Opinions on the UA Paladin of Redemption?

[NecessaryWeevil]

For example, is it problematic to be restricted to simple bludgeoning weapons? More importantly, is the focus on nonviolence likely to conflict with other party members?

[furby076]

1. Why simple bludgeoning and not all bludgeoning?
2. If the paladin forces all the other players to be non violent then it can be annoying. Also, how would said paladin "force" the other players...ha. a paladins code is a personal code. Now a non violent paladin is not likelly to hang out with murder hobos....but heck....just hand waive it.. keep it a personal code, and game on

[JAL_1138]

For example, is it problematic to be restricted to simple bludgeoning weapons? More importantly, is the focus on nonviolence likely to conflict with other party members?

Haven't read that UA, but the weapon part is easy to answer.

Simple bludgeoning weapons eliminate GWM builds, but GWM isn't the only way to build a competent enough Pally. If you go bludgeon-and-shield, you could take Dueling style and the Shield Master feat and you'll be fine. You're looking at 2 points of average DPR difference between mace and longsword (one point average damage per hit). That's not a huge deal.

It does limit your ranged options to light hammers, but meh. They do the same damage as daggers, just different type. Javelins are better...by a point of average damage per hit. Not the end of the world.

Also, quarterstaves are simple bludgeoning weapons. If you want to cheese it, take Dueling style, Polearm Master, and use the quarterstaff one-handed with a shield in the other. I personally hate that combo and won't use it on my PAM characters, but it's quite potent. If you don't go for that particular fromage, you could still take PAM for the bonus-action attack and use the quarterstaff two-handed and it'd be fine.

[Spore]

More importantly, is the focus on nonviolence likely to conflict with other party members?

That is likely. But I feel that is the intention of a Paladin of said code when it is brought into play. I think you cannot overlook the theme of the kit, bringing up the topic at any table. And most reasonable tables would either comply (because murder-hoboing is a default thing but not necessarily born from roleplaying) or enjoy the in character conflict (the ranger that insists that he can kill what he has hunted for example or a vengeance paladin).

I think I particularly would enjoy a party of a Redemption and a Vengeance Paladin. One's goal is to hunt down and murderiate evil, the other's is to capture and reform evil. Good cop, bad cop is bound to happen.

[toapat]

Honestly id wait and see when a revised version comes out, the current version is EXTREMELY poorly thought out and wants the character playing at least 3 separate combat roles which really is one of the worst things you can force a character to have to deal with.

if you go for No armor, you want to be using a rapier with Duelist and ideally Shield master. If you want to use the Mind Control, you need to be Strength in heavy armor. The Spells want you to be playing BFC when paladin wants to be doing tons of damage.

The capstone disables itself after beiing hit.

[NecessaryWeevil]

1. Why simple bludgeoning and not all bludgeoning?


Are you asking me, or the game designers?
Because that's what you're restricted to if you want to use the 3rd-level feature.

[Camman1984]

vows on non-violence are definitely going to cause conflict in the party, one of the key parts of the game is combat, if you have one party member trying to prevent every combat or threatening the party if they want to go murder-hobo it is going to be a pita.

we have a wizard at the moment in our party who has several times threatened to kill other party members because of his 'personal code' and his wish for us not to hurt anyone. it's annoying as heck for the rest of us, particularly as his personal code seems inconsistently flexible when he wants to blur the lines of good and evil himself.

[Jarlhen]

So the Redemption paladin is not a pacifist. There's not a single thing or even a hint that they would be pacifists. They see violence as a last resort, but a resort nonetheless. When people go "Let's kill 'em" it is your job to go "Now hold on a minute here, can't we try X or Y before we go murdering?". But if X and Y doesn't work, stab 'em in the face. Just play it as someone who seeks to avoid violence but also understands that sometimes it's necessary. And a lot of times it's the only way. It's genuinely not an issue.

Secondly, the charm effect doesn't seem to actually do anything. If you take someone to 0 HP with a melee attack you can choose to knock them unconscious. This does the same thing only they're not unconscious. But they would be when the charm effect stops to work. So it pretty much does nothing and I have absolutely no idea why it's a feature. I may have missed something here but I don't get it at all.

The 16+dex AC is a trap. You're going to need to max dex for a whooping 21 AC. Can't use a shield. Is unlikely to get str bumped up. Can't get magic armor or shields. It's neat, but useless. Don't fall for it.

The redemption paladin gets, imo, the best spells of all the paladins. It's a fantastic spell list. And at level 7 onwards they get the features that actually have to do with the class. They're awesome both mechanically as a tank-type, but also RP-wise. They fit perfectly. The charm and the armor are traps and give you nothing worthwhile in 9 out of 10 builds. They also work poorly together as high dex means going for dex weapons whereas all simple bludgeoning weapons are str. So stay away from them and play the paladin like you would any other paladin. Sword n board ideally.

[Jacquerel]

I don't think a Paladin of Redemption player should limit themselves to simple bludgeoning weapons.
You should carry a simple bludgeoning weapon, but you only have one class feature that requires one and it has a fairly situational use.

It seems to me that the intended effect is that you use your non-lethal simple bludgeoning weapon when fighting (for example) bandits or goblins who you might have a chance to "redeem" or reason with, but then pull out the real weapon when you're taking on (again, example) demons or the undead.
It's not supposed to be the weapon you use all the time.

[Sigreid]

I think it has a strong chance of annoying the rest of the party unless they are all in favor of a very different kind of game than most.

[toapat]

The redemption paladin gets, imo, the best spells of all the paladins. It's a fantastic spell list. And at level 7 onwards they get the features that actually have to do with the class. They're awesome both mechanically as a tank-type, but also RP-wise. They fit perfectly. The charm and the armor are traps and give you nothing worthwhile in 9 out of 10 builds. They also work poorly together as high dex means going for dex weapons whereas all simple bludgeoning weapons are str. So stay away from them and play the paladin like you would any other paladin. Sword n board ideally.

their spell list is half as functionally versatile and a tenth as effective as Ancients. Ancients is already a Godwizard paladin, and has the best oath features of any paladin. comparatively ALL of the things redemption has are focused on BFC which is unreliable in melee even beyond what issues using Moonbeam brings up.

I actually forgot that Redemption paladin cant actually start being a redemption paladin until level 15 when they get to actually soak damage from the rest of the party more than 1/short rest.

If they wanted redemption to be Wizard paladin, it fails.
If they wanted redemption to be tank paladin, it fails
If they wanted redemption to be dex paladin, it failed.

[Dudewithknives]

their spell list is half as functionally versatile and a tenth as effective as Ancients. Ancients is already a Godwizard paladin, and has the best oath features of any paladin. comparatively ALL of the things redemption has are focused on BFC which is unreliable in melee even beyond what issues using Moonbeam brings up.

I actually forgot that Redemption paladin cant actually start being a redemption paladin until level 15 when they get to actually soak damage from the rest of the party more than 1/short rest.

If they wanted redemption to be Wizard paladin, it fails.
If they wanted redemption to be tank paladin, it fails
If they wanted redemption to be dex paladin, it failed.

Umm, Redemption Paladins make excellent tanks.
They can easily start with a 19 AC with no gear of any kind, which is the same as someone in Halfplate and a shield and get it even higher later with more Dex, Bracers of Armor, Cloak of Protection ect.
They can soak damage like crazy, as a matter of fact they have the only way I know of to directly take damage for someone else with no roll involved at all.
They get a self heal that is MUCH better than the fighter self heal, on top of the fact they have all the other paladin spells to help heal, Aura of various kinds.
Their level 20 ability is the best tanking ability in the game. It is 1/2 damage from everything, and it hurts the person that damages them, no save, no range limit, no nothing. All you have to do is have more than double the HP of the person attacking and there is absolutely nothing they can ever do that could kill you from HP loss, and considering that you have so much built in auto-healing or spell healing or lay on hands, that is not hard to get.

Also, their level 20 ability does not break its own effect, you have not taken an action to cause them harm, they took passive damage that does not break it.

Also nothing in their abilities says they can not use normal weapons, only their level 3 ability requires it, as a matter of fact they even say in the description of the Oath that they bring the full force of their weapons against those that are unredeemable.

I honestly think the Oath is TOO good.
It also could easily lead someone to trolling their own group, but it does not have to.

[Cybren]

Are you asking me, or the game designers?
Because that's what you're restricted to if you want to use the 3rd-level feature.

preeeeeeeetty sure it's actually to capture the flavor of an itinerant friar with nothing but a walking stick to defend themselves with

[Spore]

preeeeeeeetty sure it's actually to capture the flavor of an itinerant friar with nothing but a walking stick to defend themselves with

Honestly it's not that imho. A friar would still be a cleric or commoner to me. A Paladin is still a trained fighter. Remember that most self defense school disable their attackers not kill them. Coincidentally it is not easy to stabilize bleeding opponents. I know its a weird thought on a class with readily available magival healing but most blades leave wounds.

[toapat]

Umm, Redemption Paladins make excellent tanks.

After lvl 14. yes. You dont measure a tank spec at the point where their mechanics are working correctly, but over the entire experience. What is this, World of Warcraft where we can dismiss that Retribution Paladin doesnt work until you have Wake of Ashes//Ashes to Ashes?

are they better tanks than pretty much any class except OotA? yes

The Capstone doesnt have some nuance to its disabling. You were involved in the retaliation damage, which disables it.

[Cybren]

Honestly it's not that imho. A friar would still be a cleric or commoner to me. A Paladin is still a trained fighter. Remember that most self defense school disable their attackers not kill them. Coincidentally it is not easy to stabilize bleeding opponents. I know its a weird thought on a class with readily available magival healing but most blades leave wounds.

It walks around without armor and using a stick for a weapon. It's exactly that

[Honest Tiefling]

I think it has a strong chance of annoying the rest of the party unless they are all in favor of a very different kind of game than most.

I am not sure I agree. Yes, there are some groups that murder first, ask questions later. But the Paladin of Redemption gets a few ways to join in the fun. First, if killing someone will clearly save lives, they can do it. Secondly, evil creatures like undead or demons don't count. Third, violence is a last resort, but it is still a resort.

As long as several members of the party are in fact alive, it's a technicality that can be exploited. I would also say that saving boon companions is probably a fine use of legal loopholes for the paladin.

The weaponry thing bugs me. Hitting someone over the head repeatedly with a mace doesn't seem very peaceful to me. The charm condition also bugs me. I get it's probably there so they can talk to the character after the battle, but I can't imagine many people being reasonable after being subject to such a spell.

[Sigreid]

I am not sure I agree. Yes, there are some groups that murder first, ask questions later. But the Paladin of Redemption gets a few ways to join in the fun. First, if killing someone will clearly save lives, they can do it. Secondly, evil creatures like undead or demons don't count. Third, violence is a last resort, but it is still a resort.

As long as several members of the party are in fact alive, it's a technicality that can be exploited. I would also say that saving boon companions is probably a fine use of legal loopholes for the paladin.

The weaponry thing bugs me. Hitting someone over the head repeatedly with a mace doesn't seem very peaceful to me. The charm condition also bugs me. I get it's probably there so they can talk to the character after the battle, but I can't imagine many people being reasonable after being subject to such a spell.

I'm just saying this is one of the sub-classes that before you do it it would be a good idea to see how the people you play with feel about it. I would personally even go so far as to talk out how I intend to uphold the oath of redemption while still being an adventurer. Could work with the right group in the right campaign. Won't for a standard adventuring team out looking to risk their lives for wealth and excitement.

Could work beautifully for a Rise of Tiamat campaign where the threat is so clear that the struggle is unquestionable.

[Jarlhen]

their spell list is half as functionally versatile and a tenth as effective as Ancients. Ancients is already a Godwizard paladin, and has the best oath features of any paladin. comparatively ALL of the things redemption has are focused on BFC which is unreliable in melee even beyond what issues using Moonbeam brings up.

I actually forgot that Redemption paladin cant actually start being a redemption paladin until level 15 when they get to actually soak damage from the rest of the party more than 1/short rest.

If they wanted redemption to be Wizard paladin, it fails.
If they wanted redemption to be tank paladin, it fails
If they wanted redemption to be dex paladin, it failed.

I don't really agree with that. Hypnotic pattern alone will end entire fights. Personally I don't find Ancients particularly impressive, at least not to the level you do. Aura of warding is great. But as far as I see it, from the point of tanking, Ancients aren't even in the same tier as redemption. I don't put much value in the sacred oath as it's 1/rest. Though I'd argue the Ancients have a slight leg up there, but only barely.

Either way Redemption is the only oath that gets level 3 features. All other oaths get stuff later. And for Redemption it's only the level 3 features that are meh. Level 7 and 15 are incredibly good. So even though it's frustrating having to wait that long to get the tanking stuff that's no different in terms of progression from the other paladins.

[Leostarnfire]

Personally I see no problem with this class.
I see this as the ultimate cop paladin.
"Come out with your swords and crossbows up."
1. They walk out and are arrested being treated to the full justice system.
2. They come out in full force. This is when the big giant sword comes into play.

Which do you think is more likely to happen?

Need one alive for interrogating bash it on the head with your spare mace and lay hands on it. Boom! It's charmed and greatful you didnt kill it. Now you know more information thanks to the paladin's high charisma.

Oh flip! You've been kidnapped or found not in your armor. Great you got a good defence and are more likely to be safe.

I mean come on lawful good doesnt mean lawful cute and kind. It means you believe in the law of the land and the creeds of your deity.

[Erit]

I mean come on lawful good doesnt mean lawful cute and kind. It means you believe in the law of the land and the creeds of your deity.

A correction: There are no alignment restrictions on classes in 5e. Chaotic Evil Redemption Paladins are mechanically permissible. I mean, good luck rationalizing one, but they can hypothetically exist.

Source: Am playing a Chaotic Good Tabaxi Kensei every Sunday.