts to your primary and secondary. Plus, you get a CON-based breath attack and damage resistance. This is awesome!
Forest Gnome:Here’s the thing, Gnomes get serious save advantages. You’ll get targeted by a lot of spells in your tanking career, and it might be worth going Gnome for that reason alone, especially if you happened to roll great stats and don’t need a stat boost.
Rock Gnome: Same as the Forest Gnome. Both of them have features not related to saves, but those features don’t really matter.
Half-Elf: You get a Charisma bonus and a boost to your two favorite stats. Add in Skill Versatility and you have a great choice.
Half-Orc: Half-Orcs make great melee combatants. You are a melee combatant. Everything they give you helps you in that regard.
Tiefling: CHA bonuses are always worth it, especially when they’re accompanied by the Tiefling’s powers. This race also has some very conflicted RP choices that I personally find intriguing.


Dungeon Master's Guide:
Eladrin: Fey Step is nice, but INT isn't great.

Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide
Duergar: The STR, CON, and spells are great, but the saving throw business is icing on this delicious cake. As with Drow, avoid sunlight because it makes you terrible.
Deep Gnome: As with the other Gnome options, if you're willing to forgo ability boosts to get nice save bonuses, you can pick this.
Ghostwise Halfling: The basic Halfling package is good, but you don't need WIS.

Volo's Guide to Monsters
Aasimar: The Charisma alone is great, but the powers are fantastic. Each subrace pairs extremely well with any paladin oath. Well, Oathbreakers only really pair with the Fallen Aasimar, but otherwise it's all fine.
Firbolg: They're not the best, but their invisibility jaunt is pretty damn nice.
Goliath: STR, CON, and damage reduction on a short rest.
Kenku: They don't really offer anything that helps a Paladin.
Lizardfolk: The Bite is nice, and it makes a pretty decent Paladin. A Lizardfolk will typically be a better Druid or Cleric than a Paladin.
Tabaxi: Excellent for a DEX Paladin who wants to keep mobile.
Triton: Well, getting a boost to all of your important stats is very nice, but the control spells and damage resistance send it over the top.

Volo's Monstrous Races
Bugbear: The extra damage and STR work pretty well, and the reach is alright. It'a a lot of okay features that come together to be pretty decent.
Goblin: It has okay stats for a Dex build.
Hobgoblin: The extra chance to hit is nice, but the stats just don't flow.
Kobold: If you want to be a damage-focused, single-classed Dex Paladin who doesn't take the Oath of Vengeance, this actually fits fairly well. Otherwise, you should pass.
Orc: Aggressive is pretty nice for any melee character, and the boost to STR and CON is nice.
Yuan-Ti Pureblood: If you can get over the whole "definitely evil" thing, it's not without its charms. It's not the best, by far, but it's not terrible.


Elemental Evil
Aarakocra: Unless you want to go pure DEX and wear light armor, don't pick this option. It doesn't provide much for Paladins.
Genasi: All the Genasi options provide a CON boost and casting with CON.
Air Genasi: Solid DEX build with some mobility options.
Earth Genasi: STR and CON boosts work well, as do the mobility options.
Fire Genasi: No boost to a primary stat, but you get resistance to a common damage type and you can cast Wizard spells with CON.
Water Genasi: Acid resistance and CON make this decent.


The Tortle Package
Tortle: I'm going to be honest, I was away from the internet for a few days a couple months ago, and I completely missed this. It's fine, I guess. Its AC will be high at low levels and low at high levels, and Shell Defense will be extremely useful if you ever find yourself surrounded by ranged attackers and unable to do anything helpful. It doesn't really do much for a Paladin, specifically, but its general ability bonuses and features are at least generally helpful.

Plane Shift Zendikar
Holy crap, it's a Magic/D&D crossover. A lot of the races in this supplement don't fit the races in traditional D&D settings that well, so be sure to talk to your DM before utilizing them.

Human: About what you'd expect.
Kor: Ghostwise Halfling drops psychic shenanigans for a climb speed.
Merfolk: The Charisma boost across the board is nice, but INT and WIS are not important to you at all.
Vampire: It makes sense that Vampires don't really offer much to a Paladin, save Charisma.
Goblin: A boost to Constitution and two resistances is going to be nice for any class.
Elf: Too much Wisdom. Tajura get that Charisma goodness, but not much else. Juraga are basically Wood Elves, and Mul Daya are Wood Elves with Wis casting and a STR boost. Solid, but not impressive.


Unearthed Arcana are official homebrews, not officially released like the other supplements.

Eberron

Changeling: Surprisingly enough, Changelings make decent DEX Paladins. They get boosts to two primaries, and they have interesting secondary options.
Shifters: Shifters tend to be okay as Dex Paladins.

Beasthide Shifter: A solid option. The bonuses to AC, CON, and DEX make a great Paladin.
Cliffwalk Shifter: Your DEX is good, but that's it. Not terrible, but less interesting than any other DEX option.
Longstride: Another pure Dex option, but with a cool mobility option. Wizards need a spell slot to get this mobility.
Longtooth Shifter: You can go either STR or DEX with this option, and you get a solid attack with a free grapple.
Razorclaw Shifter: This is actually a really good DEX option. You can take the Dueling fighting style and Tavern Brawler, then you essentially have the benefits of both Dueling and Two Weapon Fighting.
Wildhunt Shifter: This race provides a lot of awesome bonuses to WIS abilities. You do not need these bonuses.
Warforged: Good ability bonuses, a bonus to AC, and Living Construct bonuses.

Waterborne
Minotaur: You get a bonus to STR, and you get some cool attack options. Great option.

[EvilAnagram]

Good is Not Nice
Knightly Oaths

http://i.imgur.com/CrPE7kt.jpg
Image by tfsean on DeviantArt

The Oath of a Paladin empowers him, but also binds him. Breaking your Oath will have grave consequences that range from having to undergo penance to losing your Paladin powers completely. Choose well.

Oath of Devotion: Protect the Innocent
Adherents to the Oath of Devotion will find themselves empowered to face truly evil foes while protecting your allies better than any other class.
Oath Spells: All of these are quality spells. Most of them are solid buffs or healing spells, with a couple powerful damaging ones to boot.
Channel Divinity: Sacred Weapon is amazing at lower levels, but doesn't scale. Turn the Unholy is solid control.
Aura of Devotion: You can never be charmed while conscious, and neither can your nearby allies. This can turn an entire encounter in your favor.
Purity of Spirit: A free passive protection against some of the nastiest villains you'll ever come across. Yeah, that's nice.
Holy Nimbus: Gain advantage against spells and make it painful to be near you. This is nice. Combines well with Sentinel.


Oath of the Ancients: Defend the Light
Followers of the Oath of the Ancients will find themselves adept at combating outsiders and mages, and eventually they will become nigh-unkillable juggernauts.
Oath Spells: You have great options here. You also have Tree Stride and Speak with Animals. It doesn't cost anything to keep them, though, and you get much better spells, too.
Channel Divinity: Nature's Wrath does less than Ensnaring Strike and has more limited uses. Turn the Faithless offers solid control.
Aura of Warding: Resist all spell damage forever. This is borderline unfair.
Undying Sentinel: This is definitely unfair. You can refuse to fall unconscious once a day. And you're immortal.
Elder Champion: Holy balls this is unfair. You get regen 10 and some serious buffs to your spells.


Oath of Vengeance: Avenge the Helpless
Those who swear the Oath of Vengeance will find themselves empowered to take the lives of their enemies. They will dole out punishment swiftly and relentlessly.
Oath Spells: If your job is to hunt down evildoers, these spells accomplish that. Bane is a nasty debuff, Hunter's Mark piles on more damage, Banishment removes an enemy from your plane of existence, Protection from Energy gives you a nice resistance, and all the other spells make it easier for you to keep your foe from escaping.
Channel Divinity: Abjure Enemy keeps it from escaping, and Vow of Enmity makes it easier to kill. Again, great for a dedicated damage dealer.
Relentless Avenger: Keep your enemy from escaping your wrath.
Soul of Vengeance: Again, pile on that damage.
Avenging Angel: Sprout wings, terrify your enemies, and kill them with advantage. Because Good is Not Nice.


Oath of the Crown: For King and Country
Some Paladins swear to uphold the laws of their nation as they enter the ranks of a knightly order. They are the bulwark that protects civilization from the chaos that would consume it. The Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide brings us this oath.
Oath Spells: I mean, they're perfectly fine spells, but all but two are already Paladin spells. However, Warding Bond is a fantastic protective spell to help out your fleshier buddies, and Spirit Guardians can be nasty.
Channel Divinity: Champion Challenge is arguably the stickiest tank ability in 5e, plus a massive heal with Turn the Tide. Unfortunately, While Turn the Tide starts out strong, it doesn't scale.
Divine Allegiance: Take damage so your buddy won't have to. Not terrible.
Unyielding Spirit: Excellent protection against effects you probably won't need constant protection from.
Exalted Champion: A slew of decent bonuses that come very late to the party.


Oath of Conquest: The Strong Must Rule
Some Paladins look at a world torn apart by mortal iniquity: greed and mercy corrupt weak rulers, and the world suffers for it. In Xanathar's Guide to Everything, we meet these knights who recognize that only strength and a resolute commitment to law and order will bring a civilization to its potential, safeguarding it against the barbaric wilds.
Oath Spells: There's a decent mix of flavorful, powerful spells that can work well with your other features. Honestly, this might be the best-designed archetype, conceptually, even if I personally dislike the dark-and-edgy take on the Paladin. Most of them give solid control, and Fear works extremely well with your Aura of Conquest. Spiritual Weapon is a wonderful spell that can open up some bonus action options that might be lacking otherwise. It's worth noting that these are not the spells of a buffing Paladin. You're going to be disrupting your enemies and hurting their ability to attack you and your allies, so you might want to focus on boosting your Charisma to be more effective.
Channel Divinity: Conquering Presence is going to be extremely effective once you hit seventh level, and Guided Strike is almost as great as it was when the War Cleric had it.
Aura of Conquest: This is the only ability you have that makes you a true tank, and it makes you sticky as molasses. Plus, it works well with both your spell selection and Conquering Presence.
Scornful Rebuke: I like when tanks give their enemies nothing but bad choices, and this works perfectly. If a Paladin of Conquest takes Sentinel and reaches level 15, any adjacent enemy will be paralyzed with terrible choices, especially if they're Frightened.
Invincible Conqueror: It's not particularly clever or well-designed compared to the other features of this class, but it's bluntly effective. Resistance, extra attacks, and an expanded critical range are all effective.


Oath of Redemption: Mercy for the Penitent
"To subdue an enemy in battle is not the height of skill," says Sun Tzu. "To subdue an enemy without fighting is the height of skill." Xanathar's Guide to Everything brings us the Paladin of Redemption, dedicated to pursuing justice without drawing blood.
Oath Spells: While Sleep will eventually lose viability, there is a slew of disabling spells that provide a ton of benefits. If you wanted, you could even build this class as a primary caster more than a smite machine.
Channel Divinity: Emissary of Peace provides an excellent situational advantage in social situations, while Rebuke the Violent can produce some decent damage. Neither are amazing, but both are useful.
Aura of the Guardian: This is one of those tanking abilities that don't appeal to everybody, but work very well if you dedicate yourself to that strategy.
Protective Spirit: Great regeneration sounds good to me, especially if you keep taking damage for everyone else.
Emissary of Redemption: This is incredibly powerful, but it involves seriously limiting your actions in combat. It's very difficult to gauge how useful this is when you're limiting your smites.


Oathbreaker: Terrorize the Masses
Note: This is a Villainous Class Option from the Dungeon Master's Guide and specifically requires DM approval. It is highly unlikely that a DM will allow you to start from level one with the intention of entering this class, and it's bad RPing to boot. It is an exclusively evil option.
A fallen Paladin, the Oathbreaker lives to enforce his will on the helpless. He will wreak great horrors on those who oppose his will.
Oath Spells: You're a nasty person, and you have some nasty spells. A number of them deal damage, but it's often less than a smite at that level. Certain spells inflict massive debuffs, allow fantastic control, or simply allow you to pursue options you otherwise could not.
Channel Divinity: Control Undead allows you to turn a threat into an ally under your control with a single save, while Dreadful Aspect is essentially a Dragon's Frightful Presence. Forcing your enemies to have disadvantage while you hack away at them is an excellent ability.
Aura of Hate: Adding Charisma to damage is amazing so long as you're not fighting fiends or undead.
Supernatural Resistance: The only problem with this is that by the time you get it, most of the damage you'll be worrying about will come from magical sources.
Dread Lord: This is a perfect example of why this class was originally intended for boss level villains. This is ridiculously OP.


For more about Oath Spells, see Divine Gifts.

[EvilAnagram]

Good is Not Nice
Divine Gifts

http://i.imgur.com/f8CGh2Z.jpg
Image by Todd Lockwood

While Paladin's don't have the same potential as full casters, their spells are excellent at healing and buffing their allies and increasing their damage output.

A note on Oath Spells: Oath Spells are separate from your list of prepared spells for the day. They still use up spell slots when cast, however.


Armor of Agathys*: It's useful to have a small boost to your health, and retributive damage is always fun. The numbers might not be worth the spell slot at higher levels, though.
Bane*: On an RP note, there's a really dark component for making your Vengeance Paladin edgier. It places a decent debuff on your targets. It's definitely worth the spell slot, and not having to prepare it is a bonus.
Bless: Basically the opposite of Bane. Give your whole party a bonus to hit and to save.
Ceremony (XGtE): It's my favorite spell. It is a beautiful use of casting to create a powerful RP experience with tangible benefits. I love it.
Command**: A clever player could use it to turn an entire encounter around. Less clever players won't know what to do with it. It's a worthwhile pick since you can completely disrupt your enemy's turn.
Compelled Duel**: Disrupt your enemies' plans and seriously up your tanking potential.
Cure Wounds: Heal up to 45 points of damage if cast as a 5th level spell. It's pretty nice at lower levels when you really don't have too much healing potential. At higher levels, it's still a 45% increase in your healing potential.
Detect Evil and Good: You already have Divine Sense.
Detect Magic: Leave this to your wizard. You don't have many spell slots, and this one isn't one you should prepare most days.
Detect Poison and Disease: Just like Detect Evil and Good, it's nice at times, and it's worth preparing when you think you might need it.
Divine Favor: Extra 1d4 per hit. It's a weaker version of Hunter's Mark, but you cast it on yourself, not the target, which is a plus. Also, radiant damage helps against plenty of enemies.
Ensnaring Strike*: Damage your enemy and lock down their movement. Solid spell that you don't have to prepare each day.
Hellish Rebuke*: While it's nice for Tieflings, and reaction casting is fun, the problem with this spell is that a smite does more damage, so it isn't worth an actual spell slot. The only time you should cast this is if your enemy is vulnerable to fire.
Inflict Wounds*: Again, a smite will simply deal more damage.
Heroism: A decent spell that buffs an ally and makes him or her immune to fear.
Hunter's Mark*: You don't have to prepare it, and it's a solid damage boost against the target of your Channel Divinity powers. A decent, single-target boost to the damage of Divine Favor.
Protection from Evil and Good**: It's okay. The buff is decent, but it only works against a limited pool of enemies. Of course, it's a group of enemies you're likely to encounter, especially as a Paladin. It's terrible as an Oath Spell since it's already on the Paladin spell list, and level 15 Paladins have this benefit without the spell.
Purify Food and Drink: Again, situational at best. You might prepare it before a shady dinner, but not on a regular day.
Sanctuary*: Protect an ally when they're hurting. It would rate higher, but your warded ally won't be able to harm your enemies. Still, give them some breathing room.
Searing Smite: It's not bad, and it's amazing when you need to take out something weak to fire or with a weak CON save.
Sleep*: At low levels it's amazing, and at higher levels it's basically useless.
Shield of Faith: Decent buff that takes concentration, and it lasts a decent amount of time.
Speak with Animals*: The only thing working in its favor is the fact that you won't have to prepare it. Otherwise, it's totally situational. Can combine well with Command.
Thunderous Smite: The damage boost isn't much, but the effects are nice and there's only one gate to dealing it.
Wrathful Smite: Less damage than Thunderous Smite, but the effect is stronger. Forcing the enemy to take an action to end it is nice, and it works well with Conquest's aura.




Aid: A good buff to a weak ally that scales.
Branding Smite: Like Thunderous Smite, but it scales and reveals invisible creatures. Not bad, but it's a bit silly to make a spell to reveal invisible creatures that depends on hitting with a melee attack.
Calm Emotions: It will occasionally be very useful, but it's pretty rare.
Crown of Madness*: Some major flaws should have you questioning the value of this spell. To summarize, it's actually difficult to land hits with this, your enemy has plenty of chances to save, and you'll be giving up some damage dealing potential.
Darkness*: Occasionally very useful. If you ever need to escape some vicious attacks, or you want to shift the tactical makeup of the field, make like a squid and ink.
Find Steed: If you want a steed, this power is just about mandatory. You gain an intelligent steed you don't have to make rolls to control and who obeys your commands. It's a solid power.
Hold Person*: The vast majority of enemies are humanoids, and this is just such a great disabling spell.
Lesser Restoration**: Very nice spell, and the Oath of Devotion Paladin doesn't need to prepare it.
Locate Object: You know the drill. Prepare this if you know you'll need it, but you won't usually need it.
Magic Weapon: Necessary, up until you find a magic weapon of our own.
Misty Step*: Teleports are nice, and an Oath of Vengeance Paladin can get a lot of use out of it.
Moonbeam*: A small burst (3x3 squares on a grid) that deals radiant damage. It's okay, and it's a must against shapechangers. It's a great way to deal with were-anythings, and it doesn't take any preparation.
Protection from Poison: Cure poison. Protect people from poison damage. Dwarven Paladins don't really understand why this spell exists.
Spiritual Weapon*: Bonus action attacks are fun! Worthless if you went with Polearm Master.
Warding Bond*: Reduce damage for a buddy and boost his defenses, but you'll take damage in his stead. Solid protective spell.
Zone of Truth**: It's situationally useful. If you think you'll be interrogating someone, definitely prepare this.




Animate Dead*: Not as abusable as some like to think, especially for a Paladin. Still, you'll be able to create allies, which is worthwhile.
Aura of Vitality**: Definitely your best healing power so far.
Beacon of Hope*: Another awesome spell, though it would be better if you could stack it with Aura of Vitality.
Bestow Curse*: On the one hand, Concentration spells tend to be terrible for melee combatants. On the other, Paladin saves are great, and the effects are very nice.
Blinding Smite: Highest damage of any smite so far, and blinding your enemy is a nice debuff.
Counterspell*: If you're going to have something permanently prepared, it might as well be a spell that will occasionally be the most important spell to cast.
Create Food and Water: If you're starving, you can prepare this, eat, and never prepare it again.
Crusader's Mantle: Buff all friendlies with extra damage. If your party can summon a lot of creatures, this gets better.
Daylight: Quite a lot of people will never be in a situation in which they'll use this. Prepare it when you fight Drow.
Dispel Magic**: Everyone needs this at some point, but hopefully your Wizard will have it prepared.
Elemental Weapon: It's a good spell, and you can tailor the damage to whatever your enemy is weak against.
Fear*: It's a good spell, but it also combos incredibly well with the seventh-level aura of the Oath of Conquest, and that's the one archetype that gets it.
Haste*: Continuing this level's trend of being awesome, this spell is a fantastic buff.
Hypnotic Pattern*: Disabling five enemies is incredibly useful, and the only class that gets it prefers pacifism.
Magic Circle: It has its uses, and not all of them are totally situational.
Plant Growth*: Good for losing tails or helping out locals. It's still situational, but it handles those situations really, really well, and you don't have to prepare it.
Protection from Energy*: Probably the best Protection spell. Choose a damage type, and take less damage from it.
Remove Curse: You'll probably need this at some point, but you'll be able to take the time to prepare it when you need it.
Revivify: You'll definitely want to keep this on hand.
Spirit Guardians*: Solid AoE that keeps your foes from running off. Excellent spell




Aura of Life: Another beautiful aura for Paladins. When you're facing a necrotic damage, you should use this.
Aura of Purity: Again, when you're facing this kind of damage, you should pop this aura. And the advantage on saving throws is great.
Banishment**: It's a decent power. You get to remove an enemy from your plane of existence with a single spell. Nice.
Blight*: Deals more damage than a 4th level smite.
Death Ward: It's a decent power, and it's worth preparing, but it's not the best, and it replicates an Oath of Ancients power.
Confusion*: Excellent table control.
Dimension Door*: Better teleportation.
Dominate Beast*: It's not terrible, but the number of beasts that are going to be major threats at the level you get this spell is very small. Very, very small.
Freedom of Movement*: Situational, but you don't have to prepare it, so yay!
Find Greater Steed (XGtE): Flying speeds are fun. I like it.
Guardian of Faith*: Good damage and solid control. Also, the fluff is pretty awesome.
Ice Storm*: Quite strong for a Paladin AoE. That's all there is to say about it.
Locate Creature: Not an important power. But, if you need it for the day, you can prepare it.
Otiluke's Resilient Sphere*: A solid disabling spell that can also be a solid defensive spell. Versatility in a single slot is nice.
Staggering Smite: Blows away every other smite up until this point.
Stoneskin*: Damage resistance is a good thing, especially when you're the tank.




Banishing Smite: Deal tons of damage, and if you bring your target down to under 50 HP then you banish it. Awesome.
Circle of Power**: Basically, another aura. This one has amazing effects.
Cloudkill*: This is a really powerful spell, especially since the Oath that gets it tends to focus on crowd control.
Commune*: You get to talk to your god. It's good for when you really need to talk to your god. It's a situational benefit, but it might be exactly what you need.
Commune with Nature*: Commune for hippies. Same situational benefits.
Contagion*: It's simply a fantastic spell with excellent potential.
Destructive Wave: Basically, an AoE smite that deals 10d6 in a giant area.
Dispel Evil and Good: Unfortunately, most of the extraplanar beings you would use this on have high CHA and Legendary Resistance. The Break Enchantment aspect could help a lot, though.
Dominate Person*: Another excellent spell with massive control and RP potential.
Flame Strike*: A solid AoE that can deal okay damage. There are better spells, but this one's not bad.
Geas**: This spell is a great big pile of pure potential. If you don't use it, you have no imagination.
Hold Monster*: Hold Person for monsters. Or anything, really. It's worthwhile as a disabler, and auto-crits are fun.
Holy Weapon (XGtE): This... is a capstone spell. It's like Hunter's Mark, but with more damage and it can end in a damaging, disabling burst.
Raise Dead: You will need this every once in a while. The material cost is high, though.
Scrying*: Gather information at the cost of a spell slot. Usually, it's not worth one of your highest slots when you can deal damage with them.
Tree Stride*: Hippie teleporting. It will probably come in handy if you fight in a forest.
Wall of Force*: Suuuuuuuuper useful. It can completely divide your enemies or lock away the biggest threat.



*Only available through Oath Spells.
**Available both as Oath Spell and as regular Paladin spell.

[EvilAnagram]

Good is Not Nice
Feats and Multiclassing

http://i.imgur.com/0GbH4AC.jpg
Image by Dani Lopez


Barbarian: Unarmored Defense is nice, but unnecessary with Plate. Plus, your secondary should be CHA, not CON. Still, Rage, Danger Sense, and the Bear Totem path also make this a solid choice.
Bard: Spellcasting synergy! I love spellcasting synergy! A great choice for upping your casting potential.
Cleric: Despite the religious overtones, these two don't complement well. WIS is a potential dump stat, but if you pump it for Perception this could be okay.
Druid: I wouldn't. There are just too many better options for upping your casting.
Fighter: The only bad thing about this is losing your level 20 Paladin Feature. In return, you get Second Wind, Action Surge, Archetype features, and a Fighting Style. It's just a great choice.
Monk: For most Paladins, Monks utilize two of their dump stats. Monks are great. Pally/Monks are not.
Ranger: Your spellcasting abilities don't mesh. Probably not worth it when there are better options.
Rogue: If you're a DEX-based Pally, absolutely worth it in so many awesome ways. If not, it's still okay.
Sorcerer: This is by far one of the more popular choices to up your spell slots for smiting. It has the drawback of severely reducing your hit point gains, but it works pretty well.
Warlock: Want to up your blasting potential? This works. It can also provide short rest smites.
Wizard: Don't cast spells with your dump stat.




Alert: If you multiclass into Rogue and take the Assassin route this goes sky-blue.
Athlete: It makes you a better skill monkey, but that's it.
Actor: You already have solid CHA, so you might want to give it a shot.
Charger: It's okay. You get to charge, just like you did in the last system. Nothing special.
Crossbow Expert: Most Paladins won't be using crossbows, but if you're going to then get this.
Defensive Duelist: Quite nice for any melee character.
Dual Wielder: You have no use for this.
Dungeon Delver: Great if your DM is a bit trap-happy.
Durable: It's okay. Nothing special, but it's a good half-feat bonus.
Elemental Adept: More of a full-caster feat.
Grappler: Good if paired with Tavern Brawler, but unless you want to wrestle people, I wouldn't get it.
Great Weapon Master: If you want to wield a two-handed weapon, get this.
Healer: You can improve your ability to heal, but not by much.
Heavily Armored: Don't give up an Ability point for a bonus you already have.
Heavy Armor Master: Almost all Paladins should consider this.
Inspiring Leader: You have the Charisma, and the buff is sweet.
Keen Mind: There's nothing wrong with it, but there's also nothing particularly good about it.
Lightly Armored: You already have the benefit.
Linguist: In my experience, knowing the right language at the right time can save your ass.
Lucky: This is an exceptionally powerful feat. Definitely worth taking.
Mage Slayer: Having trouble with mages? Use, Mage Slayer!
Magic Initiate: Expand your casting ability. I like it.
Martial Adept: Might be worth it if you multiclass into Battle Master. Otherwise, I'd skip it. 1d6 per short rest is just not worth giving up the feat.
Medium Armor Master: Solid if you don't want to go with Plate, but you're looking at some serious MAD here.
Mobile: It's a very nice group of passive benefits.
Moderately Armored: You already have the benefit.
Mounted Combatant: Obviously, this is only good if you are frequently mounted.
Observant: It's a great bonus to two skills that are extremely important to a party.
Polearm Master: If you're wielding a polearm, get this. Great synergy with Sentinel.
Resilient: For a single ability point, you gain a save proficiency. That's awesome.
Ritual Caster: Save your spell slots and gain more spells. This is great!
Savage Attacker: More damage is a good thing.
Sentinel: The tankiest feat you ever did see! Absolutely necessary for the Oath of Devotion's final feature, and works wonderfully with Polearm Master.
Sharpshooter: You belong in melee, not at range.
Shield Master: An excellent pick if you use a shield.
Skilled: Try your hand at (skill) monkeying around.
Skulker: Sneaky stuff can always work to your advantage. Better for a DEXbased pally.
Spell Sniper: This is not made for a Paladin.
Tavern Brawler: This is only good if you're playing around with an unarmed character concept.
Tough: It's a fairly good benefit, and it ends up giving you 40 HP at level 20.
War Caster: Makes casting in combat much, much easier.
Weapon Master: You already have proficiency with everything.



Bountiful Luck: Giving someone a free reroll on a critical failure without using any resources is unreasonably awesome.
Dragon Fear: If you're at all familiar with me, you'll know I like frightening enemies.
Dragon Hide: Getting a boost to your AC for half a feat is good all by itself.
Drow High Magic: I will never turn down extra spells. Never. Do you hear me!? Never!
Dwarven Fortitude: This is a pretty solid boost to your resilience.
Elven Accuracy: This is goooooood. Really good. Like, really, really good. Dang. It's so good. Why is it so good? It should be less good.
Fade Away: Turning invisible as a reaction with no spell slot is damn nice.
Fey Teleportation: A half-feat that provides a situational ability with a great slotless teleportation spell. Yay!
Flames of Phlegethos: Paladins don't have enough fire spells for this feat. "But what about Sorcad--" Smack! This is not a multiclassing guide!
Infernal Constitution: Resisting three kinds of damage and getting advantage on poison saves is nice. Also getting a point in CON is great.
Orcish Fury: It's a solid melee feat, and Paladins are solid melee characters. I like it.
Prodigy: Four situational abilities make a blue. That's just science.
Second Chance: I like mulligans, especially when you're forcing them on others. At the very least, you can negate 20s.
Squat Nimbleness: This is basically an "I don't want to be grappled," feat, which is fine. Being grappled can be debilitating, so it might be worth it.
Wood Elf Magic: Just don't. There are so many good things you can do with your time. Don't take this.


Feel free to leave comments/suggestions/insults after this post.

[madwolf10]

Well holy sweet killing machine, nice summary EvilAnagram!! Look forward to more... as my choice IS a Tiefling Paladin (of Vengeance) for the game starting next month.

[Shining Wrath]

Thanks for this!

An Oath of Vengeance Tiefling IMNSHO has awesome RP potential. Everyone is scared of you to begin with, and you are a relentless killer of people who need killing, which everyone has to ensure does not include them.

[Cambrian]

I like it! Still going over the options but it looks right.

Might be worth changing the mountain dwarf to black? They're not, great, but outside of the wisdom bonus all of their benefits are relevant, and they're really tanky if that's the goal.

Thanks for putting in the time for this!

[EvilAnagram]

Thanks for this!

An Oath of Vengeance Tiefling IMNSHO has awesome RP potential. Everyone is scared of you to begin with, and you are a relentless killer of people who need killing, which everyone has to ensure does not include them.
You're welcome!

And yeah, Tiefling Paladins can get pretty dark. It's a lot of fun to play a religious devotee who has been marked as a fiend, but still wants to do good in his life. And when the ostracized and oppressed dedicate themselves to killing evildoers, the people who would have gladly strung them up tend to think twice about it.


Well holy sweet killing machine, nice summary EvilAnagram!! Look forward to more... as my choice IS a Tiefling Paladin (of Vengeance) for the game starting next month.

Thanks! I fully expect it to take me a week or so to finish the spell list on account of grad school, but I'll finish it when I can.

I played a Tiefling Pally in 4e, and the RP potential is phenomenal! One of my favorite characters.

Although the 4e version of a OaV was an Avenger, which is a bit different.


I like it! Still going over the options but it looks right.

Might be worth changing the mountain dwarf to black? They're not, great, but outside of the wisdom bonus all of their benefits are relevant, and they're really tanky if that's the goal.

Thanks for putting in the time for this!
If you meant the Hill Dwarf, I thought about it and decided to do just that.

And you're welcome!

[Ferrin33]

The problem I'm seeing is that all the choices are good or great, with very few worse than black. Wouldn't it be better to cut down on the Great and add more Red and Black? This would make it easier to browse through the relevant points (What's good or bad). It's relative anyway, so there should be no issue there.

[FoxDropz]

The problem I'm seeing is that all the choices are good or great, with very few worse than black. Wouldn't it be better to cut down on the Great and add more Red and Black? This would make it easier to browse through the relevant points (What's good or bad). It's relative anyway, so there should be no issue there.

Yes, I agree with Ferrin. You should narrow down the "awesome" choices.

[EvilAnagram]

The problem I'm seeing is that all the choices are good or great, with very few worse than black. Wouldn't it be better to cut down on the Great and add more Red and Black? This would make it easier to browse through the relevant points (What's good or bad). It's relative anyway, so there should be no issue there.

I see my job in making a guide as informing people of their choices as objectively as possible. If I make the OoA Oath Spells Purple because two of the spells aren't that useful, while all the others are, I'm doing a disservice to the reader. I would be falsely suggesting that the spells available to the Oath of Ancients Paladin aren't that useful or are only situationally useful. The OoA spells are great, but not as good as those of the other Oaths, and the coloring reflects this. If I were to do what you suggest, I would be misinforming the reader.

I was very clear in the first post what the distinctions between color are, and I fully intend to stick with them. I'm not going to force a bell curve simply because people think there should be one. If a reader really wanted an Oath of Vengeance Paladin, but mistakenly thought that he would be worse of with one because I narrowed the focus of what counts as awesome, and he ended up choosing a different build because of it, I would be hurting his character concept simply because you don't want there to be too much blue.

If it makes you feel better, the Feats and Multiclassing section has much more red and purple, and the spell list, when it goes up, will have more varied coloring as well.

[Ferrin33]

I see my job in making a guide as informing people of their choices as objectively as possible. If I make the OoA Oath Spells Purple because two of the spells aren't that useful, while all the others are, I'm doing a disservice to the reader. I would be falsely suggesting that the spells available to the Oath of Ancients Paladin aren't that useful or are only situationally useful. The OoA spells are great, but not as good as those of the other Oaths, and the coloring reflects this. If I were to do what you suggest, I would be misinforming the reader.

I was very clear in the first post what the distinctions between color are, and I fully intend to stick with them. I'm not going to force a bell curve simply because people think there should be one. If a reader really wanted an Oath of Vengeance Paladin, but mistakenly thought that he would be worse of with one because I narrowed the focus of what counts as awesome, and he ended up choosing a different build because of it, I would be hurting his character concept simply because you don't want there to be too much blue.

If it makes you feel better, the Feats and Multiclassing section has much more red and purple, and the spell list, when it goes up, will have more varied coloring as well.

Power is relative, so the best way to rate it is to have Black be the average power to show as many differences as possible. Making everything Good or Great is a waste of color and only makes things harder to read. The outliers(those above or below the average), should be colored.

[EvilAnagram]

Power is relative, so the best way to rate it is to have Black be the average power to show as many differences as possible. Making everything Good or Great is a waste of color and only makes things harder to read. The outliers(those above or below the average), should be colored.

It is relative. It's relative to every other class and to other powers. The standard class features simply happen to be exceptional when compared to other classes. That's not an exaggeration, either. The auras are insanely powerful, especially with scaling. All of the Oaths happen to have excellent abilities that blow away other class features. There happen to be no races that cannot make decent Paladins.

However, Paladins only have basic access to skills, so that's black. Divine Health and Great Weapon Fighting and Divine Sense are useful, but not exceptional, so they're black. It's not my fault that Paladin Class Features are strong, but it would be my fault if I failed to show that they are.

However, if you have a specific suggestion, such as one feature you think is overrated, then by all means let me know.

[DireSickFish]

With regards to color. I think Drow should be downgraded due to Sunlight Sensitivity being a huge negative for a class that relies on hitting with a weapon.

Regular Human should be downgraded because it doesn't give anything that synergies with Pally, and there are far better selections you can make.

Armor and weapon prof should be regular blue nto sky blue as other classes get these proffs and they do not give the class a huge power boost in and ov themselves.

Athletics has come up as sky blue in most other character guides and I tend to agree whereas the social skills Intimidate and Persuasion vary more from campaign to campaign.

The sky blue for 100pts of healing in the Lay on Hands ability is confusing. When does this scaling ability go from simply good to great? Is that when I should stop taking pally levels? Makes it unclear how useful the ability is.

Can't look at Oaths right now, but all of the abilities that requier you to use divine channel have opportunity cost associated with them. Which is the best and worst use of it? Are some so situationel they might never come up? I really don't think there are that many sky blue options with oaths.

[EvilAnagram]

With regards to color. I think Drow should be downgraded due to Sunlight Sensitivity being a huge negative for a class that relies on hitting with a weapon.
I'll consider it, but there's always the simple option of being nocturnal, and in Underdark campaigns this doesn't matter at all. Still, I might not have factored that in.


Regular Human should be downgraded because it doesn't give anything that synergies with Pally, and there are far better selections you can make.
If you have a lot of odd Ability scores, regular human is great. Worth considering though.


Armor and weapon prof should be regular blue nto sky blue as other classes get these proffs and they do not give the class a huge power boost in and ov themselves.
They don't give a huge power boost in and of themselves, but they are the best you can get. You cannot have more proficiencies in armor and weapons than the Paladin does.


Athletics has come up as sky blue in most other character guides and I tend to agree whereas the social skills Intimidate and Persuasion vary more from campaign to campaign.
Athletics is useful, but social skills can drastically alter campaigns, and with CHA as a main statistic Paladins are exceptionally capable of utilizing them.


The sky blue for 100pts of healing in the Lay on Hands ability is confusing. When does this scaling ability go from simply good to great? Is that when I should stop taking pally levels? Makes it unclear how useful the ability is.
It's a vague line, but at level 20 healing 100 HP without even spending a spell slot is huge. And no, you should stop taking Pally levels when you feel you have more to gain from other classes than the Pally.


Can't look at Oaths right now, but all of the abilities that requier you to use divine channel have opportunity cost associated with them. Which is the best and worst use of it? Are some so situationel they might never come up? I really don't think there are that many sky blue options with oaths.
There is an opportunity cost with the Channel Divinities, and that's factored in. None of them are so situational that they aren't likely to come up, and the few that are situational rely on common situations (fighting a spellcaster, fighting undead/fiends/fey at higher levels). They're just good.

Those were some great notes, though. Thanks!

[JRutterbush]

What's this about Sacred Weapon not scaling? Not only does it actually scale (every time your Charisma increases), it's an ability that doesn't need to scale. AC is one of the things that doesn't get much of an increase as levels and CR go up, so +Charisma to attack rolls is always an amazing ability.

[EvilAnagram]

What's this about Sacred Weapon not scaling? Not only does it actually scale (every time your Charisma increases), it's an ability that doesn't need to scale. AC is one of the things that doesn't get much of an increase as levels and CR go up, so +Charisma to attack rolls is always an amazing ability.

Once you have other options for gaining a magic weapon, it loses some of its use, but is still great. And if you had 18 CHA at level 1 and 20 CHA at level 12, it hasn't scaled much.

[DireSickFish]

I'
They don't give a huge power boost in and of themselves, but they are the best you can get. You cannot have more proficiencies in armor and weapons than the Paladin does.

It is the best armor/proficiencies that you can get true, but that does not itself make it awesome. You would need to downgrade abilities like the Pallys spell-casting then because he doesn't get the most or best spells. Minor abilities, even if they are the best you can get, should only be considered awesome if it's awesome to have them.

Being an elf gets you a martial weapon and the damage potential of simple weapons isn't -that- much lower. Fullplate is a better benefit as it's the best armor you can get with-ought an unarmored defense class ability(and those require high stats to be useful where plate only needs a str 15). You yourself note that a Dex pally is a viable build so the armor wouldn't be useful there. And if you are multiclassing into pally they -don't- get plate. So not all pallys will get it if they start a career somewhere else.

Thanks for writing the guide! I like it, just don't agree with everything in it.

[EvilAnagram]

It is the best armor/proficiencies that you can get true, but that does not itself make it awesome. You would need to downgrade abilities like the Pallys spell-casting then because he doesn't get the most or best spells. Minor abilities, even if they are the best you can get, should only be considered awesome if it's awesome to have them.
I have to compare a feature to the things that are comparable to it.

With Spellcasting, I have to judge it by how it allows the Paladin to act effectively in combat. With Proficiencies, I have to compare it to the proficiencies of other classes because that's all I have to go on.


Thanks for writing the guide! I like it, just don't agree with everything in it.
Ha! No problem. Thanks for posting!

[Strill]

Divine Sense: Useful if your campaign involves the undead or fiends. Give your party a heads-up when nasties are around. Not quite indispensible, but it can still be useful.This can also be used to determine the locations of invisible creatures.


Great Weapon Fighting is obviously for those who want to wield bigger swords.Why is GWF black? It should be blue at the least. It's a 16.7% increase to Smite damage if nothing else.


Devotion Oath Spells: All of these are quality spells. Most of them are solid buffs or healing spells, with a couple powerful damaging ones to boot.I disagree. Devotion has the fewest out-of-class Oath spells, and several of them are partly or mostly redundant.

Lesser Restoration: Your Lay on Hands already cures poison and disease. This is only useful for paralysis.

Beacon of Hope: Your aura provides immunity to fear and charm, which constitute 75% of WIS saves. This is outclassed by Aura of Vitality, which provides about as much healing as Beacon of Hope would, and lets you straight-up bring allies back to life rather than giving them advantage on death saves.

Flame Strike: Worse than Destructive Wave in almost every way. The only advantage is that it's a ranged spell...but why does that matter?


Heavily Armored: Almost all Paladins should consider this.The hell? Paladins already have heavy armor proficiency.


Martial Adept: Might be worth it if you multiclass into Battle Master. Otherwise, I'd skip it. 1d6 per short rest is just not worth giving up the feat.If you have a rogue in the party, you can give them a second sneak attack. Not the biggest advantage, but still not terrible.


Shield Master: Great if you use a shield!It's certainly good, but it has a lot of caveats. Huge or larger creatures are immune to shoves, the +2 to DEX saves only works on spells that only target you, which is almost none, and the last benefit requires you to make your save AND use a reaction. The gotchas keep it from greatness.


War Caster: Makes casting in combat much, much easier.This is bad for Paladins. All of the Paladin-specific spells are Verbal only, and for the rest you can just sheathe your sword and cast.

[EvilAnagram]

This can also be used to determine the locations of invisible creatures.
Yes, it can. Noted


Why is GWF black? It should be blue at the least. It's a 16.7% increase to Smite damage if nothing else.
I distrust rerolls, especially compared to flat increases.


I disagree. Devotion has the fewest out-of-class Oath spells, and several of them are partly or mostly redundant.

Lesser Restoration: Your Lay on Hands already cures poison and disease. This is only useful for paralysis.

Beacon of Hope: Your aura provides immunity to fear and charm, which constitute 75% of WIS saves. This is outclassed by Aura of Vitality, which provides about as much healing as Beacon of Hope would, and lets you straight-up bring allies back to life rather than giving them advantage on death saves.

Flame Strike: Worse than Destructive Wave in almost every way. The only advantage is that it's a ranged spell...but why does that matter?
Honestly, I need to look through spells, and I won't be able to for a little while. I liked the spells I saw, though I do agree that some slowly lose importance as you level.


The hell? Paladins already have heavy armor proficiency.
I switched up the two Heavy Armor feats. Nice catch!


If you have a rogue in the party, you can give them a second sneak attack. Not the biggest advantage, but still not terrible.
That's what black means: Not bad, but nothing special. Martial Adept isn't bad, and you shouldn't write it off, but it isn't great.


It's certainly good, but it has a lot of caveats. Huge or larger creatures are immune to shoves, the +2 to DEX saves only works on spells that only target you, which is almost none, and the last benefit requires you to make your save AND use a reaction. The gotchas keep it from greatness.
Excellent points!


This is bad for Paladins. All of the Paladin-specific spells are Verbal only, and for the rest you can just sheathe your sword and cast.
Sheathing your sword keeps you from making opportunity attacks. Keeping it drawn is important for a tank. War Caster is helpful.

[Cambrian]

If you meant the Hill Dwarf, I thought about it and decided to do just that.

And you're welcome!Oops sure did.

Looking forward to it when it's all finished.

[Gnomes2169]

You mixed up Heavy Armor Master and Heavily Armored. Other than that, looks good!

[Yagyujubei]

I would argue that warlock is sky blue as an MC choice. it also shares spellcasting synergy and a 2 level dip gets you 2 of the incredibly useful invocations as well as short rest slots to use for smites

[Demonicattorney]

I dont actually think a two-level dip in warlock is ever very good. You might gain a couple of encounter spell slots, but you will lose daily spell slots, which will be higher level. Also the Paladin is chalk full of class features, and I'm not sure its worth getting Aura of Protection, or Courage a few levels late. Seems like 3 levels of Battlemaster nets you extra damage with added benefits 4x a short rest, Second Wind, Action Surge, a second Fighting style, and can reasonably be explained to your DM as to why you are multi-classing.

[Suichimo]

I dont actually think a two-level dip in warlock is ever very good. You might gain a couple of encounter spell slots, but you will lose daily spell slots, which will be higher level. Also the Paladin is chalk full of class features, and I'm not sure its worth getting Aura of Protection, or Courage a few levels late. Seems like 3 levels of Battlemaster nets you extra damage with added benefits 4x a short rest, Second Wind, Action Surge, a second Fighting style, and can reasonably be explained to your DM as to why you are multi-classing.

It gives the Paladin the one thing it is missing, though. Range. Eldritch Blast+Agonizing Blast is the best ranged attack a Paladin could ask for, and you can improve it with a 10' shove or doubling its range.

You are actively discouraged from DEX ranged thanks to heavy armor and Aura of Warding. STR ranged isn't really ranged, it is just melee at a distance. And neither of them work with your Smites.

I agree with a sky blue rating.

[MeeposFire]

Tome Warlock 3 is also the best way to make an all cha based paladin (cha to melee via shillelagh, cha to ranged via EB, and cha to saves...) however this is probably a late game only build since I have a feeling that waiting extra levels for more attacks or for cha to attack and damage would be too annoying for most if starting at 1st level.

[Objulen]

Since the slot level for Warlocks is determined only by the Warlock's level, it's only worth if you take get high enough for level 4 spell slots to max out your Smite damage. Otherwise, you're better off taking levels of Sorcerer or Bard, which will pool with your Paladin levels to determine total spell slots.

[EvilAnagram]

Okay, so far I've seen four viable, solid multiclass builds for Pally Warlock. It's officially sky-blue.

[Ferrin33]

Okay, so far I've seen four viable, solid multiclass builds for Pally Warlock. It's officially sky-blue.

Paladin/Ranger; Three levels gives you horde breaker and another fighting style, as well as access to Hunter's Mark without being a paladin of vengeance. I think horde breaker makes it worth the things you give up but I wouldn't go higher than that. Put it at great for three levels, and red beyond that in my opinion.

Paladin/Rogue; I don't see why you gave it two colors, it should be pretty obvious it's meant to be used as a Dexterity paladin. I have to add that even as a strength based paladin rogue levels are quite powerful, sneak attack with allies(or while mounted!), expertise, Cunning Action and Uncanny Dodge are all spectacular abilities even without maxing dexterity. It's not Great as strength but it's Average or Good at least.

Paladin/Sorcerer; In my opinion this is actually really good because of the difference in spells the classes have, they make for a more well-rounded spell list. It's also good to note that Quickened Spell is an absolutely amazing ability for a Gish. There's many ways to build this, with Paladin6 as a starting point and adding sorcerer levels as you go. There are a lot of decent breakpoints for either class so it doesn't even matter to much at which points you cut it off, although at least 3-5 sorcerer levels are recommended. I'd put this at great over good.

[EvilAnagram]

Paladin/Ranger; Three levels gives you horde breaker and another fighting style, as well as access to Hunter's Mark without being a paladin of vengeance. I think horde breaker makes it worth the things you give up but I wouldn't go higher than that. Put it at great for three levels, and red beyond that in my opinion.
Horde Breaker isn't worth any Paladin levels at all, in my opinion. I personally wouldn't choose it over any of the other Hunter options at that level, and I certainly wouldn't delay getting great Paladin powers for it.

You're right about getting Hunter's Mark, but it's not worth the levels you lose. If you want Hunter's Mark, be an Avenger. Otherwise, you may have to comfort yourself with Improved Divine Smite in a few more levels. Keep in mind, I didn't make Rangers Red. A Ranger multiclass offers some things, but it's generally not worth it.


Paladin/Rogue; I don't see why you gave it two colors, it should be pretty obvious it's meant to be used as a Dexterity paladin. I have to add that even as a strength based paladin rogue levels are quite powerful, sneak attack with allies(or while mounted!), expertise, Cunning Action and Uncanny Dodge are all spectacular abilities even without maxing dexterity. It's not Great as strength but it's Average or Good at least.
Good points. Thanks!


Paladin/Sorcerer; In my opinion this is actually really good because of the difference in spells the classes have, they make for a more well-rounded spell list. It's also good to note that Quickened Spell is an absolutely amazing ability for a Gish. There's many ways to build this, with Paladin6 as a starting point and adding sorcerer levels as you go. There are a lot of decent breakpoints for either class so it doesn't even matter to much at which points you cut it off, although at least 3-5 sorcerer levels are recommended. I'd put this at great over good.
It is really good, which is why it's blue. There are better Gish options, though, so it's not sky-blue.

[Ferrin33]

Horde Breaker isn't worth any Paladin levels at all, in my opinion. I personally wouldn't choose it over any of the other Hunter options at that level, and I certainly wouldn't delay getting great Paladin powers for it.

You're right about getting Hunter's Mark, but it's not worth the levels you lose. If you want Hunter's Mark, be an Avenger. Otherwise, you may have to comfort yourself with Improved Divine Smite in a few more levels. Keep in mind, I didn't make Rangers Red. A Ranger multiclass offers some things, but it's generally not worth it.

I would like to hear other people's opinion on this as well.




It is really good, which is why it's blue. There are better Gish options, though, so it's not sky-blue.

Which one's are better then as multiclass options, and for what reasons? The metamagic and sorcery points associated with it really pulls out ahead if not at least equal with the other options.

[EvilAnagram]

Which one's are better then as multiclass options, and for what reasons? The metamagic and sorcery points associated with it really pulls out ahead if not at least equal with the other options.
I can take a swing at this. There are two reasons to multiclass. First, to min/max some aspect of your character. Taking classes in rogue or fighter, for example, increases your ability to damage your opponent with physical attacks by quite a bit. Paladins are already good at this, but they can get excellent, immediate boosts by multiclassing.

Another reason to multiclass is to round out your character by giving them access to things they did not have access to before. A Paladin who takes spellcaster levels is doing this.

However, multiclassing is usually most effective when it's a quick dip that gets you what you need. If I have to take eight levels in Sorcerer to be effective, I'm losing out on a lot of Paladin features to be an okay sorcerer. You can be a kind of combined class, but you usually won't be as good at whatever it is you specialize in as you would be had you not multiclassed.

Sorcerers are great, thanks to metamagic. They have solid spell lists and can easily be made into great blasters. However, two levels of Warlock net you the most damaging cantrip in the game, Pact Magic that regenerates slots on a short rest, and access to excellent invocations that can give you passive bonuses without using spell slots. Warlocks are simply better when it comes to giving a Paladin that extra ranged oomph.

When it comes to spells that are more utility-oriented, Bards have a lot more utility options than Sorcerers do.

If I were building a pure caster, I would pick a Sorcerer over just about any other class. However, as a multiclass option, I think that both Bard and Warlock offer better boosts in fewer levels.

However, a one level dip in both Sorcerer and Warlock would give you both Quickened Spell and Eldritch Blast with the Agonizing Blast incantation, which might be the best option overall. But having that many different classes seems silly.

[Xetheral]

Horde Breaker isn't worth any Paladin levels at all, in my opinion. I personally wouldn't choose it over any of the other Hunter options at that level, and I certainly wouldn't delay getting great Paladin powers for it. I would like to hear other people's opinion on this as well.I would like to hear other people's opinion on this as well.


Horde Breaker is one of the only ways to get an additional attack that doesn't require a bonus action and that stacks with Extra Attack. This makes it extremely appealing to almost any martial build (although possibly still not worth three levels of Ranger). Additionally, Paladin is one of the best-positioned classes to take advantage of the Horde Breaker attack, because Divine Smite isn't limited to once per round.

__________

Speaking of Divine Smite not being limited to once per round... I'd suggest adding something to the multiclass section about the immense appeal of dipping Paladin 2 to non-paladin Gish builds. Divine Smite is an inferior use of most low-to-mid level spells, but the ability to tap some of the power represented by those spells without using an action bends the strictly-enforced action economy of 5e more strongly than possibly any other ability.

[EvilAnagram]

I just don't consider giving up Paladin levels (and therefore Paladin spells and spell slots I can Smite with, not to mention missing out on class features) in order to occasionally get an extra attack that will never help me against a solo creature to be a remotely equitable exchange. Especially when the other Hunter features at that level are much more beneficial.

I'll consider the multiclass addition.

[Ferrin33]

I just don't consider giving up Paladin levels (and therefore Paladin spells and spell slots I can Smite with, not to mention missing out on class features) in order to occasionally get an extra attack that will never help me against a solo creature to be a remotely equitable exchange. Especially when the other Hunter features at that level are much more beneficial.

I'll consider the multiclass addition.

The game does not revolve around one vs one combat. Horde Breaker is amazing against multiple enemies, absolute gold.

[Xetheral]

I just don't consider giving up Paladin levels (and therefore Paladin spells and spell slots I can Smite with, not to mention missing out on class features) in order to occasionally get an extra attack that will never help me against a solo creature to be a remotely equitable exchange. Especially when the other Hunter features at that level are much more beneficial.

Fair enough. Horde Breaker is good (personally I see it as far and away better than the other hunter choices, but I know I'm in the minority), but given how little Ranger gets in its first three levels grabbing it represents a huge sacrifice. Note though, that Ranger gives equivalent spell progression to Paladin, so while you're missing out on Paladin spells you're not missing out on slots to smite with.

[DireSickFish]

The game does not revolve around one vs one combat. Horde Breaker is amazing against multiple enemies, absolute gold.

No but one of the first thing a player learns as far as tactics is that killing one enemy at a time is more effective than spreading the damage out to multiple enemies. Hoard breaker is cool, and nice against mooks but 3 ranger lvls is a huge investment for such a minor benefit. Pally is also one of the best int he game at piling on damage to a single foe with his Smite class feature and Hoard breaker is the antithesis to that.

I'm not saying Multiclass Ranger is always terrible and no one should ever do it, but it isn't a huge power spike thus is not a "good" or "amazing" option.

[Strill]

Horde Breaker isn't worth any Paladin levels at all, in my opinion. I personally wouldn't choose it over any of the other Hunter options at that level, and I certainly wouldn't delay getting great Paladin powers for it.

You're right about getting Hunter's Mark, but it's not worth the levels you lose. If you want Hunter's Mark, be an Avenger. Otherwise, you may have to comfort yourself with Improved Divine Smite in a few more levels. Keep in mind, I didn't make Rangers Red. A Ranger multiclass offers some things, but it's generally not worth it.I disagree. Hunter's Mark isn't very good because you already have a spell that gives you +1d4 damage while costing a bonus action. Horde Breaker, on the other hand, is amazing once you've gotten Improved Divine Smite. It's probably the best way to boost your melee damage next to the Haste spell.

[EvilAnagram]

I disagree. Hunter's Mark isn't very good because you already have a spell that gives you +1d4 damage while costing a bonus action. Horde Breaker, on the other hand, is amazing once you've gotten Improved Divine Smite. It's probably the best way to boost your melee damage next to the Haste spell.

In play, in my experience, it is rare for Horde Breaker to come into play, and I think it's rarity would absolutely negate its being worth three Ranger levels. Unless your character makes a habit of being completely surrounded, it won't come into play very much.

I personally find Hunter's Mark to be very useful. It might not be worth two Ranger levels, but it's a decent power.

[Strill]

In play, in my experience, it is rare for Horde Breaker to come into play, and I think it's rarity would absolutely negate its being worth three Ranger levels. Unless your character makes a habit of being completely surrounded, it won't come into play very much.How many enemies does your group generally fight in an encounter?


I personally find Hunter's Mark to be very useful. It might not be worth two Ranger levels, but it's a decent power.

It's not that Hunter's Mark isn't useful, it's that you already have an ability that does much the same thing.

[EvilAnagram]

How many enemies does your group generally fight in an encounter?

How often do all the enemies cluster around one combatant?

[Strill]

How often do all the enemies cluster around one combatant? Pretty often if that one combatant rushes out in the middle. You only need two enemies in range regardless.

[EvilAnagram]

Pretty often if that one combatant rushes out in the middle. You only need two enemies in range regardless.

Not in my experience, especially in a game in which many creatures die in one hit.

[Dralnu]

Man, it's hard for me to choose between Devotion and Vengeance. From Devotion, I love Sacred Weapon, but dislike that it takes an action to activate. If you had the opportunity to swing that turn, the activation only becomes worth it after like 3+ more rounds, so that's pretty lame. Turn the Unholy is the best though and the other abilities are all great. From Vengeance, I understand the immense value that comes from combat advantage on demand, but it's only one enemy. Hunter's Mark is a small upgrade from Divine Favor, 1d6 instead of 1d4. The rest is good, but I like the Devotion stuff more.

Argh, decisions! I'm glad that it's such a tough choice though. Good balance! I'm thinking Vengeance is slightly better only if Sacred Weapon's action activation really hampers it.

[Abithrios]

I can take a swing at this. There are two reasons to multiclass. First, to min/max some aspect of your character. Taking classes in rogue or fighter, for example, increases your ability to damage your opponent with physical attacks by quite a bit. Paladins are already good at this, but they can get excellent, immediate boosts by multiclassing.

Another reason to multiclass is to round out your character by giving them access to things they did not have access to before. A Paladin who takes spellcaster levels is doing this.

However, multiclassing is usually most effective when it's a quick dip that gets you what you need. If I have to take eight levels in Sorcerer to be effective, I'm losing out on a lot of Paladin features to be an okay sorcerer. You can be a kind of combined class, but you usually won't be as good at whatever it is you specialize in as you would be had you not multiclassed.

Sorcerers are great, thanks to metamagic. They have solid spell lists and can easily be made into great blasters. However, two levels of Warlock net you the most damaging cantrip in the game, Pact Magic that regenerates slots on a short rest, and access to excellent invocations that can give you passive bonuses without using spell slots. Warlocks are simply better when it comes to giving a Paladin that extra ranged oomph.

When it comes to spells that are more utility-oriented, Bards have a lot more utility options than Sorcerers do.

If I were building a pure caster, I would pick a Sorcerer over just about any other class. However, as a multiclass option, I think that both Bard and Warlock offer better boosts in fewer levels.

However, a one level dip in both Sorcerer and Warlock would give you both Quickened Spell and Eldritch Blast with the Agonizing Blast incantation, which might be the best option overall. But having that many different classes seems silly.

If you take levels in a full spellcasting class, you move faster down the multiclass table of spell slots. This could mean more and stronger smites. The biggest problem I see is if it prevents you from getting improved divine smite.



Okay, so far I've seen four viable, solid multiclass builds for Pally Warlock. It's officially sky-blue.

I would love to see these. I have an idea floating around in my head of a paladin/warlock with warlock powers granted by a powerful celestial. The mechanics of a fiend patron look like they would work very well for that purpose as written for at least a few levels (the level 14 fiend patron ability is irrelevant if you do not plan to go that deep).

[Yagyujubei]

well, a 2 level dip into warlock as paladin gets you the following synergistic stuff:

Eldritch blast + Agonizing blast - the best ranged damage a paladin could ask for that scales incredibly well

another invocation - many good utility choices here. devils sight give 120ft darkvision in normal and magical darkness. repelling blast adds 10ft knockback to your eldritch blast (max @ 40 ft if all blasts hit)

spell goodness - Hex and armor of agathys are among the best level 1 spells in the game esp. AoA which a pally will LOVE, and 2 short rest spell slots can be good for having more healing access, or just for any of your best low levels.

1st lvl patron feature - some great stuff here. a short rest AoE fear, telepethy, THP on kill.

not to mention if you wanna go the polearm/sentinel route, adding warcaster and Eldritch blast to that is downright insane.

[Demonicattorney]

not to mention if you wanna go the polearm/sentinel route, adding warcaster and Eldritch blast to that is downright insane.

This does not work. Has been confirmed by Devs not to work. Also, is thematically dumb. Also, not to be too much of a purist, but Paladins of any variety probably shouldn't be warlocked with Fiends or Cthulhu. It kindof makes sense that an Ancients Paladin might have a relationship with a Fey God, but that is the only iteration that makes any sense. They loosened Paladin alignments, so that you can play a LN avenger style or CG Fey Style, not obliterated them. All iterations of Paladin serve Justice first, some iteration of a good or lawful god, second. If you want to play an evil fighter with spells, play an Eldritch Knight or wait for the Blackguard, dont sully the Paladin with this sold my soul for power Warlock BS multiclass, because their is CHA synergy between the classes.

[Abithrios]

This does not work. Has been confirmed by Devs not to work. Also, is thematically dumb. Also, not to be too much of a purist, but Paladins of any variety probably shouldn't be warlocked with Fiends or Cthulhu. It kindof makes sense that an Ancients Paladin might have a relationship with a Fey God, but that is the only iteration that makes any sense. They loosened Paladin alignments, so that you can play a LN avenger style or CG Fey Style, not obliterated them. All iterations of Paladin serve Justice first, some iteration of a good or lawful god, second. If you want to play an evil fighter with spells, play an Eldritch Knight or wait for the Blackguard, dont sully the Paladin with this sold my soul for power Warlock BS multiclass, because their is CHA synergy between the classes.

One of the paladin oaths is vengeance. That is a word I associate with LN at best and in literature is often associated with mad and ultimately self destructive quests and Men who would see the world burn if their foe burned with it.

[Strill]

One of the paladin oaths is vengeance. That is a word I associate with LN at best and in literature is often associated with mad and ultimately self destructive quests and Men who would see the world burn if their foe burned with it.

That's not what the Vengeance oath says. It says that once you swear vengeance upon something, you must take responsibility for any harm it does before you are able to vanquish it.

Vengeance may be self-destructive, but it's not obsessed with destroying the world to protect it.

[Demonicattorney]

One of the paladin oaths is vengeance. That is a word I associate with LN at best and in literature is often associated with mad and ultimately self destructive quests and Men who would see the world burn if their foe burned with it.

That isn't a Paladin. Oath of Vengeance specifically states that your goal is to set right what was wrong. You are trying to revert the world to what it once was, and punish evil for changing it. It requires that you serve the greater good, but cares less about the means. Literally the definition of LN though I might allow a LG Vengeance Paladin, but it definitely isn't CN,TN, nor any evil alignment.

Paladins are still Paladins, you still have to serve justice, you still have to serve good, though some oaths give some leeway about the method.

[Rummy]

well, a 2 level dip into warlock as paladin gets you the following synergistic stuff:

Eldritch blast + Agonizing blast - the best ranged damage a paladin could ask for that scales incredibly well

another invocation - many good utility choices here. devils sight give 120ft darkvision in normal and magical darkness. repelling blast adds 10ft knockback to your eldritch blast (max @ 40 ft if all blasts hit)

spell goodness - Hex and armor of agathys are among the best level 1 spells in the game esp. AoA which a pally will LOVE, and 2 short rest spell slots can be good for having more healing access, or just for any of your best low levels.

1st lvl patron feature - some great stuff here. a short rest AoE fear, telepethy, THP on kill.

not to mention if you wanna go the polearm/sentinel route, adding warcaster and Eldritch blast to that is downright insane.

I second the awesomeness of warlock pally. Please note that Mearls has stated on Twitter that the extra reaction attack from Polearm Master must use the Polearm, so no Eldritch Blast.

[Yagyujubei]

This does not work. Has been confirmed by Devs not to work. Also, is thematically dumb. Also, not to be too much of a purist, but Paladins of any variety probably shouldn't be warlocked with Fiends or Cthulhu. It kindof makes sense that an Ancients Paladin might have a relationship with a Fey God, but that is the only iteration that makes any sense. They loosened Paladin alignments, so that you can play a LN avenger style or CG Fey Style, not obliterated them. All iterations of Paladin serve Justice first, some iteration of a good or lawful god, second. If you want to play an evil fighter with spells, play an Eldritch Knight or wait for the Blackguard, dont sully the Paladin with this sold my soul for power Warlock BS multiclass, because their is CHA synergy between the classes.

it would take zero effort to re-flavor fiend into Solar and be fine. fiendish vigor? now you're angelic vigor. problem solved.

also, even if the polearm/sentinel/EB combo doesnt work, just rolling sentinel/warcaster would still get you EB on your OA's which is still totally awesome. oh, also your opinion is thematically dumb. don't tell me how to play my make believe game thx.

EDIT: and I wasn't even assuming you could EB on the extra atk action from polearm master, the feat combo just lets you throw out OA's like a boss, and an OA with agonizing EB is REALLY potent.

[Demonicattorney]

it would take zero effort to re-flavor fiend into Solar and be fine. fiendish vigor? now you're angelic vigor. problem solved.

also, even if the polearm/sentinel/EB combo doesnt work, just rolling sentinel/warcaster would still get you EB on your OA's which is still totally awesome. oh, also your opinion is thematically dumb. don't tell me how to play my make believe game thx.

EDIT: and I wasn't even assuming you could EB on the extra atk action from polearm master, the feat combo just lets you throw out OA's like a boss, and an OA with agonizing EB is REALLY potent.

So you think having Fireball, Wall of Fire, is fitting with a celestial?, You think that gaining temp HP for killing people is a celestial attribute? Everything about the Fiend pact screams fire/death/evil. How about hurl through hell?, where creatures take psychic damage because the experience is so traumatic... the truth is that celestials don't require you to sell yourself into slavery in order to tap their power, they just require you to do good or worship them. You can rename a bunch of abilities, but it doesn't reflavor them.

Also don't pretend like you weren't trying to say that Warcaster let you Eldritch Blast on your OA from Polearm, that is just revisionist.

Suffice it to say I don't like the flavor of Paladin/Warlocks, I think people only think it is cool because the classes have some synergy, not for any RP reason. I also think that outside of level 15+ builds, almost every Paladin will be worse multiclassing with Warlock rather than just getting their abilities on time.

[Ferrin33]

So you think having Fireball, Wall of Fire, is fitting with a celestial?, You think that gaining temp HP for killing people is a celestial attribute? Everything about the Fiend pact screams fire/death/evil. How about hurl through hell?, where creatures take psychic damage because the experience is so traumatic... the truth is that celestials don't require you to sell yourself into slavery in order to tap their power, they just require you to do good or worship them. You can rename a bunch of abilities, but it doesn't reflavor them.

Also don't pretend like you weren't trying to say that Warcaster let you Eldritch Blast on your OA from Polearm, that is just revisionist.

Suffice it to say I don't like the flavor of Paladin/Warlocks, I think people only think it is cool because the classes have some synergy, not for any RP reason. I also think that outside of level 15+ builds, almost every Paladin will be worse multiclassing with Warlock rather than just getting their abilities on time.

Just because you don't like a character concept doesn't mean no one else does, and you straight up say those people don't actually like it but are just doing it for the mechanics? That is extremely rude.

Forging a pact with a fiend out of desperation as a paladin works just fine, as do any number of justifications for it. Oath of the Ancients works fine with both Archfey and the Great Old One without thinking to much even.

Fireball and wall of fire... Did you read the Solar entry? Its' legendary actions include a very fiery ability and the Planetar has Flame Strike in his spells per day. Only Stinking Cloud has the wrong flavor in the spell list. Dark One's Blessing; striking down evil(enemies) gives you a blessing. Dark One's Own Luck; just change the name and it's fine, same for Fiendish Resilience. Hurl Through Hell; instead of going through hell the enemy is faced with his past sins in a Scrooge-like scenario.

[Demonicattorney]

I do think people are doing it for mechanical reasons. I do think it is very hard to justify. I don't think selling your soul for power is a very Paladin-like thing to do. I don't think a Paladin of Ancients would worship or deal with Cthulhu or That Which Lurks, or any Fiend.

Exactly one of the three angels has a Flamestrike spell-like ability, in which a pillar of divine fire (half radiant/half fire) hits players. That is the only celestial fire ability, so no, I don't view Fireball (Balors and Pit Fiends have this spell though) or Wall of Fire as appropriate.

Moreover, gaining temporary HP by killing creature and feeding off their life force, doens't sound very "Good" to me, no matter how you try to reflavor it.

My posts reflect how I and many other DMs will feel about that particular class combination, you might not agree, but it bears mentioning because other players will run into the issue.

[EvilAnagram]

So you think having Fireball, Wall of Fire, is fitting with a celestial?
Um... yes? Remember the Flame of Anor? The flaming sword that guards the entrance to paradise? The balls of fire that smote Sodom and Gamora?



Suffice it to say I don't like the flavor of Paladin/Warlocks, I think people only think it is cool because the classes have some synergy, not for any RP reason. I also think that outside of level 15+ builds, almost every Paladin will be worse multiclassing with Warlock rather than just getting their abilities on time.

I think the Fey Pact/Oath of Ancients has some good synergy, but overall you're right. Paladins follow a path of discipline and self-restraint, while Warlocks seek quick paths to power.

[Yagyujubei]

yeah man, ever heard of holy fire? angels use fire too just like fiends do.

and tell me this isn't legit rp. A paladin finds that the devotion of his order is lacking conviction in his opinion. they aren't willing to do what it takes to keep the realm truly safe, he leaves his order to do the things that are necessary as a oath of vengeance paladin, and is willing to make a path with a particularly wrathful solar to get it done. we're talking old testament here, real wrath of god type stuff, fire and brimstone coming down from the skies, rivers and seas boiling! (rimshot)

as a truly convicted oath of vengeance paladin, he would 100% believe that any life he takes was necessary and anyone he kills is an infidel or evil, furthering his own conviction that what he is doing is the right thing and bolstering his resolve (thp). the spells burning hands and command could EASILY be considered things that a solar would give you, and thats all you have to justify as RP, because it's just a 2 level dip.

there is NOONE who could seriously be dissatisfied with that RP backstory for a character. paladin to 3 to take oath of vengeance, then 2 levels in warlock making a pack with a solar, then finishing off paladin with newfound resolve.

EDIT: And about EB proccing of the bonus attack from polearm master, I seriously wasn't including that and hadn't even considered it. I haven't thought about it much since my two characters right now are a monk/warlock and a ranger/bard. I haven't even really gotten into theory crafting on paladin, and generally don't like the idea of wielding polearms in combat, im more of a DEX style kinda guy. it's strong even without including that.

[Demonicattorney]

So if we reflavor what Angels do in D&D, reflavor the Pact of the Fiend, and than pick a very specific back story than a certain type of Paladin can take up to 2 levels of Warlock. Sure. I agree.

BTW the flame of Anor refers to the Sun, or more specifically the light of the Sun. That is radiant, holy fire is also radiant damage, which Tolkien referred to as "white flame", declaring the "Red Fire cannot come this way". Tolkien literally references the opposite of what you are saying.

[Yagyujubei]

So if we reflavor what Angels do in D&D, reflavor the Pact of the Fiend, and than pick a very specific back story than a certain type of Paladin can take up to 2 levels of Warlock. Sure. I agree.

BTW the flame of Anor refers to the Sun, or more specifically the light of the Sun. That is radiant, holy fire is also radiant damage, which Tolkien referred to as "white flame", declaring the "Red Fire cannot come this way". Tolkien literally references the opposite of what you are saying.

oh there's a book somewhere that describes 100% of what every single celestial being can do in DnD? and also, I would HOPE that any character you play has a very specific back story, because otherwise just play a video game that crates the characters for you.

[Demonicattorney]

oh there's a book somewhere that describes 100% of what every single celestial being can do in DnD? and also, I would HOPE that any character you play has a very specific back story, because otherwise just play a video game that crates the characters for you.

I don't think you understand what I am saying. I am saying that not every Paladin wants to be some emo Batman wannabe that is mad at his Church elders for not being harsh enough with Infidels. That is a specific story that might let you get into Warlock, but very few players will want to play that story, or something similar. When making a character guide, it might be best not to make Warlock a light blue choice, because their are role-playing issues with that combination. If your DM is willing to change around the Warlock pacts, or has an expansive idea of what celestials do, than fine, play what you want, but as written in 5E, or how Paladins were treated in previous editions, it will cause problems.

[Ferrin33]

I don't think you understand what I am saying. I am saying that not every Paladin wants to be some emo Batman wannabe that is mad at his Church elders for not being harsh enough with Infidels. That is a specific story that might let you get into Warlock, but very few players will want to play that story, or something similar. When making a character guide, it might be best not to make Warlock a light blue choice, because their are role-playing issues with that combination. If your DM is willing to change around the Warlock pacts, or has an expansive idea of what celestials do, than fine, play what you want, but as written in 5E, or how Paladins were treated in previous editions, it will cause problems.

Archfey Pact + Oath of (Any)
(Any) Pact + Oath of Vengeance

No problems for the above, and that allows for a lot of options for character concepts without reflavoring a single thing.

[Yagyujubei]

you could also easily justify pact of the old ones by making a backstory something like you were meant to be sacrificed for a ritual as a child, escaped halfway through, but have been plagued by horrible dreams since then, and you turned to the church to find an answer to rid yourself of these influences. flavor it that every time you use one of the power you lose a tiny bit of your sanity, and if you keep relying on the old one you will eventually be driven mad.


I guess my main point is that in a system like DnD you can make anything possible with a bit of imagination and this guy saying it's "dumb" to make your own stories is going against everything DnD represents in my opinion. theres no character combination you cant justify, because there are infinite reasons for any given person to act the way they do.

[DireSickFish]

Fiendish pact into Pally makes a lot of sense, you sold your soul not knowing the price. Now you are striving to make up for what you did. Lore aint to hard to rework, especially with all of the new variants and independence from alignment.

[Demonicattorney]

There is no greater evil in D&D than Fiends. They are "Evil Incarnate". No Paladin will sell their soul to or do service for a Fiend. Even Oath of Vengeance's very loose moral restrictions will not permit that because their is no greater evil. Nor would any Paladin agree to serve Cthulhu or He Who Lurks. They are the examples listed in the PHB as Ancient Ones. Its doubtful a Paladin will agree to serve Mab or any other high-ranking unseelie fey, though as I said before perhaps Titania or another seelie fey would be appropriate for an Oath of Ancients Paladin (given that you must celebrate life and all that). I don't think a lawful oath of devotion Paladin, or a Oath of Vengeance Paladin is gonna be down for running errands for a chaotic fey demi-god.

A pact is an agreement for service, power in exchange for doing stuff for your patron."The warlock learns and grows in power,
at the cost o f occasional services performed on the patron's behalf." So now you need to work for the devil, or Cthulhu or whatever. Moreover the motivations are wrong; "Warlocks are driven by insatiable need for knowledge and power", Paladins especially oath of vengeance are about justice, not personal power, and definitely not knowledge.

Finally, it literally states that only a Paladin oath binds a Paladin, your first loyalty is to the cause of righteousness,not to crown and country. How does that cope with you being owned and controlled by a pact to obey a non-good creature? Being a Paladin and being a Warlock are pretty much the opposites of each other, what happens when your patron and righteousness conflict?

There is a reason why Warlock shouldn't be a cyan entry.

[Demonicattorney]

Fiendish pact into Pally makes a lot of sense, you sold your soul not knowing the price. Now you are striving to make up for what you did. Lore aint to hard to rework, especially with all of the new variants and independence from alignment.

You still have to work for the devil. Or do you think those powers were yours? Anyone can be an ex-warlock Paladin, I just dont see how you can be a Paladin then take levels in Warlock.

[Yagyujubei]

You still have to work for the devil. Or do you think those powers were yours? Anyone can be an ex-warlock Paladin, I just dont see how you can be a Paladin then take levels in Warlock.

the other side of the coin though is a situation along the lines of you battling and coming to a draw against a demon and at some point in the process stealing some of its power. Again it would only really work ofr oath of vengeance, but turning your enemies own power against them is a common theme in fiction.

[Demonicattorney]

How exactly is that "making a pact" or "pact magic". The whole concept of the Warlock is about someone who makes a deal for power, all of these concepts are not that.

[DireSickFish]

You still have to work for the devil. Or do you think those powers were yours? Anyone can be an ex-warlock Paladin, I just dont see how you can be a Paladin then take levels in Warlock.

The powers are yours because they are given to you. Given to you in exchange for your service. Kind of like how Galactus has the Silver Surfer as his herald weilding the power cosmic. And yet he can subvert Galactisus will or outright turn against him. And if you arn't advancing in Warlock levls anymore you arn't "increasing in power" via your patron. Ghost rider also literally turned the devils powers against him. It's a rather common trope for a good guy to have bad powers and be working to subvert his power source.

You could also turn it on its head and hate celestials. Perhaps they (justly or unjustly) purged your town because there was some great evil there. Paladin of vengeance against all celestials. You can't tell me a person like that wouldn't turn to the greatest opposition of celestials for power. Evil Palladins are a possibility now in 5e.

Expand your horizons on what a class can and cannot do in this edition. There are a lot of interesting RP opportunities for you out there.

[Scirocco]

Pretty sure a Paladin of Asmodeus would be cool with making a Fiend pact. Tharizdun, Old One pact. The aforementioned Ancients Pally with Archfey.

Actually, Oath of the Ancients would work great for Old Ones with a Blue and Orange Morality reading of that particular oath (think Cenobite perception of what "heaven" is for a comparison).

[Demonicattorney]

Did anybody actually read the character entry for Paladin?
You must be committed to JUSTICE and RIGHTEOUSNESS.

"The most important aspect of a Paladin character is the nature of his HOLY quest". God, they let some lawful neutral Paladins in and suddenly "Evil" Paladins are apparently ok. Its a complete conflict with everything the archetype stands for. The PHB even strongly dissuades players from trying an evil Paladin because they conflict (although they did not go so far as an outright mechanical prohibition). Being a Paladin of Asmodeus is a contradiction, you cannot serve Justice and one of the most unjust beings at the same time.

Blue and Orange morality is stupid, it just a way of saying that a character does something with no framework that makes sense to people. It has no place in D&D where clear good and evil are defined.

Oath of Vengeance requires more than a hatred of a person. It requires you to "fight the greater evil", it would be hard to define celestials as evil at all, considering they are literally GOOD incarnate. If you don't like D&Ds stark alignment and morality system than you can dispense with it in your games, but guides shouldn't be written for houserules.

[Objulen]

A fiendish or great old one pact makes sense for an Oath of Vengeance Paladin. It's a terrible idea, icly, but vengeance at any price is the oath's theme.

Arch-fey are natural choices for the ancient oath, and you might be able to work out something feasible with an Elder god. Still, Elder gods are just less damaging than great old ones to humanity; there's nothing especially good about them, so it's still a better choice for oaths of vengeance.

[Ferrin33]

Did anybody actually read the character entry for Paladin?
You must be committed to JUSTICE and RIGHTEOUSNESS.

"The most important aspect of a Paladin character is the nature of his HOLY quest". God, they let some lawful neutral Paladins in and suddenly "Evil" Paladins are apparently ok. Its a complete conflict with everything the archetype stands for. The PHB even strongly dissuades players from trying an evil Paladin because they conflict (although they did not go so far as an outright mechanical prohibition). Being a Paladin of Asmodeus is a contradiction, you cannot serve Justice and one of the most unjust beings at the same time.

Blue and Orange morality is stupid, it just a way of saying that a character does something with no framework that makes sense to people. It has no place in D&D where clear good and evil are defined.

Oath of Vengeance requires more than a hatred of a person. It requires you to "fight the greater evil", it would be hard to define celestials as evil at all, considering they are literally GOOD incarnate. If you don't like D&Ds stark alignment and morality system than you can dispense with it in your games, but guides shouldn't be written for houserules.

Good and evil are not defined in D&D, they are arbitrarily decided upon for certain races to have a justification of killing them.

Justice is subjective, which by definition makes righteousness subjective. There is no objective morality even in a world with gods, they are merely enforcers of their own morality who arbitrarily decide what is good and evil. The paladin is a champion and follows his oath to the best of his ability but has to judge things as an individual. A Paladin of Devotion has to be honest, courageous, compassionate, honorable, and dutiful. None of these things exempts him from being allowed to make a pact to gain greater powers, depending on the nature of the pact. A pact with one devil to slay a thousand more, the greater evil. Ignorance, desperation, or even the willingness to do anything for power to fight what he perceives as a greater evil all clearly explain how a paladin might take up a pact with what most people see as the greatest evil. Again, it is subjective, the paladin might not think a fiend is the greatest evil but thinks eldritch horrors and their aberrations are, or the other way around. And these are just reasons why a paladin might bargain for power from the greatest evils in the game, for any other pact it becomes that much easier to find the link and justification to follow his oath while making a pact.

Some paladins might even swear their oath as part of a pact made with a good entity, tying it all up in one package.

[Demonicattorney]

Good and evil are not defined in D&D, they are arbitrarily decided upon for certain races to have a justification of killing them.

Justice is subjective, which by definition makes righteousness subjective. There is no objective morality even in a world with gods, they are merely enforcers of their own morality who arbitrarily decide what is good and evil. The paladin is a champion and follows his oath to the best of his ability but has to judge things as an individual. A Paladin of Devotion has to be honest, courageous, compassionate, honorable, and dutiful. None of these things exempts him from being allowed to make a pact to gain greater powers, depending on the nature of the pact. A pact with one devil to slay a thousand more, the greater evil. Ignorance, desperation, or even the willingness to do anything for power to fight what he perceives as a greater evil all clearly explain how a paladin might take up a pact with what most people see as the greatest evil. Again, it is subjective, the paladin might not think a fiend is the greatest evil but thinks eldritch horrors and their aberrations are, or the other way around. And these are just reasons why a paladin might bargain for power from the greatest evils in the game, for any other pact it becomes that much easier to find the link and justification to follow his oath while making a pact.

Some paladins might even swear their oath as part of a pact made with a good entity, tying it all up in one package.

That interpretation is literally against D&D cannon. Fiends are evil, they are not aligned with evil, they literally ARE team Evil. Player alignment is a way of discussing your character actions, but also assigning whose team on a cosmic struggle between good and evil you are on. Morality in D&D is objective. That is the lore, like it or not.

[Ferrin33]

That interpretation is literally against D&D cannon. Fiends are evil, they are not aligned with evil, they literally ARE team Evil. Player alignment is a way of discussing your character actions, but also assigning whose team on a cosmic struggle between good and evil you are on. Morality in D&D is objective. That is the lore, like it or not.

Which in this edition they're easing the leash on.

[Demonicattorney]

Which in this edition they're easing the leash on.

Where exactly are you getting that from? If anything they literally made things more clear. Look at many Paladin abilities, they literally target Fiends. Smite does additional damage to Fiends, the turn abilities of both Oath of Devotion and Ancients turn Fiends. The freakin Holy Avenger does more damage to Fiends. They avoided adding mechanical benefits to alignment like Smite Evil or Circle of Protection (law), and short-handed it to Fiends=Evil Undead=Evil. Objective Morality.

[Gnomes2169]

Where exactly are you getting that from? If anything they literally made things more clear. Look at many Paladin abilities, they literally target Fiends. Smite does additional damage to Fiends, the turn abilities of both Oath of Devotion and Ancients turn Fiends. The freakin Holy Avenger does more damage to Fiends. They avoided adding mechanical benefits to alignment like Smite Evil or Circle of Protection (law), and short-handed it to Fiends=Evil Undead=Evil. Objective Morality.

Hey, you know what isn't on any of these lists? Fey, old ones, elder gods, particularly powerful and ancient dragons/ abberations, etc etc, all of which can be patrons for a warlock... So if they aren't under the "objectively evil" tag (like undead and fiends are) then what exactly stops a paladin from making a pact with them? (Particularly a pact that gives them power to hunt undead and fiends)

[DireSickFish]

There is also a section in the front of the MM about the possibility of good green dragons and vampires. The Angels also don't lose much by going evil.

I agree that in D&D world good and evil are cosmic forces that can be objective instead of a list of "cultural norms". The class is just lest restrictive in this edition on having to be on one side or the other of that fight. The abilities lend themselves to the force of good, and an archtypical palladin would not be on a fiends side or else lose all of his abilities. There is more than 1 way to play a palladin in this edition now.

[Demonicattorney]

I don't think Paladins should be warlocks of an evil entity. Abberration gods are still evil, should still be prohibited. The listed greater god deities are nihilistic death gods, that focus on mind control and tentacle rape. Sounds very Paladin like.

I don't mind the Fey gods as much, I think a good or even a neutral fey god might be appropriate.

[Sir Jeff]

Is there any reason the simple compromise of adding "Be sure to talk to your DM regarding the specific RP consequences involved in a paladin/warlock build," doesn't solve the problem? It offers autonomy to individual playgroups and lets inexperienced players know that they can't just decide they're a paladin who drinks the blood of the innocent in service to some dark deity (not that this is necessarily a required action for warlocks).

Love the guide, EvilAnagram.

[Rhaegar14]

Solid guide thus far, though I'd like to see your evaluation of their spell list. I might argue that Mounted Combatant would be blue for Paladins, since they have very easy access to a mount as soon as they get second level spells.

EDIT: I'd also argue that the Oath of Devotion's Oath Spells do not deserve a light blue rating. While it's true that many of them are great spells, the vast majority are on the Paladin spell list by default and can be used by any Paladin.

[Demonicattorney]

Is there any reason the simple compromise of adding "Be sure to talk to your DM regarding the specific RP consequences involved in a paladin/warlock build," doesn't solve the problem? It offers autonomy to individual playgroups and lets inexperienced players know that they can't just decide they're a paladin who drinks the blood of the innocent in service to some dark deity (not that this is necessarily a required action for warlocks).

Love the guide, EvilAnagram.

Generally, I enjoy how Paladins are balanced in both 5e and Pathfinder. Being a Paladin closes off certain options because it forces you to do the right thing. A Paladin probably won't retreat when innocents are getting hurt, won't leave a party member behind, and will confront people that do evil, even when its not in their best interest. In return, Paladins are one, if not the most mechanically powerful classes in the game. They have the best defense, and some of the best offense, they get the best weapon. These advantages are balanced against your role-playing restrictions.

Warlock, likewise, comes with role-playing restrictions, (you are awesome, but are also somebody's errand boy), and your patron is likely evil, will likely tell you to do things that will hurt others, and undoubtedly self-serving. The role-playing restriction being that in order to keep your powers you might have to do something that ***** over yourself, the party, or the greater good. In return, Warlocks are awesome.

These two role-playing restrictions however, conflict. In most campaigns, without some serious homebrew you cannot be both a Paladin and a Warlock.

Yes, you can add the disclaimer, "its up to your DM", but that is true of every rule, it fails to show why this isn't a good choice. This edition has been incredibly nice about multi-classing and codes of conduct, they don't like saying the word "no", but if you read the "fluff" of both classes, what the designers are trying to tell you, you will see these options are incompatible.

Ultimately, it will almost always be more interesting to tell a story about a Paladin and a Warlock, rather than a Paladin/Warlock,

[Xetheral]

Is there any reason the simple compromise of adding "Be sure to talk to your DM regarding the specific RP consequences involved in a paladin/warlock build," doesn't solve the problem?

I like this solution. It sums up the controversy nicely.


In most campaigns, without some serious homebrew you cannot be both a Paladin and a Warlock.

I'd be surprised if that were true. Even if it is, I'd guess it be a very small majority at best. But since I doubt there is a good way to do a survey we'll never know for sure.

[Sir Jeff]

Generally, I enjoy how Paladins are balanced in both 5e and Pathfinder. Being a Paladin closes off certain options because it forces you to do the right thing. A Paladin probably won't retreat when innocents are getting hurt, won't leave a party member behind, and will confront people that do evil, even when its not in their best interest. In return, Paladins are one, if not the most mechanically powerful classes in the game. They have the best defense, and some of the best offense, they get the best weapon. These advantages are balanced against your role-playing restrictions.

Warlock, likewise, comes with role-playing restrictions, (you are awesome, but are also somebody's errand boy), and your patron is likely evil, will likely tell you to do things that will hurt others, and undoubtedly self-serving. The role-playing restriction being that in order to keep your powers you might have to do something that ***** over yourself, the party, or the greater good. In return, Warlocks are awesome.

These two role-playing restrictions however, conflict. In most campaigns, without some serious homebrew you cannot be both a Paladin and a Warlock.

This distinction might be oversimple. I don't believe that there is a typical warlock. For instance, from the Great Old One Patron tree, we see that "The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it." Nothing about that precludes a Paladin from access. From the Archfey: "Your patron is a lord or lady of the fey, a creature of legend who holds secrets that were forgotten before the mortal races were born. This being’s motivations are often inscrutable, and sometimes whimsical, and might involve a striving for greater magical power or the settling of age-old grudges." Again this is fine. The Paladin seeks the help of an unsavory character to advance the greater good. It involves roleplay, but so does any flavorful multi-class.

I think that you're right about the Fiend, and that making a pact with it would have serious consequences regarding roleplay and character inception. It might even mean the temporary loss of paladin or warlock abilities. But all of this is up to a specific DM, about whom we know nothing. So this disclaimer lets players know that they should consult their DM about her opinion on a paladin/warlock multi-class and move on from there (which, frankly, is how all character construction ought to go). There's no need to be any more specific; this is a very flexible game, and its players ought to be flexible as well.


Yes, you can add the disclaimer, "its up to your DM", but that is true of every rule, it fails to show why this isn't a good choice. This edition has been incredibly nice about multi-classing and codes of conduct, they don't like saying the word "no", but if you read the "fluff" of both classes, what the designers are trying to tell you, you will see these options are incompatible.

I don't think that there is a "God's-eye view" regarding the intent of the designers, though to say that paladin and warlock are incompatible is a stretch, as demonstrated by the various in-text and out-of-text examples offered by me and a number of other people. Also, the disclaimer may apply to every rule, but it does so to different degrees. It's up to your DM whether or not you can get seven extra attacks at level two, but not in the same way that it's up to your DM whether or not you can role for your stats or if you must use an array, or if your urchin rogue can have an alley-cat for a pet. This conversation is of the second type, and it should be left up to a player and their DM.


Ultimately, it will almost always be more interesting to tell a story about a Paladin and a Warlock, rather than a Paladin/Warlock,

But that's not your call to make, and it would be misleading to include such a statement in a guide. What is not misleading is to advise players to construct a character with input from their DM, especially in cases where thematic conflict might arise.

[Yagyujubei]

you are so caught up in semantics. When boiled down, the whole crux of the paladin as a class is that they're a warrior that fights for a god and channels said gods power to strengthen themselves.

you could just as easily be a paladin of Cyric as one of Illmater, now I know someone like you will be outraged saying "BUT BAD PALADINS ARE BLACK GUARDS THO" but seriously at the end of the day they're basically the same thing with slightly changed wording. Detect good instead of detect evil, unholy aura instead of divine aura. big fricken whoop.

[CodeRed]

There is a reason why Warlock shouldn't be a cyan entry.

Which is why on a wonderful and free forum like this, you're perfectly free to go make your own guide. If you don't think Warlock multiclass shouldn't be listed because of RP concerns, then in your guide, you can color it whatever color you choose.

As to RAW, which is all that matters for discussion between people who aren't playing in the same game under the same DM, there is nothing that says you can't be a Paladin/Warlock multiclass. Further, your insinuations regarding "emo-wannabes" is rather insulting. If you dislike the potential multiclass combo, don't play it or let it be played in your game if you DM. But to get on an online forum and say that no-one should ever play it because you don't like it is petty and childish.

[Yagyujubei]

A guide looks at the class interactions mechanically without taking RP into account, just looking at how the features of the class and it's paths stack up, and how the features of various MC option synergize with the tools you already have.

in that light warlock is absolutely Cyan as a paladin multiclass. after that it's up to each player/DM how they want to make their mechanical build work within a world/story.

[EvilAnagram]

Finally, it literally states that only a Paladin oath binds a Paladin, your first loyalty is to the cause of righteousness,not to crown and country. How does that cope with you being owned and controlled by a pact to obey a non-good creature? Being a Paladin and being a Warlock are pretty much the opposites of each other, what happens when your patron and righteousness conflict?

There is a reason why Warlock shouldn't be a cyan entry.

First, a pact does not necessitate your obedience to the pactholder. You enter an agreement and must stick to the terms of that agreement, or you may simply siphon off power from an incomprehensible being without its knowledge. You do not necessarily have to obey the creature you enter a pact with so long as you stick to the terms of your agreement.

Second, this guide is primarily here to judge classes by their mechanical benefits, not their roleplaying ones. You could probably roleplay a very conflicted Paladin who entered into a dark pact to save someone. This could be awesome if done right, the key words being "done right." It's not my job to nip RP ideas in the bud.


Solid guide thus far, though I'd like to see your evaluation of their spell list. I might argue that Mounted Combatant would be blue for Paladins, since they have very easy access to a mount as soon as they get second level spells.

EDIT: I'd also argue that the Oath of Devotion's Oath Spells do not deserve a light blue rating. While it's true that many of them are great spells, the vast majority are on the Paladin spell list by default and can be used by any Paladin.

Good points, both of them. I'll consider them.

[Oscredwin]

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

[EvilAnagram]

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

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

[Demonicattorney]

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

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

[Oscredwin]

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

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

[Sir Jeff]

EvilAnagram,

Very little I would change, pre-spellcasting.

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

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

[Strill]

EvilAnagram,

Very little I would change, pre-spellcasting.

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

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

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

[Ferrin33]

EvilAnagram,

Very little I would change, pre-spellcasting.

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

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

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

[EvilAnagram]

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

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

[MadBear]

Just wanted to say, great guide!

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

[EvilAnagram]

Just wanted to say, great guide!

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

Thanks! :smallbiggrin:

[Strill]

Branding Smite: Like Thunderous Smite, but it scales and reveals invisible creatures. Not bad, but it's a bit silly to make a spell to reveal invisible creatures that depends on hitting with a melee attack.It's actually not. Remember you can use Divine Sense to locate invisible creatures. You'll be attacking with disadvantage, but there are ways to fix that.


Lesser Restoration**: Very nice spell, and the Oath of Devotion Paladin doesn't need to prepare it.I don't agree. You can already heal poison and disease with Lay on Hands. That leaves Blinded, Deafened, and Paralyzed. I honestly don't know if it's worth it to cure those things if it costs a 2nd-level spell slot, AND your action. That's a pretty steep cost, and those things tend to be cured on their own anyway.


Find Steed: If you want a steed, this power is just about mandatory. If you don't, it isn't.You're missing a lot of big things about this. First, it's a class feature disguised as a spell. It lasts indefinitely. There's no reason not to cast it.

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


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


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


Commune*: You get to talk to your god. It's good for when you really need to talk to your god. It's a situational benefit, but it might be exactly what you need.How can you think this is bad or situational? Virtually any time you're stuck with incomplete knowledge and need to make an important decision, this spell can trivialize that.

[EvilAnagram]

It's actually not. Remember you can use Divine Sense to locate invisible creatures. You'll be attacking with disadvantage, but there are ways to fix that.
I was referring to the disadvantage when I said that, and I think that point stands.


I don't agree. You can already heal poison and disease with Lay on Hands. That leaves Blinded, Deafened, and Paralyzed. I honestly don't know if it's worth it to cure those things if it costs a 2nd-level spell slot, AND your action. That's a pretty steep cost, and those things tend to be cured on their own anyway.
Your Lay on Hands can cure one poison or disease effect per 5HP spent. This can cure multiple afflictions, specifically afflictions that can keep a player from being effective in combat. I think it's absolutely worth a spell slot to bring someone back into combat when they're having difficulty making a CON save.


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

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


I don't think it's that great. 75% of WIS saves are vs Charm or Fear, which you have immunity auras to. Once that benefit is gone, Aura of Vitality becomes flat-out better. Why give a bonus to death saves when you could just heal them with Aura of Vitality and bring them back into the fight? Why maximize all healing in the hopes that your party *might* get some use out of it, when you can be certain of healing them with Aura of Vitality instead?
The healing maximizing is wonderful for parties with two or three members who can cast healing spells, which is likely when you consider that five classes out of twelve cast healing spells. It's meant to combo with these classes and can significantly increase your healing potential. Furthermore, the auras you mention don't have this range until level 18, and there are plenty of damaging spells that depend on WIS saves.


I think you underestimate this one. +1d4 damage to every attack in your entire party is good enough on its own, but the combos with this spell are ENORMOUS. For example, a druid can summon eight wolves, and now they ALL have +1d4 damage. This is a huge boost on its own, and it becomes amazing with the right synergy.
I think you have to build the party from the ground up to take advantage of this spell to the degree that it's worth a sky-blue rating. I will mention that it can combo, though.


How can you think this is bad or situational? Virtually any time you're stuck with incomplete knowledge and need to make an important decision, this spell can trivialize that.
First, purple is not the "bad" color. It means the use you'll get out of a power is situational. Second, this power is situational because it's only useful when you need information that your god knows. You won't constantly be making important decisions, and your god likely won't be able to solve puzzles for you left and right. It's situational because you might run into this situation once or twice a campaign.

[Strill]

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

[Ferrin33]

It can only cure one affliction.

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

[EvilAnagram]

It can only cure one affliction.

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

[MadBear]

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


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

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


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

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

[Spinward Bound]

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

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

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

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

[EvilAnagram]

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

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

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

[EvilAnagram]

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



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



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

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

[Spinward Bound]

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

[MadBear]

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

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

[Strill]

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

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

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

[Spinward Bound]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[MaxWilson]

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

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

[Spinward Bound]

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

Thanks for pointing that out.

[Oscredwin]

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

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

[Strill]

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

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

[Oscredwin]

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

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

[Gnomes2169]

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

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

[Ferrin33]

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

The difference is relatively small for some though.

[Oscredwin]

The difference is relatively small for some though.

Which is also a good thing :)

[Strill]

So when would you use Sacred Weapon? Obviously using it in combat is a waste of an action. Is it pretty much only worth activating if you have the drop on your enemies and can prepare it out of combat?

[EvilAnagram]

So when would you use Sacred Weapon? Obviously using it in combat is a waste of an action. Is it pretty much only worth activating if you have the drop on your enemies and can prepare it out of combat?

It's not really a waste of an action when it gives you a great bonus to hit and will make you more effective in combat. Plus, it emits magical light, which can illuminate magical darkness, which helps out a hell of a lot against Drow and other nasties that use Darkness. And if your weapon wasn't magical, it becomes magical for the duration, which is amazing if you're fighting one of the many monsters that resist nonmagical weapon damage. So, if you're fighting something that resists magic damage, you're doubling your damage output, hitting more often, and keeping magical darkness from ruining your attacks.

Even without considering the light effect, a level five Paladin with STR 18 and CHA 16 attacking an AC 18 creature that resists nonmagical weapon attacks will deal 2.3 times the damage with Sacred Weapon that he would deal without it. You make up for not hitting anything for one turn the very next turn.

[odigity]

Been studying the PHB to prep for my first paladin, got a few questions:

1) Can you burn more than one spell slot at a time via Divine Smite? (aka can you nova?)
2) The spell list includes a spell called "Destructive Smite" (PHB209), but it doesn't exist; however, there's a spell called "Destructive Wave" (PHB231) of the same level that I'm guessing is what was meant?
3) All seven of the Paladin's "Smite" spells require concentration to hold it until your next successfull weapon attack. Doesn't it make it impossible to use these signature Paladin spells while also maintaining the Paladin's signature buff/debuff spells, like "Bless"? Isn't that... well, kinda messed up?

It's not Paladin-specific, but since I'm designing him as a Polearm Master/Sentinel controller, I'm also wondering:

4) Isn't the bonus action attack that Great Weapon Master feat gives you (the pseudo-cleave) redundant with the far better bonus action attack that Polearm Master grants?
5) The Great Weapon Fighting style says you can reroll a die that lands on 1 or 2. Does that apply to all die rolls, like if you were using a maul (2d6) or adding additional dice through Divine Smite? On all 2H weapon attacks? All the time?

[Ferrin33]

Been studying the PHB to prep for my first paladin, got a few questions:

1) Can you burn more than one spell slot at a time via Divine Smite? (aka can you nova?)
2) The spell list includes a spell called "Destructive Smite" (PHB209), but it doesn't exist; however, there's a spell called "Destructive Wave" (PHB231) of the same level that I'm guessing is what was meant?
3) All seven of the Paladin's "Smite" spells require concentration to hold it until your next successfull weapon attack. Doesn't it make it impossible to use these signature Paladin spells while also maintaining the Paladin's signature buff/debuff spells, like "Bless"? Isn't that... well, kinda messed up?

It's not Paladin-specific, but since I'm designing him as a Polearm Master/Sentinel controller, I'm also wondering:

4) Isn't the bonus action attack that Great Weapon Master feat gives you (the pseudo-cleave) redundant with the far better bonus action attack that Polearm Master grants?
5) The Great Weapon Fighting style says you can reroll a die that lands on 1 or 2. Does that apply to all die rolls, like if you were using a maul (2d6) or adding additional dice through Divine Smite? On all 2H weapon attacks? All the time?

1) No you can't. It triggers when you hit something, and allows you to sacrifice one paladin spell slot.
2) It's indeed an editing error, Destructive Wave is the correct spell.
3) You can still use your Divine Smite class feature, it's a limiting factor but not to big. (My opinion)
4) The bonus action of Great Weapon Master is a lot stronger actually, it uses your full weapon damage (likely 1d10 in your case) instead of 1d4. The only limiting factor is getting it to activate by killing an enemy or critting, but when you do it's stronger. In turns that you don't kill an enemy or crit you can still use your bonus action from Polearm Master. Also the second ability of Great Weapon Master is very powerful, especially with Polearm Master because of its guaranteed extra attack.
5) All damage dice of damage you deal with a two-handed weapon, so using a Maul(2d6) and then using divine smite with a 1st level spell(2d8) would allow you to reroll the Maul's as well as the Divine Smite damage dice.

[Demonicattorney]

1. Debatable, I would argue that you can't, but can stack a spell smite with divine smite.

2. Yes, destructive wave=destructive smite.

3. Yeah, this kind of sucks, it makes the smites a trade-off, or something to use after your concentration has already been broken.

4. Yes, Pole-Arm Master is a non-bo with Great Weapon Master, which is fine because Pole-Arm Master is already annoyingly good anyway.

5. It applies to all dice rules including critical hits, and smite damage. That being said, it still adds less damage than duelist in most combats.

[Abithrios]

Paladins can go nova by hitting more than once per round and adding a smite to each.

[Ferrin33]

4. Yes, Pole-Arm Master is a non-bo with Great Weapon Master, which is fine because Pole-Arm Master is already annoyingly good anyway.


It's actually quite powerful together, you just won't be able to use both the bonus actions at the same time. Advantage is that you have consistency from Polearm Master's bonus action with the occasional boost from Great Weapon Master's bonus action. The power attack from Great Weapon Master is very powerful along with Polearm Master because you get the bonus attack in every round regardless of whether you crit or kill.

[EvilAnagram]

1) Can you burn more than one spell slot at a time via Divine Smite? (aka can you nova?)
The other posters have everything already, but I'd like to reiterate that you can only burn one spell slot per hit. The language is extremely specific there, without any wiggle room.

It says, "when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one paladin spell slot to deal radiant damage to the target, in addition to the weapon's damage."

They didn't even use an indefinite article for munchkins to weasel around with. They specified the exact number of slots. One.

[odigity]

Problem is I'm only going to get 5 ABI/feats. (Variant Human Paladin w/Warlock dip)

I definitely want to take Polearm Master and Sentinel, so that leaves 3. I'm starting with Str/Cha at 16/16, and would like to get them up as high as possible, but even without taking any more feats, best I can do is 18/20 (valuing Cha more because of Aura of Protection bonus to party saves).

If I take Great Weapon Mastery (or Lucky or Heavy Armor Master), that'll drop my Str/Cha scores even more.

Can't even get close to everything I want. My consolation is that at least I can get my core mechanic (PM+S) up by lvl 4, as long as I take Paladin 4 before any Warlock levels -- which means living without a good ranged attack till level 5/6.

(There should be a guide dedicated just to dipping Warlock, with a section for each of the other 11 base classes.)

[Ferrin33]

Problem is I'm only going to get 5 ABI/feats. (Variant Human Paladin w/Warlock dip)

I definitely want to take Polearm Master and Sentinel, so that leaves 3. I'm starting with Str/Cha at 16/16, and would like to get them up as high as possible, but even without taking any more feats, best I can do is 18/20 (valuing Cha more because of Aura of Protection bonus to party saves).

If I take Great Weapon Mastery (or Lucky or Heavy Armor Master), that'll drop my Str/Cha scores even more.

Can't even get close to everything I want. My consolation is that at least I can get my core mechanic (PM+S) up by lvl 4, as long as I take Paladin 4 before any Warlock levels -- which means living without a good ranged attack till level 5/6.

(There should be a guide dedicated just to dipping Warlock, with a section for each of the other 11 base classes.)

As a variant human you get a free feat at level 1.

Edit: Oops, forgot the warlock dip. Well, that's the price of this specific dip then.

[MaxWilson]

Can't even get close to everything I want. My consolation is that at least I can get my core mechanic (PM+S) up by lvl 4, as long as I take Paladin 4 before any Warlock levels -- which means living without a good ranged attack till level 5/6.

Well, at least you have the STR to do well with throwing spears, so you're not completely hopeless at range. Throwing doesn't scale well with extra attacks but for levels 1-3 daggers and spears should serve you well as a backup option.

[odigity]

Well, at least you have the STR to do well with throwing spears, so you're not completely hopeless at range. Throwing doesn't scale well with extra attacks but for levels 1-3 daggers and spears should serve you well as a backup option.

I plan to start with the following, as per the Paladin's Starting Equipment:
- halberd
- maul
- 5 javelins (to tide me over till Eldritch Blast)

Going to take Oath of Ancients, probably pact with Archfey for compatible flavor, and take a Blade boon to replace the mundane halberd or maul.

Why do you say throwing doesn't scale with extra attacks? Not that it should matter for this build, but I thought throwing weapons is an attack like any other, and Extra Attack would apply.

[Ferrin33]

I plan to start with the following, as per the Paladin's Starting Equipment:
- halberd
- maul
- 5 javelins (to tide me over till Eldritch Blast)

Going to take Oath of Ancients, probably pact with Archfey for compatible flavor, and take a Blade boon to replace the mundane halberd or maul.

Why do you say throwing doesn't scale with extra attacks? Not that it should matter for this build, but I thought throwing weapons is an attack like any other, and Extra Attack would apply.

You need to use your non-action while moving to draw the second javelin in-between javelin throws. I wonder if your DM will let you sacrifice movement to draw multiple though.

[Yagyujubei]

Problem is I'm only going to get 5 ABI/feats. (Variant Human Paladin w/Warlock dip)

I definitely want to take Polearm Master and Sentinel, so that leaves 3. I'm starting with Str/Cha at 16/16, and would like to get them up as high as possible, but even without taking any more feats, best I can do is 18/20 (valuing Cha more because of Aura of Protection bonus to party saves).

If I take Great Weapon Mastery (or Lucky or Heavy Armor Master), that'll drop my Str/Cha scores even more.

Can't even get close to everything I want. My consolation is that at least I can get my core mechanic (PM+S) up by lvl 4, as long as I take Paladin 4 before any Warlock levels -- which means living without a good ranged attack till level 5/6.

(There should be a guide dedicated just to dipping Warlock, with a section for each of the other 11 base classes.)

obviously you cant have every last feat and bonus that you want, the whole philosophy of 5e is to get away from the crazy overpowered characters that you could get in past editions and reign things in.

if it seems ridiculous to you, keep in mind that there isn't any text that includes epic level play yet, which would undoubtedly afford you another 3-4 feats and allow your character to be incredibly powerful when it's appropriate (in epic levels)

[MaxWilson]

Why do you say throwing doesn't scale with extra attacks? Not that it should matter for this build, but I thought throwing weapons is an attack like any other, and Extra Attack would apply.

Because you only get to interact with one item "for free", which means you can't draw 2-3 javelins per round even if you have enough Extra Attacks to throw them.

[Strill]

It's not really a waste of an action when it gives you a great bonus to hit and will make you more effective in combat. Plus, it emits magical light, which can illuminate magical darkness, which helps out a hell of a lot against Drow and other nasties that use Darkness. And if your weapon wasn't magical, it becomes magical for the duration, which is amazing if you're fighting one of the many monsters that resist nonmagical weapon damage. So, if you're fighting something that resists magic damage, you're doubling your damage output, hitting more often, and keeping magical darkness from ruining your attacks.

Even without considering the light effect, a level five Paladin with STR 18 and CHA 16 attacking an AC 18 creature that resists nonmagical weapon attacks will deal 2.3 times the damage with Sacred Weapon that he would deal without it. You make up for not hitting anything for one turn the very next turn.

So it's not worth using in combat if you already have a magic weapon. Good to know.

[Ferrin33]

So it's not worth using in combat if you already have a magic weapon. Good to know.

It still gives a significant boost to hit chance which becomes stronger the higher the AC of the opponent.

[Demonicattorney]

So it's not worth using in combat if you already have a magic weapon. Good to know.

In actual play its one of the strongest boosts in the game. Most combats don't start in melee range, nor is it all that profitable to dash at enemies and get no attacks. So in many cases, it doesn't actually cost you an action in terms of losing attacks, take your move and than power up your sword.

Remember that the bonus stacks, and does not replace the bonus for a magic sword, so if the combat lasts more than 2 rounds, it will be better to use the boost than not to. Unlike the vengeance ability it stacks with advantage, and a +5 bonus is worth more than advantage most of the time.

[EvilAnagram]

So it's not worth using in combat if you already have a magic weapon. Good to know.
The bonus to hit is still worth sacrificing one action. It will last all of or most of the encounter and can make an enormous difference when dealing with higher ACs. At level 20, with 20 STR/CHA, against 22 AC, it's the difference between missing half the time and hitting three quarters of the time.

[Strill]

The bonus to hit is still worth sacrificing one action. It will last all of or most of the encounter and can make an enormous difference when dealing with higher ACs. At level 20, with 20 STR/CHA, against 22 AC, it's the difference between missing half the time and hitting three quarters of the time.

So *IF* you have 20 CHA, and *IF* the fight lasts three rounds, you'll break even. Actually no you won't because you'll get attacked on the first turn by enemies you might've killed had you just attacked instead. It'll be worth it if the fight lasts four or more rounds. Those sound like pretty big "if"s to me, especially when things like Advantage and Bless make sacrificing your action for Sacred Weapon worth less.

[Ferrin33]

So *IF* you have 20 CHA, and *IF* the fight lasts at least three rounds, you'll break even. It won't become better unless the fight lasts four or more rounds. Those sound like pretty big "if"s to me.

A 50% chance to hit becomes 75%, that's a 50% increase in output which pays off in 3 rounds. However, a 25% chance to hit against a high AC enemy it's a 100% increase, paying off in the round after. The higher the enemies' AC the greater the benefit of the ability, so to beat big monsters once every while it's a very powerful buff. Obviously you wouldn't use this if the fight would only take one or two rounds.

[Demonicattorney]

So *IF* you have 20 CHA, and *IF* the fight lasts three rounds, you'll break even. Actually no you won't because you'll get attacked on the first turn by enemies you might've killed had you just attacked instead. It'll be worth it if the fight lasts four or more rounds. Those sound like pretty big "if"s to me, especially when things like Advantage and Bless make sacrificing your action for Sacred Weapon worth less.

Most harder combats last between 4 and 10 rounds (in the mid/upper levels). So, its almost always good. Second, your leaving out opportunity attacks, commander's strike, Sentinel etc. 20 CHA is also likely the optimal devotion build anyway, since you don't need the STR bonus to hit in tougher fights, and the team save bonus is worth more than the +2 damage.

If the enemy is hard to hit, it literally doubles your damage output. If the enemy is relatively easy to hit, it still ups your damage output by 30-40%.

[EvilAnagram]

So *IF* you have 20 CHA, and *IF* the fight lasts three rounds, you'll break even. Actually no you won't because you'll get attacked on the first turn by enemies you might've killed had you just attacked instead. It'll be worth it if the fight lasts four or more rounds. Those sound like pretty big "if"s to me, especially when things like Advantage and Bless make sacrificing your action for Sacred Weapon worth less.

Obviously you shouldn't use this in a fight you can win in two rounds. Channel Divinity powers are already pretty limited in use, so this is a boss encounter power no matter what. Like Ferrin said, it pays off more the higher your enemy's AC is, so it's extremely useful for taking on something big and nasty with a whole mess of HP. Yes, you have to sacrifice an action to use it, but if you've made it into the boss' lair and need to reliably deal some consistent damage to it, this is an excellent power to use. And it stacks with spells that require concentration to boot.

[MaxWilson]

So *IF* you have 20 CHA, and *IF* the fight lasts three rounds, you'll break even. Actually no you won't because you'll get attacked on the first turn by enemies you might've killed had you just attacked instead. It'll be worth it if the fight lasts four or more rounds. Those sound like pretty big "if"s to me, especially when things like Advantage and Bless make sacrificing your action for Sacred Weapon worth less.

It's situational. If all your combats consist of walking up to the bad guys and everyone hitting each other with weapons until someone falls over dead, then yeah, sacrificing an action for Sacred Weapon is a bad option. If you've got good guys and bad guys dodging around stone pillars, taking advantage of cover, Readying actions for someone to pop up and/or trying to threaten bowmen into spending a round swapping out their bows for shield + sword--if you've got complex stuff like that going on it may not be a bad thing to spend a round casting Sacred Weapon on your longbow before popping out of cover to try a headshot on whoever's ugly mug is visible.

Hammering away with weapons is boring.

[Dralnu]

I think there are plenty of times, especially as a melee with limited range, that you'll squeeze in a sacred weapon activation without "wasting" an attack. I think it loses out on a vengeance paladin's bonus action advantage oath, unless you have a consistent source of advantage from a wolf totem barbarian or something, but if you wanted damage you'd pick vengeance anyway.

[Arkhios]

Pardon me if it's considered bad on this forum to necro old threads, but thought I should chime in, first to thank OP for the immense amount of work, and for great guide!

Secondly (sorry for not reading all replies, because, well, too much, too long!), there are in my opinion several good RP-wise reasons why a paladin/warlock works remarkably well, with emphasis on lore rather than mechanics; granted, not every oath and patron match well, but even without tinkering, each one can work well.

Oath of the Ancients works amazingly well with Archfey Patron, and such a character could be anything from NG, CG, or even CN.

Oath of Vengeance works well with Archfey, too, since some fey are rather vengeful in nature, all without being outright evil.
Arguably or not, it is a good match for Fiend Patron, too, if your pact with the fiend was struck unwillingly (maybe, if you were a tiefling as suggested, the pact was made unknowingly to you - maybe your parents traded your unborn soul to a fiend in return of a service, and now you serve Him/Her, whether you want it or not) or as the necessary evil to fight for greater good.

Oathbreaker is a good choice for Fiend Patron, likewise for the new Undying Patron from SCAG. You're still a paladin, even if you were Oathbreaker. And you can remain evil all the same.

Oath of the Devotion works really well with the Undying Light Patron, from the new Unearthed Arcana article.

----
On another note, Paladin combining Protection Fighting Style with Alert feat and College of Lore Bard makes you, in my honest opinion, one of the best and multitalented "tank/support" characters. Defense is better for tank only when you're the only one in melee, but if there's even one more melee, with less potential AC than you can get with gear, Protection wins easily. And your initiative can pretty much guarantee you top the initiative count and get to act first, and even if not, if conscious, you get the chance to use your most tanky feature (reaction dependent) Protection style to save the squishy party member in ambush, for example. Cutting Words adds up to the potential of your targeted foes wanting to cut you down first. And then there are the spell slots. You can get 4th level slots a lot earlier and have a lot more to use for, say, divine smite. And the increased amount and diversity of spells from bard, especially with Additional Magical Secrets. Not to mention the skills and other benefits of Jack of all Trades (not only the fun of increasing initiative!)

[Nu]

I'm a bit confused on the ratings for Searing Smite and Wrathful Smite--Searing Smite seems rarely worth spending a slot on over just a regular Divine Smite, useful only if the target is weak to fire--something with a weak Con save probably won't have the HP to last multiple rounds against a decent party, which is the only time the damage over time really comes into play. The fact that they are d6s compared to divine smite's d8s should also be noted.

On the other hand, Wrathful Smite I think deserves a little better rating because if you can nail a monster that is out-of-position with it, you can use your own positioning to severely limit its options. Using a reach weapon (any polearm, or a lance while on horseback) may allow you to smite them, then move away, and they won't be able to give chase as long as the Wisdom save is failed. And there are a lot of monsters with weak Wisdom saves. I suppose it does somewhat depend on how much your party is tracking positioning, but I've had a lot of good success with it, especially for melee-oriented monsters that I can catch while they're away from the "main melee group".

[EvilAnagram]

snip

I think those are both good points, but I think for Wrathful the effects should stay black. It's not reliably useful every fight, but it's great when you need it. I made a note that battlemat users will like it more because of the increased focus on position.

[Corran]

My opinion is that both searing and thunderous smite are good enough spells, with some exceptional situational uses. As for wrathful smite, I think it is a very strong 1st level spell. It is kind of the equivalent of bane for a different battle. While bane can debuff up to three creatures, wrathful smite can really really debuff one creature (save it for a very strong creature). Granted, a strong enemy might have a good save ,(might), but if he fails it, then it's game over. Encounter won. Encounter made much more easy to be fair. Plus, it is a first level spell so you can spam it until it works, if you feel that the enemy has a decent chance of failing his wis save.

[Malifice]

Arguably or not, it is a good match for Fiend Patron, too, if your pact with the fiend was struck unwillingly (maybe, if you were a tiefling as suggested, the pact was made unknowingly to you - maybe your parents traded your unborn soul to a fiend in return of a service, and now you serve Him/Her, whether you want it or not) or as the necessary evil to fight for greater good.

Any reason that I cant be a LE Vengance Paladin who openly worships Asmodeus, and is also a Fiend Warlock with him as my patron?

[Arkhios]

Any reason that I cant be a LE Vengance Paladin who openly worships Asmodeus, and is also a Fiend Warlock with him as my patron?

If you read the tenets of the oath of vengeance and played the game by the book, then I would say "no", because even the Oath of Vengeance strives to fight back the evil, even if their own methods were on the grey area more often than not. Open servitude to Asmodeus screams of evil more than I would allow without breaking the oath. And then there's the issue with your alignment. How can you serve a greater good, if your own ideals are on the "dark side"? Alignment isn't just something you stamp on your forehead and do whatever you wish; on a very basic level, alignment defines what kind of person your character is. A lawful evil person isn't kind or caring person at heart.
A good example of an Oath of Vengeance paladin who isn't particularly good nor outright evil, either, is Batman, whom I'd consider being lawful neutral, who aims for the greater good of his community, but isn't afraid of using violence or deception to achieve it.

[Malifice]

If you read the tenets of the oath of vengeance and played the game by the book, then I would say "no", because even the Oath of Vengeance strives to fight back the evil, even if their own methods were on the grey area more often than not. Open servitude to Asmodeus screams of evil more than I would allow without breaking the oath. And then there's the issue with your alignment. How can you serve a greater good, if your own ideals are on the "dark side"? Alignment isn't just something you stamp on your forehead and do whatever you wish; on a very basic level, alignment defines what kind of person your character is. A lawful evil person isn't kind or caring person at heart.
A good example of an Oath of Vengeance paladin who isn't particularly good nor outright evil, either, is Batman, whom I'd consider being lawful neutral, who aims for the greater good of his community, but isn't afraid of using violence or deception to achieve it.

From Asmodeus perspective, what's evil and good differ though don't they? You can be a person who works towards the 'greater good' (as you see it) but still be a thoroughly evil person who employs torture, murder and even genocide.

Look at the Punisher or Azrael similar vigilante types that employ acts of utter evil and depravity for 'good ends'. Ditto with certain zealot crusaders and inquisitors (who toss babes on the pyre for the 'greater good'). It's so common as to be a trope of its own. They might be working for a good end (either subjectively, or objectively) but are prepared to utilise thoroughly evil means to get there. (Making them evilly aligned)

I currently have a LE Vengance paladin of Bane who views Torm (LG God of Paladins) as the 'true' evil (my parents were martyred to Torm in the bay of Tantras and my brother died in his service). I honestly believe Torm is a deceptive monster, and blame him and his faith for betraying my family and killing them, leaving me an orphan. I fight for the 'greater good' (a fascist theocratic society with Bane at its head - which I am sure would finally provide Faerun with unity, cohesiveness and a lasting peace).

Along the way I intend to employ genocide, holy wars and pogroms. I show no mercy to my enemies (particularly Tormites) and am highly intolerant of other faiths.

I think you're being way too limiting with your 'no evil paladins' thing. There is plenty of room for an evil paladin who fights for a good cause using evil means or even an evil paladin who fights against a cause he simply views as evil (even though it's not).

It's your campaign though so interpret it how you want.

[EvilAnagram]

As long as you stick to the tenets of your oath, it's fine.

[VoxRationis]

As long as you stick to the tenants of your oath, it's fine.

Tenets. Your oath is not available for rent.
Sorry; a lot of people get this wrong and I had to say something this one time.

[EvilAnagram]

Tenets. Your oath is not available for rent.
Sorry; a lot of people get this wrong and I had to say something this one time.

I hope I can blame that one on auto-correct, but I don't know that I was on my phone. Thanks!

[Arkhios]

Why exactly would Dual Wielder be bad for a paladin? Just because Paladins don't get Two-weapon Fighting Style can't be the only reason for it? Combined With Defense Style, wielding two weapons gives both a decent protection and an extra opportunity to land a Divine Smite (or a Smite Spell). Already decent from level 2 forward, but after 11th level, with Improved Divine Smite it becomes incredible! Sure, it can mean you're burning through your slots faster, but that's not very likely in the end, thanks to bounded accuracy.
Of course, many spells a Paladin can cast are cast with a Bonus Action, but I don't think that's going to be a big issue, as those are generally buffs that last much longer than for one round. One round less to attack with both weapons doesn't hurt you. After all, you'll still have that +1 to AC when you hold two weapons. (Mind you, you can cast first and then draw both weapons, unless (or until) you take War Caster feat.)

Another question: Could a barbarian/paladin use Divine Smite while raging?

(I know it's been a long while since there was last post in this thread, but I noticed that OP has updated the first few posts very recently, so I wouldn't consider this thread necromancy, correct me if I'm wrong)

[Rysto]

TWF and DW on a Paladin appears to be a solid option to me, and I'm giving it a try in one campaign. Another nice thing about the build is that you can start with Fighter 1 and then multiclass into Paladin from there, which gives you CON save proficiency (but you lose WIS save proficiency). The big downside is delaying your Paladin features by one level.

There's a very stupid part of me that's telling me I should eventually go for 3 levels of Fighter, take Champion and fish for crits to use with my smites, but I'm ignoring that for now.

However, PAM is a strictly better build from an optimization standpoint. You still get the benefit of the 3 attacks per round, you don't delay your Paladin progression, and you can wield a quarterstaff one-handed and use a shield with it and still do more DPR than TWF+DW (no, seriously).

[Saggo]

Why exactly would Dual Wielder be bad for a paladin? Just because Paladins don't get Two-weapon Fighting Style can't be the only reason for it? Combined With Defense Style, wielding two weapons gives both a decent protection and an extra opportunity to land a Divine Smite (or a Smite Spell). Already decent from level 2 forward, but after 11th level, with Improved Divine Smite it becomes incredible! Sure, it can mean you're burning through your slots faster, but that's not very likely in the end, thanks to bounded accuracy.
Of course, many spells a Paladin can cast are cast with a Bonus Action, but I don't think that's going to be a big issue, as those are generally buffs that last much longer than for one round. One round less to attack with both weapons doesn't hurt you. After all, you'll still have that +1 to AC when you hold two weapons. (Mind you, you can cast first and then draw both weapons, unless (or until) you take War Caster feat.)[/SIZE]

For optimization, Polearm Master is better. There's a brief period (levels 1-3) where 2d6+mod (2x Light Weapons) is marginally better than 1d10+mod (Halberd). But at 4, if you're picking a feat for a bonus action attack, 2d10+1d4+3*mod is better than 3d8+2*mod. Polearms with PAM have better damage, better feat support, better fighting style support, better range, better AoOs, same chances of smiting, and don't require War Caster to reliably cast. Dual Wielding's only benefit is +1 AC.

But if you're into the idea of a Paladin with 2 axes or 2 swords as a character concept, you should probably take it.

[Arkhios]

Just because one option is better doesn't make the other explicitly bad.

EDIT: nevermind, I misread something.

As a matter of fact, I do have an idea of going dual warhammering in our campaign, with my OotA paladin; I just couldn't help it and question the reasoning why it's rated red in the guide.

[DracoKnight]

Another question: Could a barbarian/paladin use Divine Smite while raging?

Rage forbids you from casting or concentrating on a spell using it. Divine Smite is a class feature that uses the same resources as spells but is not a spell. I've actually seen this multiclass in play (Barbarian 2/Paladin 6 - the player dropped the campaign after graduation) and it's fairly god-tier. Throw in 3 levels of Champion, combined with Reckless Attack and Divine Smite, and you've got pretty awesome DPR. Have fun :smallbiggrin:

[Lollerabe]

You are mixing up PAM and GWM.

PAM allows for a d4 + mod whenever you take the attack action, Pam is just a strictly better option than dual wielding from a optimization standpoint as mentioned.

That's where dual wielding falls flat on its nose, it's outgunned in every single way when it comes to dpr (even more so on palas)

[Saggo]

Just because one option is better doesn't make the other explicitly bad.

That's true, but when the purpose of a guide is to answer "Is this worth taking?", one is inferior to the other.

[R.Shackleford]

That's true, but when the purpose of a guide is to answer "Is this worth taking?", one is inferior to the other.

That doesn't mean it isn't worth taking.

You are mixing up two different things.

A) Is this option better than another option?

B) Does picking this option make me bad?

Picking DW for a Paladin doesn't make you a bad Paladin and you can NOVA quite well. You may not do as much damage as you would with PAM but that doesn't matter when we are talking about (B).

[Saggo]

That doesn't mean it isn't worth taking.

You are mixing up two different things.

A) Is this option better than another option?

B) Does picking this option make me bad?

Picking DW for a Paladin doesn't make you a bad Paladin and you can NOVA quite well. You may not do as much damage as you would with PAM but that doesn't matter when we are talking about (B).

Bad is subjective. It is, however, inferior and that's the important factor when cross-comparing the options and rating them. TWF, even with DW, offers little to nothing mechanically that PAM can't do better and for less opportunity cost. That means if you pick it you're choosing to be inferior, at a cost, specifically to uphold a character concept. By most measures, that makes it a red choice.

I don't like it, TWF has always been my favorite style, but I have to agree that red is the right rating.

[Arkhios]

You are mixing up PAM and GWM.

PAM allows for a d4 + mod whenever you take the attack action, Pam is just a strictly better option than dual wielding from a optimization standpoint as mentioned.

That's where dual wielding falls flat on its nose, it's outgunned in every single way when it comes to dpr (even more so on palas)

Yes, originally I did mix PAM with GWM. I noticed it, and edited it away.

Actually PAM isn't that much better.

3d8 average is 13,5
2d10+1d4 average is 13,5
likewise, both have a maximum of 24 damage from the dice. (crits are equal as well)

Only difference is one instance of stat modifier; if a Paladin were to multiclass into fighter, he could even out the difference. (or if a DM would let paladin take the style; not awfully game breaking)

After that, between DW and PAM it's either +1 AC and better two-weapon handling OR potential for additional case of Opportunity Attack.

[Saggo]

Yes, originally I did mix PAM with GWM. I noticed it, and edited it away.

Actually PAM isn't that much better.

3d8 average is 13,5
2d10+1d4 average is 13,5
likewise, both have a maximum of 24 damage from the dice. (crits are equal as well)

Only difference is one instance of stat modifier; if a Paladin were to multiclass into fighter, he could even out the difference. (or if a DM would let paladin take the style; not awfully game breaking)

After that, between DW and PAM it's either +1 AC and better two-weapon handling OR potential for additional case of Opportunity Attack.

With GWF, 2d10+1d4 is 15.6.

If you're focusing in on damage, PAM is easier to support. Out of the box it's better damage that DW. If you multiclass for TWF, you're delaying Paladin levels. That's fine, but you could just pick GWF and have better damage while getting the same Fighter features. PAM also let's you use GWM, and synergize with Sentinel better. You can also do Defense+PAM vs TWF+DW, have the +1 AC, better Feat support and same damage, and not worry about fumbling with the 2nd weapon just to cast (and skip War Caster).

Alternatively, as mentioned by Rysto, you can use PAM, a Quarterstaff, and a Shield. You'll do 2d8+1d4, have a chance for 3 Smites, and can take Defense or Protection as a style or Shield Master as a feat. You'll have similar damage, same Nova, and far better tanking options. Or take Dueling and have superior damage and superior AC. Worth noting that GWF style works with quarterstaff, when using both hands.

It's not that the damage is a bit better (although 3*mod is more than a bit better than 2*mod), it's that PAM has better support for the same or better damage.

[Lollerabe]

That's not a fair comparison, it's 3d8 + 6 (assuming lvl 5 no vhuman) so = 19,5 versus 2d10 + 1d4 + 9 = 22,5

And that's without mentioning the AOOs (which happens a lot with PAM from my experience) and the added a benefit of reach.

Yes you can dip into fighter to get another fightstyle, at that point you are still doing less damg and have now slowed your pala progression.

There's no need to discuss this, TWF is inferior - I'm not saying that to flame anyone who wants to play a TWF pala, I think the image is awesome. However it is a fact (dpr wise)

[R.Shackleford]

Bad is subjective. It is, however, inferior and that's the important factor when cross-comparing the options and rating them. TWF, even with DW, offers little to nothing mechanically that PAM can't do better and for less opportunity cost. That means if you pick it you're choosing to be inferior, at a cost, specifically to uphold a character concept. By most measures, that makes it a red choice.

I don't like it, TWF has always been my favorite style, but I have to agree that red is the right rating.

You are mixing up what is being looked at.

When seeing how good an option is, you don't compare it to another option.

You compare each option to what those options go up against.

In this situation the comparison isn't option A versus option B. The comparison is A versus the game and B versus the game.

Both A and B allow you to keep up with and surpass the game so they are both great.

If you have a car that does 200 MPH and I have a car that does 100 MPH and the minimum speed limit s 45 MPH... Then you having 100 MPH over me doesn't matter one bit. We will both meet and exceed the minimum speed limit.

The minimum speed limit for a Paladin is "can I be effective versus the game" and both option A and B fulfill that criteria with a huge gold star.

[Arkhios]

You are mixing up what is being looked at.

When seeing how good an option is, you don't compare it to another option.

You compare each option to what those options go up against.

In this situation the comparison isn't option A versus option B. The comparison is A versus the game and B versus the game.

Both A and B allow you to keep up with and surpass the game so they are both great.

If you have a car that does 200 MPH and I have a car that does 100 MPH and the minimum speed limit s 45 MPH... Then you having 100 MPH over me doesn't matter one bit. We will both meet and exceed the minimum speed limit.

The minimum speed limit for a Paladin is "can I be effective versus the game" and both option A and B fulfill that criteria with a huge gold star.

Well said, couldn't have done it better. Besides, DPR is not an Arms Race.

[R.Shackleford]

Well said, couldn't have done it better. Besides, DPR is not an Arms Race.

Thank you.

[Saggo]

When seeing how good an option is, you don't compare it to another option.
If one option offers more offense and defense for the same or less cost, you most certainly want that reflected in the rating.



If you have a car that does 200 MPH and I have a car that does 100 MPH and the minimum speed limit s 45 MPH... Then you having 100 MPH over me doesn't matter one bit. We will both meet and exceed the minimum speed limit.

The minimum speed limit for a Paladin is "can I be effective versus the game" and both option A and B fulfill that criteria with a huge gold star.
Nice analogy, but it's not really applicable. For the same opportunity cost and without an arbitrary limit, PAM has better offense, better defense, and better feat support.

[R.Shackleford]

If one option offers more offense and defense for the same or less cost, you most certainly want that reflected in the rating.


Nice analogy, but it's not really applicable. For the same opportunity cost and without an arbitrary limit, PAM has better offense, better defense, and better feat support.

You're wrong, the anology works due to the game having specific mechanics (AC, HP, Attack, Damages) that is the minimum to keep g up with the system.

You are still confusing the issue.

Option A and option B don't interact with each other. They both interact with the game.

[Rysto]

That makes PAM strictly better than DW, but that doesn't mean that DW is outright bad for a Paladin. It's just not optimal. A DW Paladin is far from useless. Personally I'd bump it up to at least black, but note the caveats. I could even see making it blue -- three smite chances per round is far from a bad thing.

By my math, a GWM/GWF Paladin 12+ has a lower AC than a DW/TWF Fighter 1/Paladin 11+ and does worse DPR unless the GWM Paladin can reliably get advantage (and the difference gets slightly more stark if the DM doesn't allow GWF to reroll 1s and 2s on smite dice). Should GWM also be red for Paladins?

[Saggo]

You are still confusing the issue.

The issue is why is Dual Wield a rated red and therefore bad. Whatever EvilAnagram's reasoning, there is a better option in PAM, the numbers show it. Any other issue is a different conversation.

[Corran]

You are mixing up what is being looked at.

When seeing how good an option is, you don't compare it to another option.

You compare each option to what those options go up against.

Ofc you do. That is the purpose of a guide afterall. To help you evaluate the several different options, that compete for a place in your build. And thus to help you choose the best options for your character.

Edit: Comparing just how option B deals with what it goes up against, is not so informative by itself. What we actually have to compare, is how option B deals with what it goes up against vs how option A deals with what it goes up against. In most cases, it is just simpler to directly compare the two options themselves, as that simpification rarely is misleading.

[Saggo]

That makes PAM strictly better than DW, but that doesn't mean that DW is outright bad for a Paladin. It's just not optimal. A DW Paladin is far from useless. Personally I'd bump it up to at least black, but note the caveats. I could even see making it blue -- three smite chances per round is far from a bad thing.

TWF and DW are two different things. TWF works in a Nova build that isn't taking feats for offense. But if you choose to take DW on top of that, you get a better build if you switch to PAM instead. TWF (not the style) is average depending on your build. DW is a bad use of a feat.



By my math, a GWM/GWF Paladin 12+ has a lower AC than a DW/TWF Fighter 1/Paladin 11+ and does worse DPR unless the GWM Paladin can reliably get advantage (and the difference gets slightly more stark if the DM doesn't allow GWF to reroll 1s and 2s on smite dice). Should GWM also be red for Paladins?

GWM is situational on Paladin, combos very well with OoV. It can reduce DPR, since base damage is higher with Smites, but it can also improve DPR when you're not smiting. OoV with PAM and GWM easily surpasses TWF as seen here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0). So no, I don't think so.

But more specifically, I consider DW red because everything it does, AC, weapon damage, and bonus attack, PAM does better.

[Rysto]

My fundamental disagreement here is that this is a binary thing. PAM is strictly better than DW, I agree. That doesn't make DW an outright bad, "you should never, ever take this option".

You're rating DW on a Paladin on the same level as pumping INT, or multiclassing into Druid or Monk. You're saying that you can't build an effective character around the concept, and that's going too far. A DW Paladin can be effective. It's just not optimal.

[Saggo]

My fundamental disagreement here is that this is a binary thing. PAM is strictly better than DW, I agree. That doesn't make DW an outright bad, "you should never, ever take this option".

You're rating DW on a Paladin on the same level as pumping INT, or multiclassing into Druid or Monk. You're saying that you can't build an effective character around the concept, and that's going too far. A DW Paladin can be effective. It's just not optimal.

Consider that you only get 4 ASIs and some will be used for stats. Taking a feat is very costly. By and large feats do something unique even if they're not optimal for DPR, except for weapon and armor proficiencies and DW. You really shouldn't take it unless you just want to be loyal to a concept.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

PAM does several things for a Paladin. First off, you get the same bonus attack you'd be getting as if you TWF, so basically it is free TWF with your reach and the ability to provoke on ENTERING your 10', not simply trying to leave it. By this metric, it is strictly superior to TWF.

Having said that, TWF is not a BAD option. I'd rate it probably dark blue. It's solid, you get bonus attack which means more smiting attempts. But it's not the crazy sky blue that PAM is. Then again, Paladins are REALLY hurting for bonus attacks, since most of their smite spells are bonus action cast and typically produce some very useful debuff/lockdown effects, so being able to make an attack as a bonus action isn't as effective for a Paladin. So maybe Black after all. But by no means red.

My paladin I am currently playing has both PAM and Sentinel, so he's very solid area-denial. Coupled with entangling strike from OoA, Misty Step from OoA, and various other useful tools, he's a big walking 'nope' sign. Damage output is bonus, but that's secondary in my lineup. My party has sufficient DPR to handle anything I lock down, but having the ability to Smite for some burst DPR at need is nothing to sneeze at either. Bonus attack is bonus, but most of my smite spells are competing with that bonus action pretty heavily.

Honestly, I'm loving Sentinel. Go ahead, disengage mister Rogue dude. I still got ya, and still keep ya locked down anyway. Sucker.

Also, Ranseur is an amazing Polearm for a Paladin with Great Weapon style because base damage is 2d4, which, because you re-roll 1's and 2's, means you are looking at 6-8 base plus bonuses, which is excellent for consistent DPR and gives you a better chance of finishing off something that's already been hurt badly.

[Rysto]

PAM does several things for a Paladin. First off, you get the same bonus attack you'd be getting as if you TWF, so basically it is free TWF with your reach and the ability to provoke on ENTERING your 10', not simply trying to leave it. By this metric, it is strictly superior to TWF.

Oh, absolutely. It overshadows every possible alternative. I'm not sure that there is any build that outdoes PAM in any way. Actually, the description of PAM in the feats section honestly undersells the feat.

If this were my guide, my entry for DW would look something like this:

Dual Wielder: With a one level fighter dip to pick up the Two-Weapon Fighting style, this is a viable option, especially after Improved Divine Smite kicks in. Three chances for a smite each round is nice. However, the Polearm Master feat offers superior damage per round, just as many chances to smite, the same AC boost, the ability to use a shield (and thus you can cast spells with a material component without stowing a weapon), and doesn't require delaying your Paladin progression by one level. If you really want to play a dual-wielding Paladin, go for it. It's not a complete trap option. But mechanically, PAM is an equal or better option in every way.

[Dimcair]

From Asmodeus perspective, what's evil and good differ though don't they? You can be a person who works towards the 'greater good' (as you see it) but still be a thoroughly evil person who employs torture, murder and even genocide.

Look at the Punisher or Azrael similar vigilante types that employ acts of utter evil and depravity for 'good ends'. Ditto with certain zealot crusaders and inquisitors (who toss babes on the pyre for the 'greater good'). It's so common as to be a trope of its own. They might be working for a good end (either subjectively, or objectively) but are prepared to utilise thoroughly evil means to get there. (Making them evilly aligned)

I currently have a LE Vengance paladin of Bane who views Torm (LG God of Paladins) as the 'true' evil (my parents were martyred to Torm in the bay of Tantras and my brother died in his service). I honestly believe Torm is a deceptive monster, and blame him and his faith for betraying my family and killing them, leaving me an orphan. I fight for the 'greater good' (a fascist theocratic society with Bane at its head - which I am sure would finally provide Faerun with unity, cohesiveness and a lasting peace).

Along the way I intend to employ genocide, holy wars and pogroms. I show no mercy to my enemies (particularly Tormites) and am highly intolerant of other faiths.

I think you're being way too limiting with your 'no evil paladins' thing. There is plenty of room for an evil paladin who fights for a good cause using evil means or even an evil paladin who fights against a cause he simply views as evil (even though it's not).

It's your campaign though so interpret it how you want.

Unfortunately you are wrong. You see, in the setting of DnD, good and evil is not just a perspective but a defining aspect of a deity. Yeah the devil wants to give the humans more freedom and god wants us to be less free and be more restricted. Here it is a matter of perspective. But Asmodeus knows he is evil, he does evil for evil's sake. What is good and evil has clear definitions in the setting. You are confusing good and evil with good and evil so to speak. I am sure someone else can explain this better.


Having said that, I don't see anything in the Paladin Oath itself that would clearlyindicate that good and evil there are objective rather than subjective.

[Arkhios]

About the Dual Wielder being red, I didn't ask why it's not sky blue or whatever Polearm Master is rated as. I asked why is it red? I agree as much as every one of you that PAM is better, but just because PAM is better option, DW isn't that bad. Black or purple is still less than either of the blue ratings.
In fact, as in EvilAnagram's other guides, purple has often indicated situational usefulness. I would say that DW should at least be purple because it can be good, situationally, not red as a "don't even think about it."
A fighter dip for the Fighting Style rings "situational" to me.

[Corran]

My fundamental disagreement here is that this is a binary thing. PAM is strictly better than DW, I agree. That doesn't make DW an outright bad, "you should never, ever take this option".

You're rating DW on a Paladin on the same level as pumping INT, or multiclassing into Druid or Monk. You're saying that you can't build an effective character around the concept, and that's going too far. A DW Paladin can be effective. It's just not optimal.
While I agree that a twf paladin can be effective, let me explain why I think the red rating is spot on. If for example you had a choice between pumping one stat by 2, or pumping one stat by 1, for your next ASI, and we had to rate these two options, I think that the latter should be rated red, exactly because it is strictly worse than the other option. That does not mean that the character who would pick to bump one stat by just 1 would be unplayble or ineffective. But mechanically speaking, it would be a bad choice, and not simply a bad choice, but one that should be avoided at all costs (speaking completely from a mechanics point of view), since there is a strictly better option. Well, at least that is my opinion, and how I justify the red rating.

[Xetheral]

It's not a complete trap option. But mechanically, PAM is an equal or better option in every way.

Isn't that practically the definition of a trap option? Something that looks good but is completely overshadowed by another option?

As an example, consider a hypothetical 3rd level spell Scorchball, that is identical to Fireball in every way except it does damage in d4s. Scorchball would still be a pretty good spell, but in a guide it should be rated red because the existence of Fireball makes Scorchball a trap option for the unwary.

[Rysto]

Isn't that practically the definition of a trap option? Something that looks good but is completely overshadowed by another option?

That pretty much makes everything other than PAM red for a Paladin, other than stuff that synergizes with it like Sentinel and Shield Master.

[GandalfTheWhite]

Rage forbids you from casting or concentrating on a spell using it. Divine Smite is a class feature that uses the same resources as spells but is not a spell. I've actually seen this multiclass in play (Barbarian 2/Paladin 6 - the player dropped the campaign after graduation) and it's fairly god-tier. Throw in 3 levels of Champion, combined with Reckless Attack and Divine Smite, and you've got pretty awesome DPR. Have fun :smallbiggrin:

Okay, so someone please tell me why Totem Warrior (Bear) 3/Paladin 17 isn't used more often as a multiclass. Especially looking at the Oath of the Crown's Channel Divinity (No action, compelled duel, to creatures of your choice within 30 feet of you). I'm pretty sure that this is the best tank in 5E. Unless I'm wrong.

[Corran]

That pretty much makes everything other than PAM red for a Paladin, other than stuff that synergizes with it like Sentinel and Shield Master.
Not necessarily. True, PM is one of the best options for a paly, but a lot depends on what oath he chooses (as different oath features favour different fighting style), or on the build (singleclass or multiclass), or on the party composition. For example, if the party is heavily tailored towards melee, S&B along with shield master may be the best option. Or if in the case of a OoA paladin, a dex based S&B build can be as good as a PM build imo. Etc...


Okay, so someone please tell me why Totem Warrior (Bear) 3/Paladin 17 isn't used more often as a multiclass. Especially looking at the Oath of the Crown's Channel Divinity (No action, compelled duel, to creatures of your choice within 30 feet of you). I'm pretty sure that this is the best tank in 5E. Unless I'm wrong.
I can imagine it is mostly because most of the paladin capstone abilities are really good to pass up. And ofc there are the aura improvements to consider, which a paladin gets at level 18. That is quite a feature. And ofc there is the delayed progression in your main class. Sure, a paladin is not a caster, but delaying the progression of your main class always hurts. Add the inability to concentrate on a spell while raging (and paladins do get access to some very good concentration spells). Rage also adds a bit more complexity to your action economy, which is bad. And ofc reckless attack offsets one of the main benefits you get from being a paladin (which is a good AC). And sure, resistance to all but psycich damage seems good, but between a decent AC (or even good AC when you dont use reckless attack) and good saves that already can reduce damage, there is enough redundancy to make you have second thoughts.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

How does Shield Master synergize with PAM? Polearms are two-handed weapons, you cannot use a shield and a two-handed weapon at the same time.

[Rysto]

How does Shield Master synergize with PAM? Polearms are two-handed weapons, you cannot use a shield and a two-handed weapon at the same time.

Quarterstaves are versatile weapons that qualify for PAM. The best DPR Paladin build is actually Duelist + Quarterstaff + Shield + PAM, because the +2 duelist damage rider applies to the PAM bonus action attack.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Quarterstaves are versatile weapons that qualify for PAM. The best DPR Paladin build is actually Duelist + Quarterstaff + Shield + PAM, because the +2 duelist damage rider applies to the PAM bonus action attack.

Seems to me that Ranseur + PAM comes out higher average DPR with GW because you re-roll 1's and 2's, so your average weapon damage comes out to 6-8 as opposed to quarterstaff's, which comes out to 3-8 with the +2. Granted, the bonus attack comes out slightly ahead with GW 3-4 and duelist at 3-6, however an average of a point of damage more on a bonus attack isn't worth losing the extra minimum damage on the primary attacks, particularly not on a Paladin who is likely to use his bonus attack for a Smite spell instead of a bonus attack.

[Rysto]

I'm not sure what a ranseur is. Is it from SCAG or EE?

[ShneekeyTheLost]

I'm not sure what a ranseur is. Is it from SCAG or EE?

From the Expanded Armory (http://www.dmsguild.com/product/179621/DD-5e--Expanded-Armory--Gear-Vol-2).

[Rysto]

Actually, it's somewhat irrelevant as I botched the math. If the DM does not allow the GWF to re-roll 1s and 2s on Improve Divine Smite damage then a glaive or halberd does 0.1 more DPR (in total, not per attack). If smite dice are allowed to be rerolled then the advantage increases to 2.35.

[Xetheral]

That pretty much makes everything other than PAM red for a Paladin, other than stuff that synergizes with it like Sentinel and Shield Master.

Not at all... other options have advantages over PAM depending on what you're trying to build the character to do from a mechanical standpoint. For example, the existence of PAM doesn't make War Caster a trap because the two feats do very different things.

PAM completely overshadows DW (thus making DW a "trap") because no matter which of the mechanical advantages of DW you're grying to optimize (i.e. damage or AC), PAM would be a superior choice.

[Rysto]

From the Expanded Armory (http://www.dmsguild.com/product/179621/DD-5e--Expanded-Armory--Gear-Vol-2).

Ah, thanks. However, this does worse DPR than a halberd or glave. I think that you misunderstand how GWF works. You don't get to keep rerolling 1s and 2s; you get one reroll and then must take the new result, even if it's a 1 or 2. Net result is that 2d4 averages 6 damage per hit while 1d10 averages 6.3.

[Saggo]

About the Dual Wielder being red, I didn't ask why it's not sky blue or whatever Polearm Master is rated as. I asked why is it red? I agree as much as every one of you that PAM is better, but just because PAM is better option, DW isn't that bad. Black or purple is still less than either of the blue ratings.
In fact, as in EvilAnagram's other guides, purple has often indicated situational usefulness. I would say that DW should at least be purple because it can be good, situationally, not red as a "don't even think about it."
A fighter dip for the Fighting Style rings "situational" to me.
That's sort of true. TWF, as in holding two weapons not the style, is situational. Levels 1-3 it can be the highest damage, but more importantly TWF allows any Paladin higher nova if need be. A Protection Shield Master Paladin has an option for 3 Smites if they want, by bringing 2 light weapons around as backup. So there are situations where it adds to the build.

DW, however, is the cost of a feat to marginally improve a build focused on bonus attacks. The Fighter dip is just to match the damage of a PAM build and you're a level behind to do it. At Fighter1/Paladin4 when you just get DW, a pure Paladin5 has PAM, Defense, and Extra Attack, doing the exact same thing and doing it quicker. There isn't a situation where taking DW as a feat adds to the build that another feat doesn't do better.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Also, as an alternative to the Warlock2 dip for a ranged attack, just pick up the feat Magic Initiate and you can pick up EB. Granted, you don't get the CHA bonus to damage, but you also don't lose two levels.

Mind you, feats are bigger in 5e than 3.5, but still... viable if you absolutely, positively need a ranged attack on the cheap.

[Arkhios]

I would still argue that, for a variant human, DW is great utility feat as the extra feat. I agree Dual Wielder might not be worth Ability Score Increase, but for human extra feat it just might be worth it. Kind of a middle-ground for improving both offense and defense. Even if I chose to use a shield every now and then, I could just use shield occasionally as a improvised weapon if I wanted to. (since a shield is less likely a light weapon, DW helps overcoming that problem)

[Saggo]

I would still argue that, for a variant human, DW is great utility feat as the extra feat. I agree Dual Wielder might not be worth Ability Score Increase, but for human extra feat it just might be worth it. Kind of a middle-ground for improving both offense and defense. Even if I chose to use a shield every now and then, I could just use shield occasionally as a improvised weapon if I wanted to. (since a shield is less likely a light weapon, DW helps overcoming that problem)

You'd still do better with PAM, since the quarterstaff+shield combo is better as an offense and defense middle ground, +2 AC and 1d8+(3 to 5) + 1d4 + (3 to 5) with PAM vs +1 AC and 2d8+(3 to 5) with DW. Plus you would have the shield all the time and you could use Defense, Protection, or Dueling as a style.

Dual Wield could have, and arguably should have, been the feat for mixing offense and defense, but they neutered TWF and DW pretty bad for reasons I can only guess at.

[Xetheral]

Dual Wield could have, and arguably should have, been the feat for mixing offense and defense, but they neutered TWF and DW pretty bad for reasons I can only guess at.

Probably because they made the style so much more accessible than in 3.5 and removed the significant to-hit penalties, both of which are significant buffs. It would have been a fine trade-off if they hadn't then gone and made other, better ways to access a bonus action attack.

[Arkhios]

You'd still do better with PAM, since the quarterstaff+shield combo is better as an offense and defense middle ground, +2 AC and 1d8+(3 to 5) + 1d4 + (3 to 5) with PAM vs +1 AC and 2d8+(3 to 5) with DW. Plus you would have the shield all the time and you could use Defense, Protection, or Dueling as a style.

Dual Wield could have, and arguably should have, been the feat for mixing offense and defense, but they neutered TWF and DW pretty bad for reasons I can only guess at.

Quarterstaff + Shield is just outright ridiculous thought for a Paladin.
Some people pay a lot of attention to how their characters might look like. Plated knight holding a wooden staff and a shield doesn't visualize very impressive to me.

But, enough of this. Clearly this discussion isn't going anywhere when all people care about is maximum possible results.

[tieren]

Quarterstaff + Shield is just outright ridiculous thought for a Paladin.
Some people pay a lot of attention to how their characters might look like. Plated knight holding a wooden staff and a shield doesn't visualize very impressive to me.



If it helps the mental picture my paladin is a gnome riding a dog with a shield and staff. I picture him wielding the staff more like a lance.

I'm picturing Sir Didymus from the labrynth movie.

[Saggo]

Quarterstaff + Shield is just outright ridiculous thought for a Paladin.
Some people pay a lot of attention to how their characters might look like. Plated knight holding a wooden staff and a shield doesn't visualize very impressive to me.

But, enough of this. Clearly this discussion isn't going anywhere when all people care about is maximum possible results.

That's fine for you, but you don't get to decide that for anyone else. Someone might like the concept of a protector guarding a forest civilization with his shield and ancestral battle staff and you just told them that was ridiculous. Everyone will have their own opinion on what concept is good or ridiculous. Because of that fact, and the fact that this is a public forum, the best common ground when absent context is unbiased analysis of the mechanics as they currently stand. Which inherently means optimization.


Probably because they made the style so much more accessible than in 3.5 and removed the significant to-hit penalties, both of which are significant buffs. It would have been a fine trade-off if they hadn't then gone and made other, better ways to access a bonus action attack.

Or that they gave Dueling +2 damage, making both sword & shield and two-handers both that much more appealing, that TWF doesn't scale very well with other features (including Hex and Hunter's Mark since they take a bonus action to get started), and that you can get more out of just +2 to Dex than DW. I really want to know what their thought process was.

[Xetheral]

Quarterstaff + Shield is just outright ridiculous thought for a Paladin.
Some people pay a lot of attention to how their characters might look like. Plated knight holding a wooden staff and a shield doesn't visualize very impressive to me.

Personally I've always liked the image of plate armor with with a quarterstaff (often a war staff of some kind, capped with metal), although that's usually with a two-handed grip. Quarterstaff and shield is pretty close to spear and shield, though, and that's a pretty standard trope. Also, if we're talking a spellcasting knight, a wizard's staff and shield is in many ways more intimidating than a sword. :)


But, enough of this. Clearly this discussion isn't going anywhere when all people care about is maximum possible results.

Given that the thread is an optimization guide, doesn't that make sense?


Or that they gave Dueling +2 damage, making both sword & shield and two-handers both that much more appealing, that TWF doesn't scale very well with other features (including Hex and Hunter's Mark since they take a bonus action to get started), and that you can get more out of just +2 to Dex than DW. I really want to know what their thought process was.

If TWF was the only source of a bonus action attack, it would be much more compelling for certain builds, even with the other drawbacks and competition for bonus actions.

[Fighting_Ferret]

Please the quarter staff is ONLY being used to take advantage of a loophole in the rule. If it wasn't versatile, or they wrote in that you had to wield the polearm with two hands to get the bonus attack, then this entire conversation wouldn't be happening. What DM in their right mind would allow you the bonus attack with the other end of the staff when wielded in one hand... or the other benefit of AoO when they get within your reach... Every other weapon is explicitly a two-handed weapon with the reach property... they didn't even include the spear (the first polearm) in the feat.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Please the quarter staff is ONLY being used to take advantage of a loophole in the rule. If it wasn't versatile, or they wrote in that you had to wield the polearm with two hands to get the bonus attack, then this entire conversation wouldn't be happening. What DM in their right mind would allow you the bonus attack with the other end of the staff when wielded in one hand... or the other benefit of AoO when they get within your reach... Every other weapon is explicitly a two-handed weapon with the reach property... they didn't even include the spear (the first polearm) in the feat.

That they didn't include the spear is indeed an oddity. When I first read it, I wouldn't have been surprised if they'd changed it to spear in the errata. But they didn't. They clearly specified the quarterstaff as a possibility, and given that it has clear advantages and disadvantages compared to the larger polearms when used in this respect (the advantage of being usable with a shield and being a simple weapon, the disadvantages of lower damage, lack of reach, and not being compatible with GWM's second effect), I fail to see how this qualifies as a 'loophole'. As for the aesthetics of quarterstaff and shield, that's entirely subjective. I'd call using a rapier and a shield silly, but that's not reason to down-rate it on an optimisation guide, which should deal with the rules as they are written, not as we would like them to be written.

And what DM in their right mind? Me.

[smcmike]

Aesthetics are always subjective, but for once I'm with Ferret. Shield and quarter staff is dumb, and I suspect that most people who pick it are justifying the silly aesthetics in order to take advantage of the nice numbers. It simple is not the same as a shield and spear. Moreover, it's doubly silly that it is a better build than shield and long sword, which should be the best-supported sword and board paladin.

Rapier and shield is certainly nonstandard, but nowhere near as silly. If the shield is a buckler or other light shield, it actually fits fine with some actual historical practice. The big problem with rapiers is that the image is based upon either movies, or modern fencing, or their use as a civilian side-arm, all of which don't use shields.

[Xetheral]

What DM in their right mind would allow you the bonus attack with the other end of the staff when wielded in one hand... or the other benefit of AoO when they get within your reach...

Considering that Crawford has said it works (https://mobile.twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/530377218493386753?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) and they didn't errata it, your claim that DMs who rule that way are out of their minds seems a bit extreme. One is welcome to ignore Crawford (I often do at my table) but I would never argue that those who do choose to follow the lead designer are unreasonable.

Also, the tweet and the lack of errata make it pretty clear that it's not a loophole at this point... it's apparently both RAW and RAI.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Aesthetics are always subjective, but for once I'm with Ferret. Shield and quarter staff is dumb, and I suspect that most people who pick it are justifying the silly aesthetics in order to take advantage of the nice numbers. It simple is not the same as a shield and spear. Moreover, it's doubly silly that it is a better build than shield and long sword, which should be the best-supported sword and board paladin.

Rapier and shield is certainly nonstandard, but nowhere near as silly. If the shield is a buckler or other light shield, it actually fits fine with some actual historical practice. The big problem with rapiers is that the image is based upon either movies, or modern fencing, or their use as a civilian side-arm, all of which don't use shields.

Whether staff and shield is superior to sword and shield is highly debatable, since sword and shield does more damage* and requires less feat investment. Sword and shield is already perfectly well supported, given that they have the best fighting style** and the excellent Shield Master feat (which a Staff user can also benefit from, but they have less ASI/feat room with which to do so, and have competition for the bonus action making part of one of their feats redundant).

*Admittedly the staff can match the sword for damage with Shillelagh, but that involves blowing another feat or dipping levels.
**Assuming one does not let Great Weapon Fighting reroll smite dice, as per Sage Advice.

[smcmike]

Whether staff and shield is superior to sword and shield is highly debatable, since sword and shield does more damage* and requires less feat investment. Sword and shield is already perfectly well supported, given that they have the best fighting style** and the excellent Shield Master feat (which a Staff user can also benefit from, but they have less ASI/feat room with which to do so, and have competition for the bonus action making part of one of their feats redundant).

*Admittedly the staff can match the sword for damage with Shillelagh, but that involves blowing another feat or dipping levels.
**Assuming one does not let Great Weapon Fighting reroll smite dice, as per Sage Advice.

Fair enough and good points. You're right, sword and board is well supported (a huge improvement over 3.5, in my opinion).
It's mostly an aesthetic issue for me.

[Fighting_Ferret]

It is superior to sword and shield in the fact that you get AoO more often(weapon die, plus modifier, plus additional damage, and smitable), due to the wording in the PAM feat that allows you to get attacks when an opponent enters your range, as opposed to leave it, as normal, which you can also get. You also get the benefit of a bonus action attack that deals damage (1d4), that adds your modifier, and can also add smite damage, and any other magical bonus damage as well...basically negating an entire fighting style (dual wielding, which paladins don't get) and does so with one weapon, a rather common one at that, all while also granting the use of a shield.

Yes shield master exists...but it does no damage with the bonus attack action. It can knock a target prone or back...that's it. It's a good ability.

PAM with a quarter staff is acting like a double strike or dual wielding (with the weapon style baked in). You get all of the benefits without a cost of the other two-handed polearms. I can care less about the attack of opportunity, unless you always move to get it. The bonus attack that a two-handed weapon could get, from a one-handed weapon is the ridiculous part.

[Saeviomage]

Bear in mind that to break out of a successful wrathful smite requires an ability check (ie - no proficiency bonus) with disadvantage (because being frightened gives you disadvantage to ability checks). And you have to spend an action to do it.

[Mavrik]

Well said, couldn't have done it better. Besides, DPR is not an Arms Race.

DPR is absolutely an arms race. One guy in the party doing triple the damage of his teammates gets annoying real fast. No DM in their right mind is going to let one PC hog the spotlight. Said DM will be increasing the difficulty of the encounters hence forth and those creatures will be gunning for the min/maxed PC.

Min/maxing is fun from a theorycrafting point of view, but not in actual gameplay. Does one enjoy playing a new videogame where, within the first hour of starting the game, used cheats to give yourself infinite money and set yourself to level 99? 5e is not a hard game to break, not even remotely.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

The only problem with quarterstaff/shield isn't the asthetics (remember the samurai who used a bokken instead of a katana? Kinda like that), it's the lack of control ability.

Quarterstaff is not a reach weapon. PAM lets you threaten when someone ENTERS your reach, not just leaves. You have a 10' range of 'nope' with a more typical polearm which you don't have with a quarterstaff. Combine with Sentinel, and you have an ability that can NEGATE any opponent action because he can't reach anyone to hit. That alone is worth ~1 point of damage per round, IMO. AC becomes irrelevant if your opponent cannot get into position to hit you in the first place.

[Oramac]

Beacon of Hope*:

Just a heads up, there's no descriptive text for this spell. Don't know if that's intentional or not.

Also, it might be worth mentioning how the spell ratings change if one is lucky enough to acquire a Holy Avenger.

[Arkhios]

The only problem with quarterstaff/shield isn't the asthetics (remember the samurai who used a bokken instead of a katana? Kinda like that), it's the lack of control ability.

Quarterstaff is not a reach weapon. PAM lets you threaten when someone ENTERS your reach, not just leaves. You have a 10' range of 'nope' with a more typical polearm which you don't have with a quarterstaff. Combine with Sentinel, and you have an ability that can NEGATE any opponent action because he can't reach anyone to hit. That alone is worth ~1 point of damage per round, IMO. AC becomes irrelevant if your opponent cannot get into position to hit you in the first place.

Granted, wooden swords and/or one handed staves can be flavorful. I take back my words against it being ridiculous.

However, I disagree with quarterstaff not working like the rest of the listed polearms.
5 ft. reach is just as much a reach as is 10 ft. reach. Whether your reach was 5 or 10 feet, anyone entering thar reach provokes an attack from you if you have PAM.

What I do find arrogant is that somehow, while wielding a staff one handed, you could wield it in a way to deliver a punch with the butt-end as well as with the "main" end. Doesn't compute, not one bit. Honestly, regardless of what tweets or whatnot have said, the bonus action attack should be possible with a quarterstaff only if you wielded it two-handed.

[Rysto]

To be honest, I don't really understand how the bonus attack is supposed with a 10ft reach, either.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Granted, wooden swords and/or one handed staves can be flavorful. I take back my words against it being ridiculous.

However, I disagree with quarterstaff not working like the rest of the listed polearms.
5 ft. reach is just as much a reach as is 10 ft. reach. Whether your reach was 5 or 10 feet, anyone entering thar reach provokes an attack from you if you have PAM.No, that's not quite right. With a 5' reach, you hit someone before they hit you. With a 10' reach, you hit them, they stop dead in their tracks, unable to hit anything. That's the difference. And it is a big one, because as long as you can keep them from hitting you, it gives you the equivalent of an arbitrary amount of AC. Actually, even better than that, because even with arbitrary AC, you can still be hit on a nat 20.


What I do find arrogant is that somehow, while wielding a staff one handed, you could wield it in a way to deliver a punch with the butt-end as well as with the "main" end. Doesn't compute, not one bit. Honestly, regardless of what tweets or whatnot have said, the bonus action attack should be possible with a quarterstaff only if you wielded it two-handed.

Call the bonus attack a 'back-swing' if you like.

[Malifice]

Unfortunately you are wrong. You see, in the setting of DnD, good and evil is not just a perspective but a defining aspect of a deity. Yeah the devil wants to give the humans more freedom and god wants us to be less free and be more restricted. Here it is a matter of perspective. But Asmodeus knows he is evil, he does evil for evil's sake. What is good and evil has clear definitions in the setting. You are confusing good and evil with good and evil so to speak. I am sure someone else can explain this better.

Yeah but in 5E, a Paladin can do objective acts of Evil (even though he himself thinks they are good) and not 'fall' or become an oathbreaker.

Heck, Vengance Paladins are actually fulfilling their oaths by employing torture, murder and genocide and tossing screaming babes onto the pyre. 'By any means necessary' and 'my sworn foes get no mercy' remember.

The Paladin thinks he's doing the right thing. Subjectively he thinks that his methods are justified 'for the greater good'. He's certainly fulfilling his oath, and clearly keeps his powers.

He probably even thinks he is good aligned and a good person, doing what needs to be done for the greater good.

Objectively however (on his character sheet) there is a big fat 'E' in the alignment section.

[Arkhios]

No, that's not quite right. With a 5' reach, you hit someone before they hit you. With a 10' reach, you hit them, they stop dead in their tracks, unable to hit anything. That's the difference. And it is a big one, because as long as you can keep them from hitting you, it gives you the equivalent of an arbitrary amount of AC. Actually, even better than that, because even with arbitrary AC, you can still be hit on a nat 20.
Being hit at 10'reach does not stop the movement, unless you also have the Sentinel feat. You're still as much in danger of getting hit after you've attacked on approach as you would be with 5'reach



Call the bonus attack a 'back-swing' if you like.
If I was able to do a 'back-swing' with a staff, why couldn't I do that with any other weapon as well? It doesn't make sense.

[Saggo]

Being hit at 10'reach does not stop the movement, unless you also have the Sentinel feat. You're still as much in danger of getting hit after you've attacked on approach as you would be with 5'reach

I think that was his original premise, that when combo'd with Sentinel, the lack of reach is costly.

[Arkhios]

I think that was his original premise, that when combo'd with Sentinel, the lack of reach is costly.

Ah, never mind me then, must've missed that post. Or just forgot it.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

I think that was his original premise, that when combo'd with Sentinel, the lack of reach is costly.

This, pretty much.

While a Paladin can dish out the deeps, using Sentinel + Polearm Mastery can also turn one into a beastly melee control. Pair well with various Smite debuff spells and you can be effective at lockdown for a party to focus-fire down. Very effective at single big-boss type encounters.

[MeeposFire]

I think that was his original premise, that when combo'd with Sentinel, the lack of reach is costly.

Yes but taking all those feats are also costly and the more you see bigger enemies with longer reach it becomes less OP (though still very useful). For a fighter the cost is not so big but for a paladin it is a viable choice but has a real cost because you are giving up toughness due to loss of con, cha bonus which is used for a lot of things on a paladin, or both.

Not all paladins are going to want to spend that cost to get sentinel.

[coredump]

Yeah but in 5E, a Paladin can do objective acts of Evil (even though he himself thinks they are good) and not 'fall' or become an oathbreaker.

Heck, Vengance Paladins are actually fulfilling their oaths by employing torture, murder and genocide and tossing screaming babes onto the pyre. 'By any means necessary' and 'my sworn foes get no mercy' remember. While I don't want to rehash this discussion again.... I do want to note that I *strongly* disagree with it.

To cherry pick 'by any means necessary' while ignoring the rest of the entry is disingenuous. Your "qualms" can't get in the way. Torture, murder, genocide, and tossing infants into fires is *WAY* *WAY* past 'qualms'. Those are blatantly and flagrantly vile and evil acts....the tenet does not somehow justify war crimes.

And 'show no mercy' is not the same as 'go ahead and torture and abuse'. And you again used very slanted editing. It says no mercy for "the Wicked". It then says normal foes may get mercy, but not sworn enemies. But even that does not condone torture and genocide.


Now, if it is an Evil PC, then doing these evil acts may fit.

[Malifice]

While I don't want to rehash this discussion again.... I do want to note that I *strongly* disagree with it.

To cherry pick 'by any means necessary' while ignoring the rest of the entry is disingenuous. Your "qualms" can't get in the way. Torture, murder, genocide, and tossing infants into fires is *WAY* *WAY* past 'qualms'. Those are blatantly and flagrantly vile and evil acts....the tenet does not somehow justify war crimes.

I can assure you, my LE Paladin has no such qualms. Genocide and torture are necessary evils to bring about the 'greater good' for Faerun - united under the benevolent rule of Bane.

One Nation, one God, one King. Hail Bane!

He doesnt harm children though. He's not a monster ;)


And 'show no mercy' is not the same as 'go ahead and torture and abuse'. And you again used very slanted editing. It says no mercy for "the Wicked". It then says normal foes may get mercy, but not sworn enemies. But even that does not condone torture and genocide.

My sworn enemies are the 'evil' church of Torm and his 'false' Paladins. Infidels that deserve death the lot of them. Also Cyricists. The usurpers worshipers are apostates that spread chaos and lies. Neither of them deserve or will recieve any mercy. A holy pogrom will cleanse them all from Faerun.

I particularly hate Torm. I know his lies, having once been a paladin of the church of Torm myself. He is a false god, and I am devoted to exposing his lies and evil for the world to see. Bane showed me the truth.

Hail Bane!


Now, if it is an Evil PC, then doing these evil acts may fit.

Oh I utterly agree. If a LN or LG Paladin engaged in genocide or murder and threw his oath at me as justification (and that he was doing what needed to be done for the greater good), I would solemly nod in agreement that he is indeed fulfilling his oath, and then pick up an eraser, lean forward, rub out whatever he had written in the alignment section of his character sheet, and write 'LE' in the same space.

Then the campaign would continue as normal.

[Ewhit]

Yes. I love the article. So does my oath of the ancient stout halfling paladin who is chaotic neutral and after bashing his worthy foes rips their hearts out and eats it to gain their strength and honor them.

"You say you cannot hear me because of my size? Well then... I shall yell into your ear after you lie dead upon the ground."

[Saggo]

Yes but taking all those feats are also costly and the more you see bigger enemies with longer reach it becomes less OP (though still very useful). For a fighter the cost is not so big but for a paladin it is a viable choice but has a real cost because you are giving up toughness due to loss of con, cha bonus which is used for a lot of things on a paladin, or both.

Not all paladins are going to want to spend that cost to get sentinel.

It is a specific build, not something every Paladin will do. The major argument is that if you take Sentinel and PAM, you'll do better using a reach weapon (in regards to battlefield control), rather than keeping the quarterstaff for Dueling and a shield.

[Klorox]

I do think people are doing it for mechanical reasons. I do think it is very hard to justify. I don't think selling your soul for power is a very Paladin-like thing to do. I don't think a Paladin of Ancients would worship or deal with Cthulhu or That Which Lurks, or any Fiend.

Exactly one of the three angels has a Flamestrike spell-like ability, in which a pillar of divine fire (half radiant/half fire) hits players. That is the only celestial fire ability, so no, I don't view Fireball (Balors and Pit Fiends have this spell though) or Wall of Fire as appropriate.

Moreover, gaining temporary HP by killing creature and feeding off their life force, doens't sound very "Good" to me, no matter how you try to reflavor it.


I tend to agree with you.

I don't think I'd have a problem with a Oath of the Ancients paladin multiclassing into an Archfey warlock though.

Also, Paladins don't need to be Good anymore. 😜

[TheOrcNextDoor]

I could totally see however, A young man/woman forming a pack with a demon, then having a change of heart. Then swear to work for good as pittance to try to redeem themselves and maybe regain their soul. (warlock 3/paladin X)

But starting as a paladin, the only thing I'd see thats really flavorful and not silly is the ancients + archfey.

MAYBE you could sell an oath of vengeance making a deal with the devil so to speak, in hopes to combat other evils. I might buy that, but you would eventually have to confront your patron.

[Arkhios]

I tend to agree with you.

I don't think I'd have a problem with a Oath of the Ancients paladin multiclassing into an Archfey warlock though.

I strongly agree with both. At 3rd level when my paladin swore his Oath of the Ancients, our DM had me roleplay the ritual in the presence of druids of the Land Circle, and the Archfey Titania (the Summer Queen, Good fey lady as I recall) appeared, beckoning my paladin to become her appointed Summer Knight.

So, yes, if he had had the chance of multiclassing into warlock, he might've taken Archfey as his Matron, because he already was her Chosen. Feys range from good to evil in alignment so Feylocks are among the most plausible combinations with a paladin, especially Oath of the Ancients paladin.

[Fflewddur Fflam]

I could totally see however, A young man/woman forming a pack with a demon, then having a change of heart. Then swear to work for good as pittance to try to redeem themselves and maybe regain their soul. (warlock 3/paladin X)

But starting as a paladin, the only thing I'd see thats really flavorful and not silly is the ancients + archfey.

MAYBE you could sell an oath of vengeance making a deal with the devil so to speak, in hopes to combat other evils. I might buy that, but you would eventually have to confront your patron.

I think Oath of Devotion and an Undying Warlock go together. You totally could have a God of Life be your patron for that which fits just fine with your typical "scare off the undead" Devotion Paladin.

[Oramac]

Divine Health: Well, not every feature can be amazing. Still, tell werewolves to suck it.

Help me out here. As I read it in the Monster Manual, lycanthropy is a curse, not a disease.

Why would a paladin tell werewolves to suck it?

[EvilAnagram]

Help me out here. As I read it in the Monster Manual, lycanthropy is a curse, not a disease.

Why would a paladin tell werewolves to suck it?

Because I made this before I had a Monster Manual. It's updated.

[Oramac]

Because I made this before I had a Monster Manual. It's updated.

Haha. Touche. :) Just checking.

[jake6898]

your first level spells colors might be a little argumentative. Thunderous smite should be sky blue or blue because its damage is only one step down from divine smite but with thunderous smite you can use constantly until you use a different concentration spell or fail it's con save. you can also combine this spell with divine smite to add more damage. you also need to remember that paladins don't have a whole lot of spell slots.

[Saggo]

your first level spells colors might be a little argumentative. Thunderous smite should be sky blue or blue because its damage is only one step down from divine smite but with thunderous smite you can use constantly until you use a different concentration spell or fail it's con save. you can also combine this spell with divine smite to add more damage. you also need to remember that paladins don't have a whole lot of spell slots.
Most Smite spells, including Thunderous, only work on the first weapon attack.

[Arkhios]

Most Smite spells, including Thunderous, only work on the first weapon attack.

More to the point, on the first hit after you've cast the smite spell. The effect doesn't end if you attack and miss.

[EvilAnagram]

your first level spells colors might be a little argumentative. Thunderous smite should be sky blue or blue because its damage is only one step down from divine smite but with thunderous smite you can use constantly until you use a different concentration spell or fail it's con save. you can also combine this spell with divine smite to add more damage. you also need to remember that paladins don't have a whole lot of spell slots.

As others have said, Thunderous Smite applies its damage once per casting, on the first hit after you cast it. If it applied it to every hit in the time frame, it would absolutely be sky-blue.

[GhorrinRedblade]

Does the sky-blue rating for Ritual Caster account for the fact that you'd need a 13 in Int or Wis? You might find yourself MADed up a bit.

(Sorry if this has been addressed.)

Love this and all of your guides, thanks for doing them.

[Sception]

Is this guide going to cover UA options apart from race, like Tunnel Fighter or the Tyranny & Treachery oaths?

[prismfalcon]

Excellent overview, EvilAnagram.

It's one of the two best guides I've found for exploring Paladin options and I particularly like the way that you keep the character creation open-ended with mechanics acting in a secondary role to role playing.

I would like to see your views on the Unearthed Arcana, Oath of Treachery option when you get a chance.

I have a character in mind that I'd like to use that oath on. I want to create a reformed criminal (rogue) who was saved by a paladin as part of his backstory. Because of this he decides to turn his back on crime and become a Paladin himself. In the campaign, evil forces start to take over the country using a mix of military strength and underhanded political machinations. These forces want to remove the paladins and use the paladins morals and predictability against them by creating situations where the paladins have to choose what is right and what will allow them to defeat their enemies, or between helping others vs. their own survival. After seeing many of his comrades killed because of their ideals, he decides that the traditional methods of the paladins aren't working and has a crisis of faith. He half reverts to his old unlawful ways as a means of restoring the balance by using the evil force's methods against them. His group works together using illusion, deception, poison, and contrived treachery to frame and eliminate the evil leaders and to pit them against each other. The reformed criminal couldn't use these methods as a paladin, so he falls and secretly becomes a blackguard in an attempt to defeat his enemies and protect the people left in his order.

Lots of role playing options, especially depending on whether or not the entire party is in on it. I'm picturing an intrigue-heavy campaign where the players have to play intelligently, gather information, seek out targets of opportunity and fade away before the reinforcements arrive. It would encourage players to be creative in trying to use any available means to get an edge; including using dirty tricks, such as using "Betray" as a word of command, or attempting an incapacitating strike on an opponent by applying the proficiency bonus from your medicine skill to the skill check because you're using your anatomical knowledge. Ect.

The Oath of Treachery option sounds like an ideal fit for this type of character or fighting style. The Oath of Treachery is extremely open ended in allowing you to decide what your character will do, as opposed to the other Oaths. I'm thinking of dual classing to a dexterity based Paladin after hitting level 3 in thief and unlocking either Assassin or Swashbuckler as an archetype. Possibly at level 5 after Uncanny Dodge.

I want characters to have an unusual and challenging adventure that makes them think creatively and possibly reevaluate their views and reevaluate the ways that they would approach an issue.

[Captain Panda]

I don't agree with the sorcerer multiclass option being only blue. Sorcadins are among the best multiclass builds in this edition. The two mesh together so well they almost fuse together and transcend the limits of both classes.:biggrin:

[Corran]

I would really like to see your take on the new conquest oath if/when you have time, even if it is just a brief evaluation. Then again, the oath will most likely make print soon enough, so if you want to hold back till you can see the final version, it is totally understadable. I still hope for a sneak peak at your thoughts about it though...!

[EvilAnagram]

I would really like to see your take on the new conquest oath if/when you have time, even if it is just a brief evaluation. Then again, the oath will most likely make print soon enough, so if you want to hold back till you can see the final version, it is totally understadable. I still hope for a sneak peak though...!

I'm waiting for the new book to come out before I write up an official take on it, but I'm honestly a big fan. It has the flavor of a 4e devotee of Bane, and it makes a very sticky tank. That said, the stickiness doesn't show up until seventh level, and it really won't be coming fully online until you can cast Fear. Levels 10+ will be extremely powerful, though, and I do like that the Conquering Presence essentially acts as Turn Everyone.

[Corran]

I'm waiting for the new book to come out before I write up an official take on it, but I'm honestly a big fan. It has the flavor of a 4e devotee of Bane, and it makes a very sticky tank. That said, the stickiness doesn't show up until seventh level, and it really won't be coming fully online until you can cast Fear. Levels 10+ will be extremely powerful, though, and I do like that the Conquering Presence essentially acts as Turn Everyone.
I hadn't thought of the benefits of fear, over conquering presence, when you combine them with the lvl7 aura (looked it up again because of how you said they come fully online at lvl9 when they get fear). If fear sticks, they'll never get to make another save as long as you can hold on to your concentration (didnt remember that part of fear). I guess they will be able to use their action to attack/dodge/anything-but-dash since they cant use their action to dash as dictated by the fear spell, so that can really shut down opponents without reach or a ranged attack, just as long as your remain in the right spot (I am expecting to see DMs having more monsters using bull rush tactics if they have a lvl9+ conquest paly PC. That CC is very powerful! (I just realized it, so apologies for stating the obvious.)

I think the real headache when playing a conquest paly, will be how you will manage your spell slots. Now, I am completelly speculating here, but they get so many good stuff! AoA and stoneskin will probably be very important the moment you hit lvl15 (temp hp and resistance, thus you will have to be hit more times to be brought down, so your 15lvl feature will probably be used more, at least in the difficult fights), and AoA and stoneskin are a good combination on their own. But even at lower levels, you'll have all the useful spells a paly gets (wrathful smite becomes even more important too), and you also get spiritual weapon and later on fear, plus you need slots to smite... So many good uses, both concentration-ones and concentration-free. It's a logistical nightmare, so many good choices!

Oops, I rambled a bit, couldnt hold myself. Anyway, thanks for your take, will wait to see what you'll make of the final version once(/if?) we see it.

[Arkhios]

It just occurred to me that Fallen Aasimar might make quite impressive Conquest Paladin.

[EvilAnagram]

It just occurred to me that Fallen Aasimar might make quite impressive Conquest Paladin.

Definitely. They'd be coming online much earlier, and in general the boost to both Strength and Charisma is very helpful for a paladin who wants to cast debuffs.

[Coidzor]

A note on the Multiclassing section. Barbarians' Unarmored Defense does work with a shield unlike what is stated there and how it works for Monks.