Question about Aura of Protection (cha bonus stacks twice?)

[Ramshack]

I apologize if this has been discussed before but does the paladin's auro of protection ability double their charisma saves. For Instance a Paladin has a 16 Cha. They have a plus 3 proficiency bonus so their save is +6, then they gain aura of protection, does it increase to +9 and count the charisma bonus twice? My gut tells me it wouldn't but I don't know of any rules that would back that up. Thoughts?

[JNAProductions]

It does indeed stack twice. The Aura applies to all saves, and affects the Paladin.

[Ramshack]

Isnt there a rule about the same modifier can't stack twice though?

[JNAProductions]

It isn't the same, though. One is the basic ability, the other is the Aura. Two Auras won't stack, but an Aura and a base save will.

[Daishain]

If you're concerned ab out the balance of double stacking Cha, do recall how rare that save is. Banishment is among the few, and I do find it appropriate that it is difficult to simply dismiss a holy warrior.

[E’Tallitnics]

Jeremy Crawford has confirmed that two Auras of Protection stack: http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/07/20/paladins-and-aura-of-protection/

[SharkForce]

wow. i seem to recall recently being told that saving throws don't fail on a 1. i guess a party of paladins are pretty much immune to anything that allows a saving throw. scary.

[E’Tallitnics]

wow. i seem to recall recently being told that saving throws don't fail on a 1. i guess a party of paladins are pretty much immune to anything that allows a saving throw. scary.

This is "expect table variance" but the only Win/Lose roll is an unadjusted attack roll. 20=Hit, 1=Miss. No modifiers to the attack roll can change that RAW.

However that 20/1 mentality has worked its way into other rolls where it shouldn't.

The DC for an Ability Check can go over 20. Easily in high level play. Rolling a 20 in that situation means nothing if the DC was 22. Rolling a 1 means nothing until all modifiers have been added.

[SharkForce]

This is "expect table variance" but the only Win/Lose roll is an unadjusted attack roll. 20=Hit, 1=Miss. No modifiers to the attack roll can change that RAW.

However that 20/1 mentality has worked its way into other rolls where it shouldn't.

The DC for an Ability Check can go over 20. Easily in high level play. Rolling a 20 in that situation means nothing if the DC was 22. Rolling a 1 means nothing until all modifiers have been added.

*shrug* i'm used to earlier editions where the chance of failure was deliberately kept in for saving throws.

[Kryx]

This is one of those moments where the math breaks. Allowing 2 aura of protection means players would never have to save again. Even if the aura is only 10 feet the party would just stay grouped as they can't fail aoe saves anyways.

Even 1 is problematic as it gives 10-25% better saves.

[Citan]

Jeremy Crawford has confirmed that two Auras of Protection stack: http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/07/20/paladins-and-aura-of-protection/
Wow. I usually find his ruling well-founded... But here. Did he smoke something before answering?

Beyond the fact that it breaks the general rule that you cannot have more than once a benefit from the same cause, it clearly breaks balance.

You want a everwinning party? Get 4 people, each with 18+CHA and 7 lvl Pallys at least (one being full pally for 30feet aura if needed): one Devotion, one Ancients, the rest Oathbreaker.
Complete with high AC and Shield Master and any other class ability that improve defense (Deflect Misile, Evasion, Manoeuvers...).

Congrats: you now just have to always stay concentrated in a small group. With +4 or +5 CHA mod per character, you'll have at least +16 to saving throws, not taking into account your own proficiencies or other bonus.
Shield Master will avoid taking half damage on successful saving throws.
Your high AC can be completed with buffs (even better if all take a few levels as Sorcerer to twin lvl1 spells.).

What in the world could have a chance to hit you, except maybe CR10+ monsters?

As for damage, don't worry: you benefit from double Aura from Oathbreaker, meaning at last +8 to damage. Enough to significantly compensate the loss or going one-handed instead of two-handed.

You can now go and save the world...
Utterly, ridiculously broken ruling, making an already really powerful class the no-brainer choice for nearly any and all situations. And after they nerfed the wizard/sorcerer spell abilities too. LOL.

[Xetheral]

it breaks the general rule that you cannot have more than once a benefit from the same cause

That isn't a general rule in 5e. The only general stacking limitations I'm aware of are that multiple castings of the same spell don't stack, and that you can't add your proficiency bonus multiple times to the same roll from different sources.

Other things don't stack because they are of the "set [value] to x" variety (e.g. resistance, most features that grant AC).

Otherwise, all numerical bonuses stack fully.

[Mellack]

As for damage, don't worry: you benefit from double Aura from Oathbreaker, meaning at last +8 to damage. Enough to significantly compensate the loss or going one-handed instead of two-handed.
.

Aura of Hate only works for "the Paladin", fiends and undead. It won't stack. It even specifically says a creature can only benefit from this from one paladin at a time.

[Demonic Spoon]

Wow. I usually find his ruling well-founded... But here. Did he smoke something before answering?

Beyond the fact that it breaks the general rule that you cannot have more than once a benefit from the same cause, it clearly breaks balance.


You're missing the entire point of Crawford's responses. He does not change the game rules on the fly. He tells people what the rules say. Occasionally, if it's ambiguous, he'll say "The intent is that..."

There is absolutely nothing in the entirety of the PHB to suggest that multiple auras of protection don't stack. Thus, the RAW answer is simple - yes, they do stack, and that's all he's saying.


Personally, if I had multiple paladins in my party, I'd houserule swap the Aura of Protection out for something else. You don't want to screw over the party for having two paladins by making one player's feature worthless, but you also shouldn't allow that much stacking.

[rhouck]

Even if the aura is only 10 feet the party would just stay grouped as they can't fail aoe saves anyways.

Alternatively, instead of all 5-6 party members getting hit by the Ancient Red Dragon's 26d6 breath weapon and taking half damage... they could spread out and only 1-2 of them get hit by it. :smallsmile: Things get wonky at 18th level when the aura spreads to 30 feet, but cramming everyone within a 10 foot radius just to get better saves is not always a great solution.

If players were always clumping together, I'm sure clever DMs would find ways to show the players the error of their ways.

[Citan]

Aura of Hate only works for "the Paladin", fiends and undead. It won't stack. It even specifically says a creature can only benefit from this from one paladin at a time.
You're right on that part, my bad, should have double-checked. Doesn't ruin the main point though.


That isn't a general rule in 5e. The only general stacking limitations I'm aware of are that multiple castings of the same spell don't stack, and that you can't add your proficiency bonus multiple times to the same roll from different sources.

Other things don't stack because they are of the "set [value] to x" variety (e.g. resistance, most features that grant AC).

Otherwise, all numerical bonuses stack fully.
No stacking of a bonus from the same kind of source is a general principle of D&d since at least 4th edition (didn't play the older).

This is clearly against this principle AND holds evident game-breaking potential. Having to houserule something this obvious should not be necessary.

Otherwise, the whole D&d setting should have been overrun and dominated foverer by any Paladin Order.

Just imagine a platoon of high-level humanoïd Paladins, each with a 30-feet aura radius. This means most of them in the platoon could benefit from more than a dozen auras.
They are plain invicible. That's why it's stupid.

[Xetheral]

No stacking of a bonus from the same kind of source is a general principle of D&d since at least 4th edition (didn't play the older).

It was indeed a general rule in previous editions, but I can't find any such rule in 5e.


...That's why it's stupid.

I didn't say it wasn't, only that under the rules of 5e, most things other than spells stack with themselves.

[Kryx]

Alternatively, instead of all 5-6 party members getting hit by the Ancient Red Dragon's 26d6 breath weapon and taking half damage... they could spread out and only 1-2 of them get hit by it. :smallsmile: Things get wonky at 18th level when the aura spreads to 30 feet, but cramming everyone within a 10 foot radius just to get better saves is not always a great solution.

If players were always clumping together, I'm sure clever DMs would find ways to show the players the error of their ways.
Sure, in extreme cases a DM can punish them for this tactic.

If people enjoy those type of games where a DM has to go significantly out of their way to balance encounters around an ability that breaks the math of the game then it's easier to directly address that ability.

[coredump]

This is one of those moments where the math breaks. Allowing 2 aura of protection means players would never have to save again. Even if the aura is only 10 feet the party would just stay grouped as they can't fail aoe saves anyways. That is not even close to being true. We have 2 paladins in our group, currently if next to both of them you get a +4 (soon a +5). That is not *nearly* enough to "never have to save again".

It also means everyone is jammed together, and on the front lines (just where the casters/archers/etc *don't* want to be). IME it is rare that anyone gets any save bonus, let alone to get both.
And since many saves are caused by AoE's.... by grouping up you are making it much easier for everyone to get hit.

[Kryx]

You're right: it's not as big of an issue for Paladins who do not prioritize Charisma.

But when they do is when the math breaks down. At level 1 you can have a 15% higher chance to save. At higher levels its 25%. 2 Paladins = 50%. That's auto save territory.

[coredump]

Beyond the fact that it breaks the general rule that you cannot have more than once a benefit from the same cause, it clearly breaks balance.
As mentioned, there is no such general rule. Unless you want to tell us where...??



You want a everwinning party? Get 4 people, each with 18+CHA and 7 lvl Pallys at least (one being full pally for 30feet aura if needed): one Devotion, one Ancients, the rest Oathbreaker.
Complete with high AC and Shield Master and any other class ability that improve defense (Deflect Misile, Evasion, Manoeuvers...).

Congrats: you now just have to always stay concentrated in a small group. With +4 or +5 CHA mod per character, you'll have at least +16 to saving throws, not taking into account your own proficiencies or other bonus.
Shield Master will avoid taking half damage on successful saving throws.
Your high AC can be completed with buffs (even better if all take a few levels as Sorcerer to twin lvl1 spells.).

What in the world could have a chance to hit you, except maybe CR10+ monsters?
Several problems...
1) There are a bunch of 'spam' lists that break the game
1a) spam warlocks with darkness and devilsight
1b) spam abjuration wizards getting tons of damage ward
etc

2) Your list doesn't move very well
3) your list has almost no ranged ability
4) your list has almost no magical support
5) you casually handwave things like 'up your AC by magic' without explaining how
6) For every paladin to have 18/20 Cha, you are talking >12th level, and that means you have low Str/Dex. (So even less damage dealing)
7) you treat CR 10 creatures as a big deal, but are talking about very high level characters.
8) Many things requiring a save still do half damage
etc
etc

AC 20-22 just isnt that big of a deal by level 12-16.... so what you have is a very slow moving small blob that is extremely vulnerable to air attacks or ranged attacks. I would venture that either of the Warlock or Abjurer groups would easily kill those paladins.

[Citan]

It was indeed a general rule in previous editions, but I can't find any such rule in 5e.
I didn't say it wasn't, only that under the rules of 5e, most things other than spells stack with themselves.
Indeed, you're right. I'm sorry if my post seemed agressive. :)


As mentioned, there is no such general rule. Unless you want to tell us where...??
Several problems...
1) There are a bunch of 'spam' lists that break the game
1a) spam warlocks with darkness and devilsight
1b) spam abjuration wizards getting tons of damage ward
etc

2) Your list doesn't move very well
3) your list has almost no ranged ability
4) your list has almost no magical support
5) you casually handwave things like 'up your AC by magic' without explaining how
6) For every paladin to have 18/20 Cha, you are talking >12th level, and that means you have low Str/Dex. (So even less damage dealing)
7) you treat CR 10 creatures as a big deal, but are talking about very high level characters.
8) Many things requiring a save still do half damage
etc
etc

AC 20-22 just isnt that big of a deal by level 12-16.... so what you have is a very slow moving small blob that is extremely vulnerable to air attacks or ranged attacks. I would venture that either of the Warlock or Abjurer groups would easily kill those paladins.
Errm, sorry, but false.
For all your say, since lvl6 Paladin is enough, you can easily multiclass to be a good ranged fighter, a good sorcerer/warlock etc.
So 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) are irrelevant.

AC 20/22 is only the base AC, with only Paladin goodies you can put it much higher, if only by Shield of Faith. For the rest, I just didn't have (and neither now) time to list all the spells that are available to Paladin (Aid, Heroism, all the Auras etc) or otherwise with multiclass (Armor of Agathys, Shield, Mirror Image, etc) to upgrade your defense .
As for stat, you can get to 18 CHA as soon as lvl4 with decent point-buy and race combination. (15 start+Half-Elf = 17 starting CHA) while maintaining a correct STR/DEX. Or pick Shillelagh through a multiclass to become SAD (meaning coming online 3 or 6 levels later) if you really didn't have good starting stats and planned on building Warlock/Bard either way.
Lack of STR/DEX meaning less chance to hit/damage can be compensated with Feats and Oath abilities (Sacred Weapon, Vengeance). Beyond that, who cares if it takes time killing enemies if they cannot do anything to you anyways...

So, sorry, my argument fully stands.

[coredump]

You're right: it's not as big of an issue for Paladins who do not prioritize Charisma.

But when they do is when the math breaks down. At level 1 you can have a 15% higher chance to save. At higher levels its 25%. 2 Paladins = 50%. That's auto save territory.

Sure, if the Paly puts a 16 into Cha, and bumps it twice, with 2 paly's by 8th level you could get a +10 to saves.
Granted, if the save is a primary stat *and* has proficiency, the +10 is an autosave. But that Wizard with a 12 wisdom, now has an 11 wisdom save... no where near 'automatic'. *AND ONLY IF* he is within 10' of *both* of the paladins. (not likely for a wizard)

And this means those Paladins have devoted a lot of resources into that, they now have a 14 (*maybe* 16) in their attack stat.

[CNagy]

So... 6/14 Paladin/Monks? The Order of the Smiting Staff. God's Own Terminators. MADmen with mad saves.

Honestly, I don't see the overlapping Auras of Protection rearing their heads at many tables, and if they does at mine it will be intentional--different Knightly orders sending each a champion for a specific cause. They'll walk through the flames, saving for half damage with ease, and ending whatever evil threatens the land.

[Citan]

So... 6/14 Paladin/Monks? The Order of the Smiting Staff. God's Own Terminators. MADmen with mad saves.

Honestly, I don't see the overlapping Auras of Protection rearing their heads at many tables, and if they does at mine it will be intentional--different Knightly orders sending each a champion for a specific cause. They'll walk through the flames, saving for half damage with ease, and ending whatever evil threatens the land.
True this could be very nasty. :)
Although I'd say Monk's ability is overkill for a group of 4+ people, better drop some levels to get Shillelagh and smite them with your divine staff. ^^

Or use remaining levels to build something totally different. :)

[coredump]

Errm, sorry, but false.
For all your say, since lvl6 Paladin is enough, you can easily multiclass to be a good ranged fighter, a good sorcerer/warlock etc.
So 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) are irrelevant.

AC 20/22 is only the base AC, with only Paladin goodies you can put it much higher, if only by Shield of Faith. For the rest, I just didn't have (and neither now) time to list all the spells that are available to Paladin or otherwise to upgrade your defense.
As for stat, beyond just picking Shillelagh through a multiclass to become SAD if you really didn't have good starting stats, you can get to 18 CHA as soon as lvl4 with decent point-buy and race combination. (15 start+Half-Elf = 17 starting CHA).
And lack of STR/DEX can be compensated with a Feat and Oath abilities (Sacred Weapon, Vengeance).

So, sorry, my argument fully stands.

You are still pulling 'what if's out of the air with no context and no concern for how your claims are mutually excluding themselves. You want Cha of 18-20 *and* shield master *and* damage boosting feats, etc..... and that is just one example.

So lets try and give some organization to your disorganized claims.

First, you need a party of all paladins for 6 levels. So for 6 levels you have no ranged attacks, no stealth, low damage output....but lets say they all survive.

So they start MCing.
Lets assume one Paladin has an okay Dex... so ranged
Which one has the okay Int for wizard?
Or okay Wisdom for Cleric?
etc
Remember, they started with a 13 Str and a 16 Cha *and* need a 'decent' stat for your MC class.
Further, since you plan on putting them in Plate... that 13 Str really needs to be 15 Str. But I guess all of them could use the 15-15-15-8-8-8 build....

So, how many levels before that MC becomes a decent ranged attacker? How many levels until they become a useful Wizard? etc?

Yes they can cast Shield of Faith.... but its concentration, for a whopping +2AC.
How do they all move and still stay within 10' of each other
AC 20/22 is not the 'base AC', at best 20 is the base AC, and that assumes a shield, so reduced damage output.
At what level do you take the feat to compensate for low Str/Dex?
Shillelagh is Druid only I believe, so *if* they MC druid they can use their low wisdom instead of their low Str.... I don't see the improvement.
Or did you want them to use a feat for MI? If so, what level does *that* happen?
And when they are all standing right next to each other, it means those 'auto pass' saves for half damage, are already doing Double Damage because they are hitting so many of them. Yay Moonbeam, fireball, lightning bolt, spirit guardians, etc, etc getting to hit the entire party, every time.....
And you still don't move well, and still kind of suck at range....


So no, your argument does not stand.... you are creating some theoretical party that will never exist, and will not work. And would still get dusted by the warlock or abjurer party....

[SharkForce]

honestly, I'd probably suggest all of them go paladin 6-7, warlock 2-3, the rest sorcerer. warlock gives amazing ranged damage based on cha early on (and recharging spell slots), sorcerer gives most of the buffs you really need to make this terrifying plus metamagic plus higher level spell slots, paladin gives you smites and that ridiculous aura.

and it doesn't have to come online particularly slowly thanks to those 2-level warlock splashes (though it may be worthwhile to have 1-2 take their first 6 levels in paladin, then take the warlock levels, then take the sorcerer levels).

with devotion oath, your paladins can add cha to hit 1/short rest, so your damage should still be fairly solid even for the melee cha-based paladins if they want.

[Sigreid]

It was indeed a general rule in previous editions, but I can't find any such rule in 5e.



I didn't say it wasn't, only that under the rules of 5e, most things other than spells stack with themselves.

That didn't come about until 3.0. In the older editions a bonus was just a bonus, it wasn't "typed".

I don't think this is much of a problem for 3 reasons. 1. I haven't met any parties that had more than one person who really wanted to be a paladin. 2. The potential (and I mean fanaticism) required to be a paladin should be rare in the population at large. 3. It does give the GM a means short of "The gods are coming for you riding on the back of the Tourrasque" to deal with a powerful party that's gotten out of hand. If you're bad enough, 10 paladins who ordinarily operate alone or with normal soldiers may decide it's necessary to protect the world from the party. This would shut down much of the power from the clerics, sorcerers, druids, bards, Eldrich Knights, Monks, Warlocks, Trickster Rogues and wizards. Basically you're left with only 2 types of fighter, barbarians and 2 types of rogues not finding half or more of their abilities essentially shut down.

[Tenmujiin]

So they start MCing.
Lets assume one Paladin has an okay Dex... so ranged
Which one has the okay Int for wizard?
Or okay Wisdom for Cleric?
etc
Remember, they started with a 13 Str and a 16 Cha *and* need a 'decent' stat for your MC class.
Further, since you plan on putting them in Plate... that 13 Str really needs to be 15 Str. But I guess all of them could use the 15-15-15-8-8-8 build....

So, how many levels before that MC becomes a decent ranged attacker? How many levels until they become a useful Wizard? etc?

Yes they can cast Shield of Faith.... but its concentration, for a whopping +2AC.
How do they all move and still stay within 10' of each other
AC 20/22 is not the 'base AC', at best 20 is the base AC, and that assumes a shield, so reduced damage output.
At what level do you take the feat to compensate for low Str/Dex?
Shillelagh is Druid only I believe, so *if* they MC druid they can use their low wisdom instead of their low Str.... I don't see the improvement.
Or did you want them to use a feat for MI? If so, what level does *that* happen?

Who says they need to fill the party roles with the traditional classes? 2 levels of warlock gets you a strong at-will ranged attack based off charisma, so there's your ranged character SAD.

If one of the paladins goes bard you have your arcane support.

All 4 charcters have at least 6 levels of the best healing class in the game (paladin).

I'm not sure where he got the 22 AC from, maybe he misread the defense fighting style?

So the average stat array might look like this:

10/15/15/10/10/14 -> 10/16/16/10/10/16 from half elf

or

15/10/15/10/10/14 -> 10/16/16/10/10/16 again, from half elf

Which means they can all have a 16 in every stat they care about and the strength characters can wear plate as soon as they can afford it.

They would have been a little short on skills since paladins have a kind of crappy skill list but the 2 extras from half elf means they each have 4 skills to put wherever they need them.

While I don't think there is a problem with the auras stacking (for the same reasons already listed in this thread) or with the parts of your post I didn't quote, a party of 4 paladins would get along just fine since paladin already fills both the front liner and support caster roles while a 2-3 level dip into bard (probably at level 1) for one character fills the skill monkey role and a 2 level dip into warlock fills the ranged damage role.

The party would be perfectly viable from levels 1-6 at which point the two pure paladins have their auras come online while the two paladins that started as warlock/bard have their auras come online at levels 8 and 9.

[coredump]

I agree with both of you, but the brokenness comes from a party of warlocks with Devil sight, darkness, and agonizing blast. Not from the paladin aura.

If you start with the warlock levels.... no one would bother with having every warlock take 6 levels of paladin just to get the saving throw boosts.

Oh, the array isn't legal, need to go 8/15/15/8/10/14

[Giant2005]

Stacking saves does little good if you have to bunch up to do it anyway. Evasion/Shield Mastery only apply to Dex Saves and there are plenty of AOE attacks out there that target other abilities.
Bunching up like that might feel really awesome for a long time but you might regret it as soon as someone nukes your entire party to death.

[georgie_leech]

That didn't come about until 3.0. In the older editions a bonus was just a bonus, it wasn't "typed".



Eh... AD&D was actually extremely anal about it, to the point that rings of protection and magic armor didn't stack because they both improved armor class.

[SharkForce]

Stacking saves does little good if you have to bunch up to do it anyway. Evasion/Shield Mastery only apply to Dex Saves and there are plenty of AOE attacks out there that target other abilities.
Bunching up like that might feel really awesome for a long time but you might regret it as soon as someone nukes your entire party to death.

yeah, and most of those other AoE spells do nothing on a passed save anyways...

[Giant2005]

yeah, and most of those other AoE spells do nothing on a passed save anyways...

Literally almost every single aoe effect that isn't a cantrip inflicts half damage on a failed save.
EDIT: Here is a list of spells that the group would become very susceptible to: Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting, Arms of Hadar, Circle of Death, Cloudkill, Cone of Cold, Destructive Wave, Dust Devil, Insect Plague, Investiture of Ice, Investiture of Wind, Moonbeam, Otiluke's Freezing Sphere, Shatter, Spirit Guardians, Sunbeam, Sunburst, and Thunderwave. There are also more spells like Spike Growth, Silence, and Wall of Force that don't allow a save at all which they would easily fall prey to.

Even if the strategy works quite well on most enemy encounters, it will find itself very, very vulnerable to the counter-strategies. The sad thing is that those counter-strategies would probably become a whole lot more common than they should be in most games.

[Malifice]

YJust imagine a platoon of high-level humanoïd Paladins, each with a 30-feet aura radius.

In what world does this exist?

[Citan]

I agree with both of you, but the brokenness comes from a party of warlocks with Devil sight, darkness, and agonizing blast. Not from the paladin aura.

If you start with the warlock levels.... no one would bother with having every warlock take 6 levels of paladin just to get the saving throw boosts.

Oh, the array isn't legal, need to go 8/15/15/8/10/14
Ok, so two other people were kind enough to answer you in my place.
And considering that broken build comes from Devil Sight + Darkness is funny, considering how any decent Cleric can break the combo with a Light (or Daylight? don't remember) spell...

Also, Shillelagh would obviously come from Warlock or Bard. Do you really know the basic tricks? :)

[SharkForce]

Literally almost every single aoe effect that isn't a cantrip inflicts half damage on a failed save.
EDIT: Here is a list of spells that the group would become very susceptible to: Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting, Arms of Hadar, Circle of Death, Cloudkill, Cone of Cold, Destructive Wave, Dust Devil, Insect Plague, Investiture of Ice, Investiture of Wind, Moonbeam, Otiluke's Freezing Sphere, Shatter, Spirit Guardians, Sunbeam, Sunburst, and Thunderwave. There are also more spells like Spike Growth, Silence, and Wall of Force that don't allow a save at all which they would easily fall prey to.

Even if the strategy works quite well on most enemy encounters, it will find itself very, very vulnerable to the counter-strategies. The sad thing is that those counter-strategies would probably become a whole lot more common than they should be in most games.

sure, let's look at those spells. the vast majority are half damage on a save, and no other effect. a group of paladins that wants to group tightly will probably include at least one oath of the ancients paladin. so... you're dealing 1/4 damage. i'm sure the group of paladins that have high hit points and lots of healing are just shaking in their boots. especially for the ones you listed that have ranges that equate to "in melee with a group of smiting paladins".

about the only one you listed that could cause any problems is wall of force. but, since we've established they all want to be warlocks and probably sorcerers as well, they can just misty step out of it.

essentially guaranteeing that you make all saves is not a balanced mechanic. paladin auras should not stack.

[Ouranos]

Lets not forget the original mention of it being OP with a group of paladin assumed they all had Shield Master, allowing them to negate the half damage on AOE damage spells they save from.

But, in all seriousness, I think the REAL reason it stacks is because a TRUE PALADIN will NOT be multiclassing all over the universe, nor would a large group of paladins have all of them far enough to have the aura to 30 feet AND be leveled in other classes, AND it's rare for a party to have more than one person willing to play a Paladin. EVERY edition of D&D has "optimal" setups that can break the game. But, generally, these setups required so much complex setup and level-prep that no ordinary player would find it in the first place, and it required stuff that made very little sense. Like a Roman Legionnaire phalanx of Paladins clumped up JUST so they succeed at saves. Sure, they'll never fail a sacing throw. Which is why you don't use em. Shoot ballistas at their AC, or force em into a narrow corridor and throw barbarians at em a la Thermopylae until the last paladin falls.

Basically, if you have a problem with people all taking Paladin to outwit ONE aspect of the game, beat em down with ALL the other aspects of the game. When one of your Devotion Oath pallies lies, HURT HIM FOR IT. Make em stick to the rules and see how quickly their tune changes.

[Sigreid]

Eh... AD&D was actually extremely anal about it, to the point that rings of protection and magic armor didn't stack because they both improved armor class.

Well then, my various groups and I never noticed that.

[SharkForce]

Lets not forget the original mention of it being OP with a group of paladin assumed they all had Shield Master, allowing them to negate the half damage on AOE damage spells they save from.

But, in all seriousness, I think the REAL reason it stacks is because a TRUE PALADIN will NOT be multiclassing all over the universe, nor would a large group of paladins have all of them far enough to have the aura to 30 feet AND be leveled in other classes, AND it's rare for a party to have more than one person willing to play a Paladin. EVERY edition of D&D has "optimal" setups that can break the game. But, generally, these setups required so much complex setup and level-prep that no ordinary player would find it in the first place, and it required stuff that made very little sense. Like a Roman Legionnaire phalanx of Paladins clumped up JUST so they succeed at saves. Sure, they'll never fail a sacing throw. Which is why you don't use em. Shoot ballistas at their AC, or force em into a narrow corridor and throw barbarians at em a la Thermopylae until the last paladin falls.

Basically, if you have a problem with people all taking Paladin to outwit ONE aspect of the game, beat em down with ALL the other aspects of the game. When one of your Devotion Oath pallies lies, HURT HIM FOR IT. Make em stick to the rules and see how quickly their tune changes.

or, instead of saying it's unlikely to happen and that we'll punish anyone who tries to use the rules they've been presented with, WotC could just not provide broken mechanics to be exploited in the first place, especially when there isn't a meaningful benefit to be gained by having that broken mechanic. that could also be an option.

i mean, if there was something you could point to and show how there's a reasonable use of this that won't break the everything, then sure, by all means, include it. i haven't seen anyone yet who stepped in and showed a balanced use of it yet, though, and that's kinda worrying.

[Ouranos]

or, instead of saying it's unlikely to happen and that we'll punish anyone who tries to use the rules they've been presented with, WotC could just not provide broken mechanics to be exploited in the first place, especially when there isn't a meaningful benefit to be gained by having that broken mechanic. that could also be an option.

i mean, if there was something you could point to and show how there's a reasonable use of this that won't break the everything, then sure, by all means, include it. i haven't seen anyone yet who stepped in and showed a balanced use of it yet, though, and that's kinda worrying.

Name me ONE game without an exploit in it and I'll let this have credit. Otherwise, you're just complaining that people are people, and Earth is Earth, and math is math. There is no such thing as perfect, and EVERY GAME has exploits. In this case, it's a minor exploit, of a single aspect of combat, that can only be used by cramming a rare class, above a certain level, down everyone's throats. Can it be overpowered? Yes. Is it likely to be? No.

If you're going to put this much rage into one class feature on one class, I cannot IMAGINE what you thought of 3.5 and Wizards...

[SharkForce]

Name me ONE game without an exploit in it and I'll let this have credit. Otherwise, you're just complaining that people are people, and Earth is Earth, and math is math. There is no such thing as perfect, and EVERY GAME has exploits. In this case, it's a minor exploit, of a single aspect of combat, that can only be used by cramming a rare class, above a certain level, down everyone's throats. Can it be overpowered? Yes. Is it likely to be? No.

If you're going to put this much rage into one class feature on one class, I cannot IMAGINE what you thought of 3.5 and Wizards...

i'm sorry, i must have missed the part where you explained why the existence of mistakes is a good reason to not fix them when you find them.

could you perhaps go over that part again?

[Ouranos]

And again, nobody is perfect. No team is perfect. 5th is STILL far less prone to breaking than 3.5 or 4th were, so that they missed one, minor, little detail that's laughably difficult to exploit in any MEANINGFUL way is reason to whine so hard WHY?

[SharkForce]

And again, nobody is perfect. No team is perfect. 5th is STILL far less prone to breaking than 3.5 or 4th were, so that they missed one, minor, little detail that's laughably difficult to exploit in any MEANINGFUL way is reason to whine so hard WHY?

so then, you *don't* have any reason why we should leave broken things broken instead of fixing them, and you're just complaining that people want a better product.

my advice to you: deal with it. just because i have a pretty good product, doesn't mean i don't want it to be better.

[Kryx]

just because i have a pretty good product, doesn't mean i don't want it to be better.
Hear, hear!

[Ouranos]

so then, you *don't* have any reason why we should leave broken things broken instead of fixing them, and you're just complaining that people want a better product.

my advice to you: deal with it. just because i have a pretty good product, doesn't mean i don't want it to be better.

No I'm saying I'm fine with a minute detail that's easily dealt with BY THE AUTHORITY GIVEN DM'S BY THE NATURE OF THE PRODUCT. I'm also saying I'm having a hard time believing how entitled and whiny people can be. If you think you can do a better job, than apply with WOTC and make a better game. Otherwise, you've gone beyond theorycrafting or trying to find the exploits, and you're simply whining for the sake of whining.

[Citan]

But, in all seriousness, I think the REAL reason it stacks is because a TRUE PALADIN will NOT be multiclassing all over the universe, nor would a large group of paladins have all of them far enough to have the aura to 30 feet AND be leveled in other classes, AND it's rare for a party to have more than one person willing to play a Paladin. EVERY edition of D&D has "optimal" setups that can break the game. But, generally, these setups required so much complex setup and level-prep that no ordinary player would find it in the first place, and it required stuff that made very little sense.

Basically, if you have a problem with people all taking Paladin to outwit ONE aspect of the game, beat em down with ALL the other aspects of the game. When one of your Devotion Oath pallies lies, HURT HIM FOR IT. Make em stick to the rules and see how quickly their tune changes.
This. Your comment is by far the most conclusive one to disrupt my feared awesomeness of a group of Paladin. :)

Indeed, rare are the players that really roleplay Paladin to the utmost, and indeed, multiclassing can be seen as devious in itself for a true Paladin. Points taken and hat down to you (although, one last time and then I shut up on this I promise, would be simpler to not allow Auras stacking, as I may houserule anyways would the case arise ^^. But well...).

[SharkForce]

No I'm saying I'm fine with a minute detail that's easily dealt with BY THE AUTHORITY GIVEN DM'S BY THE NATURE OF THE PRODUCT. I'm also saying I'm having a hard time believing how entitled and whiny people can be. If you think you can do a better job, than apply with WOTC and make a better game. Otherwise, you've gone beyond theorycrafting or trying to find the exploits, and you're simply whining for the sake of whining.

says the guy who is whining about everyone else whining.

just because the DM *can* fix the game, doesn't mean the game should be badly designed. "fixing the game" is not generally one of the described responsibilities of the DM. creating the world. controlling the NPCs, the environment, etc. even adapting the game to suit their group's needs and wants (not the same as fixing the game; the game should work on its own, and the DM should only need to change things to suit their tastes, not to keep the game from being broken).

DMs can fix things. but they're not a reason to design things badly.

and just because I'm not currently making a better game, doesn't mean I can't identify bad design when I see it, and doesn't mean I have no right to point out or discuss the flaws in the game in an online forum dedicated to discussing the game. and since this isn't (last I checked) your website, you have no right to tell me what I am or am not allowed to discuss.

if this violates the rules of the forums, then you can feel free to tell me not to post it (or, more appropriately, report the post to the moderators (who are actually the only people authorized to police these forums).

[Ouranos]

This. Your comment is by far the most conclusive one to disrupt my feared awesomeness of a group of Paladin. :)

Indeed, rare are the players that really roleplay Paladin to the utmost, and indeed, multiclassing can be seen as devious in itself for a true Paladin. Points taken and hat down to you (although, one last time and then I shut up on this I promise, would be simpler to not allow Auras stacking, as I may houserule anyways would the case arise ^^. But well...).

Well and this is what it comes down to. The ULTIMATE authority in making rulings is the DM. House rulings fix small cracks. DM cleverness goes around exploits. DM's making players PAY for go against their class or their character is how you fix bad RP used to exploit things.

[JNAProductions]

Quick question-how is multiclassing against the Paladin way? A Paladin/Fighter multiclass, for instance, is simply a Paladin with an emphasis on martial skills. Still 100% within their oath. A Paladin/Sorcerer is a Paladin with an emphasis on magic, but as long as they're roleplayed well it's still entirely within their oath.

[coredump]

so then, you *don't* have any reason why we should leave broken things broken instead of fixing them, and you're just complaining that people want a better product.

my advice to you: deal with it. just because i have a pretty good product, doesn't mean i don't want it to be better.

Simple, I don't agree that it is broken.
Your only evidence boils down to "If an entire party of people decide to do something that is *never* going to happen, a problem might arise...in theory...we think..."

Its like complaining that a glass vase is 'badwrong'...because "someone might use it as a hammer". Umm... that will never happen. Just like you will never get an entire party of multiclassing paladins that happen to all also take Warlock and all have Shield Master, and all pump Cha....

I am playing in a party with two paladins, and it simply isn't a broken mechanic. It is more likely that no one gets the benefit, and almost never that anyone benefits from both auras.


An entire party of Warlocks that MC is even easier to pull off, and that isn't happening either
Or an entire party of Abjuration wizards.....

You want to nerf a perfectly reasonable mechanic, because on the bleeding edge of improbability that is a 'never gonna happen' chance that maybe something might be broken.....

[SharkForce]

if it is never going to happen, it isn't a nerf to make it not happen.

[Kryx]

Some like like the game exactly as is with its flaws here and there.

Some people, like Shark and myself, would rather the game not have those flaws. And more importantly would rather not design encounters based around those flaws.
As a DM I shouldn't have to deal with highly exploitable things. Examples being Devil's Sight+Darkness, RAW contagion, Forecage, Wall of Force, etc.


Different people enjoy different aspects of the game. And that's ok.

[Citan]

Quick question-how is multiclassing against the Paladin way? A Paladin/Fighter multiclass, for instance, is simply a Paladin with an emphasis on martial skills. Still 100% within their oath. A Paladin/Sorcerer is a Paladin with an emphasis on magic, but as long as they're roleplayed well it's still entirely within their oath.
Hey :) You're perfectly right imo.
Sorry if my message could be read as "For a Paladin, multiclassing is plain bad". Indeed not.

I was just implicitly referring to some multiclass such as Warlock, or Sorcerer, which may be more difficult to justify and roleplay, and which were quoted in my theorical broken build. :)

@coredump. Sure, DM can and will houserule if this is bothering. This does not discard the fact that official ruling is against classic D&d approach and setting-breaking. But this is probably gonna end in a sterile discussion, so I won't pursue the matter. Let's just agree that we disagree. :)

[Ouranos]

I'm with Citan. Yeah, a paladin can multiclass. But if you really dig at the flavor, once they are called, they are CALLED. It'd be more likely that a fighter, cleric, maybe even rogue, gets called and becomes a paladin from then on. But for a paladin to DROP their calling is just strange, considering how it works. This was why it had a multiclass restriction in 3.0 and 3.5, there were very few classes you could multi into and still be able to continue as a paladin. The inability for things to be perfect aside, lore, logic, and flavor MASSIVELY trump minor exploits that can only occur by going AGAINST that lore and flavor, in my mind.

[JNAProductions]

I think you're confusing IC profession with OOC levels. A Paladin 5/Fighter 5 is, IC, 100% Paladin. Heck, a Fighter 10 might be a Paladin IC simply because they follow an oath and serve a higher calling, regardless of gaining no special power from it.

[Daishain]

I'm with Citan. Yeah, a paladin can multiclass. But if you really dig at the flavor, once they are called, they are CALLED. It'd be more likely that a fighter, cleric, maybe even rogue, gets called and becomes a paladin from then on. But for a paladin to DROP their calling is just strange, considering how it works. This was why it had a multiclass restriction in 3.0 and 3.5, there were very few classes you could multi into and still be able to continue as a paladin. The inability for things to be perfect aside, lore, logic, and flavor MASSIVELY trump minor exploits that can only occur by going AGAINST that lore and flavor, in my mind.

Except that getting training elsewhere doesn't necessarily indicate dropping their calling. In fact, if the paladin is convinced that learning a few martial tricks will better enable them to fulfill their oath, a couple levels of fighter can be an affirmation of their dedication, not a violation.

Stuff like warlock is considerably more difficult to justify in that context, but not out of the question. Of course, if the player can't some up with a basic explanation, I feel the DM should be perfectly in his rights to veto it.

[MeeposFire]

Well then, my various groups and I never noticed that.

TO be fair actually that is one of the few exceptions in the game. Most bonuses did stack by default which is why they came up with the idea of "typed" bonuses in 3e to make it clear how stacking should occur since in AD&D you could buff people up to absurd levels if you really tried. Granted even with the typed bonuses in 3e that still happened so it really did not help much...