Paladorc + bonusactions, Shieldmaster vs. Warcaster

[Dimcair]

Heya,


a friendly playground member got me hooked on trying a very defensive;y oriented paladorc build.
The DM for the current campaign let us roll epic stats (7x 4d6, reroll 1s, pick the 6 best), so here is what I have:

Dragonborn - Devotion Paladin
16 Str or 18 Str
16 Con 14 Con
16 Cha 16 Cha


I've been meddling with the concept and I wondered what a paladorc does with his bonus action?

Therefore I am wondering whether I should take the Shield master feat and pick the 18 str.
(shove for the bonus action, potentially granting you (And allies!) advantage for your attack if the target fails the (athletics) contest).

For that consideration I need to ponder the following:

1.
Warcaster is an important element in the concept, allowing you to cast with your hands full (SnB). It is supposedly taken at level 4, just before a dip into sorcerer.
Naturally I would want to make use of that bonus action as early as possible, so I would want to grab Shield Master at level 4.

From here I have to options:
A - Pick subtle spell as metamagic, so if I absolutely HAVE to cast I can. Although everyone would prefer quicken+heighten or smth else, rather than subtle?
B - Just roll with it. If I can pull of the movements with 1 hand, i can sheathe my sword, and draw it again as part of my movement. At the early levels I don't have a second attack anyways, then I can draw the weapon again as part of my movement the next round. (Making warcaster look a bit weak, but ofc. i'll need the bonus to concentration saves later ((i know, resilient is an option too)) ).

Warcaster would then be taken at level 9, or maybe 8 if i adjust the recommended build slightly. Just when or before I get a second attack as well.


2.
The implication is of course that I will not reach 20 CHA as fast, save for a magic item, since i need/want two feats.
How important is 20 Cha by level 17 for a paladorc? Then again, first that campaign has to GO to level 17^^. So I am overall more worried about whether i will get frustrated with issue 1.

//edit: There is merit of sticking to the stats of 16 16 16 anyways, +1 HP/level and +1 to con saves/concentration saves may be considered more important than +1 to damage +1 attack and +1 to athletics checks.

I ask these questions as always too late. Quick words of wisdom appreciated ;).

Cheers,

Dim



edit trivia:

Somatic
Spellcasting gestures might include a forceful
gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures. If a spell
requires a somatic component, the caster must have free
use of at least one hand to perform these gestures.

If you take the Attack action on your turn, you can use
a bonus action to try to shove a creature within 5 feet
o f you with your shield.
• If you aren’t incapacitated, you can add your shield’s AC
bonus to any Dexterity saving throw you make against
a spell or other harmful effect that targets only you.
• If you are subjected to an effect that allows you to
make a Dexterity saving throw to take only half damage,
you can use your reaction to take no damage if
you succeed on the saving throw, interposing your
shield between yourself and the source o f the effect.

You have advantage on Constitution saving throws
that you make to maintain your concentration on a
spell when you take damage.
• You can perform the somatic components o f spells
even when you have weapons or a shield in one or
both hands.
• When a hostile creature’s movement provokes an
opportunity attack from you, you can use your reaction
to cast a spell at the creature, rather than making
an opportunity attack. The spell must have a casting
time o f 1 action and must target only that creature.

In combat, characters and monsters are in constant
motion, often using movement and position to gain
the upper hand.
Here are a few examples of the sorts of thing you can do in
tandem with your movement and action:

- Draw or Sheathe a sword


ps: I have given up on how to spell sheathe correctly, don't ask -.-

[djreynolds]

Dump the shield and take PAM instead. With sacred weapon you yourself do not need to spam bless, so you can cast shield of faith instead.

I like shield master and you do qualify for bard, and three levels would give you expertise in athletics... important at higher levels when stuff has higher strength scores and +s.

The shield spell is a reaction and you can hold a glaive in one hand as you cast this reaction. You have plenty of healing.

Remember sacred weapons plus is based on your charisma score, its 1 minute long and recharged on a short rest. That's +4 to hit with 18chr, plus the bless spell.

So max out charisma 1st, IMO.

Also your save bonus at 6th level extends to all within 10ft, everyone wants that +4/+5 to their saves also. At 6th level, that 16 con is +3, but now is +7 because your charisma is 18.

IMO, charisma for devotion paladins is bigger, as it effects sacred weapon and saves

[Dimcair]

Dump the shield and take PAM instead. With sacred weapon you yourself do not need to spam bless, so you can cast shield of faith instead.

I like shield master and you do qualify for bard, and three levels would give you expertise in athletics... important at higher levels when stuff has higher strength scores and +s.

The shield spell is a reaction and you can hold a glaive in one hand as you cast this reaction. You have plenty of healing.



If I would go PAM, wouldnt i go for a PAM+Sentinel build rather than a Palad-sorc who needs Warcaster?

i forgot about shield... as a reaction I would run into trouble casting that to up my AC. Damn. Then again, earlier on my spellslots are fewer anyways, I could wait till lvl 8.

Shield of faith will probably have to do the job, since I can't use shield as a reaction then. Would you still take shieldmaster first? being able to cast shield and take a feat for it... it is so situational (shield). A bonus action to make somebody fall prone is so much more useful.

If I take PAM i would trade a bonus 1d4+4 attack for 2-4 AC.
If i include shield master in this I will also loose the opportunity to give me and my allies advantage (1 rogue, 1 fighter, 1 fighter/wizard).

I think on average this might land more crits and hits that result in damage than my extra 1d4+4. That changes with improved divine smite, (3d8 instead of 2d8 if all attacks hit, but by then i'd be level 17+). Imagine two rounds in a 10 round combat where I succeed in 'proning' the target and even just 1 ally gets advantage on his attack rolls.

/edit: I just got what you imply by drop the shield: I will not have to get warcaster is what you are saying and instead can grab PAM and max out my CHA, right?

[djreynolds]

If I would go PAM, wouldnt i go for a PAM+Sentinel build rather than a Palad-sorc who needs Warcaster?

i forgot about shield... as a reaction I would run into trouble casting that to up my AC. Damn. Then again, earlier on my spellslots are fewer anyways, I could wait till lvl 8.

Shield of faith will probably have to do the job, since I can't use shield as a reaction then. Would you still take shieldmaster first? being able to cast shield and take a feat for it... it is so situational (shield). A bonus action to make somebody fall prone is so much more useful.

If I take PAM i would trade a bonus 1d4+4 attack for 2-4 AC.
If i include shield master in this I will also loose the opportunity to give me and my allies advantage (1 rogue, 1 fighter, 1 fighter/wizard).

I think on average this might land more crits and hits that result in damage than my extra 1d4+4. That changes with improved divine smite, (3d8 instead of 2d8 if all attacks hit, but by then i'd be level 17+). Imagine two rounds in a 10 round combat where I succeed in 'proning' the target and even just 1 ally gets advantage on his attack rolls.

/edit: I just got what you imply by drop the shield: I will not have to get warcaster is what you are saying and instead can grab PAM and max out my CHA, right?

PAM gives you a bonus action. And the chance to Smite. And at 11th all hits add 1d8 radiant damage.

I'm unsure if your DM will allow your weapon to be your divine focus, but since you can hold it (not wield it) in one hand.... you should be able to cast spells like a wizard with a staff does and not be hampered and have your divine/arcane focus something other than your shield

I like shield master, but its better in the hands of a fighter/rogue IMO, just with standard array stats, its easy for a fighter of grab a level of rogue for sweet expertise. But if you rolled awesome go for shield master.

Also for paladin spells a shield is fine as it is your divine focus, but for your arcane focus you would have to sheathe a sword.

Its all opinions.

You make the character you want for its flavor.

I like my paladins shield-less. And its tough to squeeze in lots of feats like the fighter will, because you want max charisma and strength if possible.

PAM&sentinel, or shieldmaster/warcaster or PAM/GWM... you may not be able to afford this with 5 ASI/feats and 2 crucial stats.

But PAM gives you a bonus action, and 4ASI left for charisma and strength. I mean heck you can still smite.

And 6 levels of paladin will greatly help out other melee types with notably low wisdom, intelligence and charisma saves... more than shield master.

[Spiritchaser]

With quicken spell, a paladin/sorcerer is usually fairly rich in bonus action options. If you don't feel like burning too many resources, just quicken green flame blade. At two sorcery points you can keep that up for a very long time. That gives you what PAM gives you with extra damage at a very minor cost, and keeps your options open for weapons.

Not that a glaive isn't really cool in it's own right for concept and reach... but the bonus damage from GFB or BB at higher levels starts to add up as well.

If you want to go more defensive, and take a shield, but you don't want warcaster, take an arcane staff and board. You lose one die size from longsword to quarterstaff, but you can free up another feat if you want. I know there's the open question about spells with somatic components but no material components... check with your DM. Again: nothing against warcaster, it's a great feat, just throwing out options.

Other points with shield master:
1. Shield master has some great defensive contributions to make to a paladin's slight vulnerability to dex saves.
2. A paladin sorcerer can take either enlarge/reduce or enhance ability which is fun with shoves

[PeteNutButter]

With quicken spell, a paladin/sorcerer is usually fairly rich in bonus action options. If you don't feel like burning too many resources, just quicken green flame blade. At two sorcery points you can keep that up for a very long time. That gives you what PAM gives you with extra damage at a very minor cost, and keeps your options open for weapons.

Not that a glaive isn't really cool in it's own right for concept and reach... but the bonus damage from GFB or BB at higher levels starts to add up as well.

If you want to go more defensive, and take a shield, but you don't want warcaster, take an arcane staff and board. You lose one die size from longsword to quarterstaff, but you can free up another feat if you want. I know there's the open question about spells with somatic components but no material components... check with your DM. Again: nothing against warcaster, it's a great feat, just throwing out options.

Other points with shield master:
1. Shield master has some great defensive contributions to make to a paladin's slight vulnerability to dex saves.
2. A paladin sorcerer can take either enlarge/reduce or enhance ability which is fun with shoves

Mostly this. The strength of SM and PAM is that they use a bonus action that is largely left unused (on other builds). Paladorcs have plenty to do with their bonus action, which usually cost resources. So these feats can still be a good idea if you think your DM likes to have a high number of combats between long rests, as you can burn through your resources very quickly as a paladorc. I'd still avoid them, as they will go unused in the tough fights, when you'd rather spend resources if available.

Definitely avoid subtle for the explicit use of getting around warcaster feat. One of the biggest strengths of the paladorc is the option to attack and quicken a powerful spell. You won't be doing that as you cannot quicken and use subtle on any given spell. You really just need warcaster, and SM is subpar.

A note on your MC, it seems (unless I read it wrong) like you are going into sorc at level 5. The breakpoints for paladin are usually 2 or 6. For a tank, I'd highly recomend you take paladin to 6.

[Dimcair]

A note on your MC, it seems (unless I read it wrong) like you are going into sorc at level 5. The breakpoints for paladin are usually 2 or 6. For a tank, I'd highly recomend you take paladin to 6.

Paladin 1-4
Sorc 1-3
Paladin 5
Sorc 4-5
Pala 6~8

There is a bit of mixing going on. Break is either 6 or 8. If I take 7 aura devotion then id say naturally I'd go grab the ASI at paladin 8. Maybe 7 is not worth it though to not get charmed.

[Gastronomie]

War Caster should be taken ASAP if you're using S&B, but if you're going GWM or PAM, Resilient (CON) is better.

Shield Master is good, but even in that case, take War Caster before it. Get it as soon as possible. Don't look back.

Or alternatively, play a Variant Human and get both by level 4.

(For more insight on Sorcadins, look at mah sig)

[Spiritchaser]

War Caster should be taken ASAP if you're using S&B, but if you're going GWM or PAM, Resilient (CON) is better.

Shield Master is good, but even in that case, take War Caster before it. Get it as soon as possible. Don't look back.

Or alternatively, play a Variant Human and get both by level 4.

(For more insight on Sorcadins, look at mah sig)

Caveat that if you go QS and board instead of sword and board you can go res C instead of WC if you wish.

[Gastronomie]

Caveat that if you go QS and board instead of sword and board you can go res C instead of WC if you wish.Requires DM persmission for that though. Most generous DMs will let you use a Quarterstaff as an arcane focus, and even more generous DMs may allow you to use a tattoo or something as an arcane focus, but some very hard-headed people may say no (the arcane focus "staff" and weapon "quarterstaff" are different items, with different prices).

[Spiritchaser]

Requires DM persmission for that though. Most generous DMs will let you use a Quarterstaff as an arcane focus, and even more generous DMs may allow you to use a tattoo or something as an arcane focus, but some very hard-headed people may say no (the arcane focus "staff" and weapon "quarterstaff" are different items, with different prices).

Actually as I recall, the DMG specifically stated that an arcane staff can be used as a QS.

Ive loaned my copy out but I'll dig the page reference out when I can.

[PeteNutButter]

Actually as I recall, the DMG specifically stated that an arcane staff can be used as a QS.

Ive loaned my copy out but I'll dig the page reference out when I can.

Several magic staves say they can be attacked with as a quarterstaff with plus to hit and damage.

The improved weapon section says that if something very closely resembles a normal weapon it should use the normal weapon's damage.

Both are pretty strong evidence that they should be the same (and Gandalf!). Ultimately though some DMs could give you no for answer... just like anything else.

[Spiritchaser]

Several magic staves say they can be attacked with as a quarterstaff with plus to hit and damage.

The improved weapon section says that if something very closely resembles a normal weapon it should use the normal weapon's damage.

Both are pretty strong evidence that they should be the same (and Gandalf!). Ultimately though some DMs could give you no for answer... just like anything else.

I think the section I recall actually says something like "unless the item's description specifically says otherwise, an arcane focus staff can be used as a quarterstaff"

I'll try and get my book back later this week to check

But of course you're right, the DM is always free to say no.

Edit: and the conversation I had about this was about a year ago, so I reserve the right to be missremembering a quote out of context.