Paladins busted?

[Sexyshoeless]

Help me out friends. I have played a good amount of 5e on both sides of the DM screen and across different groups have felt the Paladin is by far the most durable, obnoxious class to deal with in combat. They have high ACs, boost to all saves, high hit dice, the most reliable healing ability in the game (high one action heal without rolling in lay on hands) and reliable HIGH damage from smites. And that is befroe you start messing with find steed.

The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.

Convince me paladins aren't broken compared to the rest of the classes? Suggestions for exasperated GMs for how to deal with this discrepancy in durability?

[Unoriginal]

Convince me paladins aren't broken compared to the rest of the classes?

How many fights do you usually get between Long Rests?

[LudicSavant]

Paladins are indeed one of the stronger classes in the game, but they're not alone in that category. If they're making classes like Druids jealous then the problem is more likely that your group knows the tactics for piloting Paladins better than the tactics for piloting Druids, not that Paladins are busted.

[Torgairon]

in the party makeup you're describing, the paladin is the one class that should be coming out of most combats looking okay, if a bit low on resources, because he's likely the closest thing you have to a front line and he has some heals and AC. your rogues and warlock should both be, over the course of an adventuring day, coming reasonably close to his DPR as it averages out between smites and non-smites. anyone who is within 10 ft. of the paladin also has his high saves, and his healing hopefully isn't going to him and him alone.

I'm going to assume the party in question is level 6 or higher, and shortly past that point balancing 5e combats starts to get really difficult. with 6 PCs, it's likely that your DM is increasing the amount and power of the enemies in each encounter, which depending on the enemy might equal lots of creatures that the paladin can take 2-3 hits from while the rogues and monk can take maybe 2 if they're lucky.

paladins are indeed combat monsters if you let them only have 1-3 encounters before the adventuring day ends, which is pretty likely in most campaigns that I've seen, ran and heard of. a paladin without smites and no lay on hands is rare to see, but they're not an enviable sight. the best thing you could possibly do is make the paladin think about whether he wants to smite right now or 3 encounters from now when the stakes and tension are higher.

[Man_Over_Game]

Help me out friends. I have played a good amount of 5e on both sides of the DM screen and across different groups have felt the Paladin is by far the most durable, obnoxious class to deal with in combat. They have high ACs, boost to all saves, high hit dice, the most reliable healing ability in the game (high one action heal without rolling in lay on hands) and reliable HIGH damage from smites. And that is befroe you start messing with find steed.

The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.

Convince me paladins aren't broken compared to the rest of the classes? Suggestions for exasperated GMs for how to deal with this discrepancy in durability?

Paladins can be good, but there's two things you might be missing:
Their only real defense is their AC, and they are INCREDIBLY long rest dependent.

On the AC, this may always be an issue if your DM is stingy on To-Hit and excessive on the damage. This is generally poor game design, most enemies should rely on high accuracy, low damage, and lots of health, to make them consistent but durable threats. Making these changes will make them less of a threat to your squishy allies, and a more consistent threat against your tank.

On the rest dependency, the only ability they have that refreshes on a short rest is their Channel Divinity. If you or your DM makes the common mistake of having one fight every day, you're inherently making short rest players (like a Warlock or Monk) weaker than a long rest player (like a Paladin). This is fine, but then ask to implement the rules regarding extended rest periods per fight.

Generally, a short rest should be about 1/5 of a Long Rest, so a 24hr/Long rest and 4hr/Short rest should work perfectly fine. Another, more exaggerated, example is using a day to represent a short rest, and a week to represent a long rest. The overall goal should be to force players to consider backing off to rest for a major fight to catch their wind, and there NEEDS to be at least 3 fights between each long rest to balance the classes and resource management. If you only have one fight a day, then it might be best to resort to a 1 week long rest requirement.

[sophontteks]

Paladins are great for their support tools. They give everyone a bonus to all saves and they have a nifty way to bring up downed teammates.

In combat they can nova, but they have few spell slots. A fighter can nova by taking an entire free attack action every short rest. 6 attacks in one turn vs a paladin's 2. EKs can hold person and attack 3 times. Battlemasters can add extra damage and effects to each of those attacks. Fighters are DPS monsters.

Paladins can tank like any other martial, but barbarians take half damage, have more hit points, have advantage on grapples, pushes, and trips, and move much faster. Totem barbarians can bonus action dash while breaking reaction attacks, and can eventually fly. Barbarians are the ultimate tanks that demand the enemies attention and can take everything they can dish out.

They are good. So are fighters and barbarians. I think from a team perspective having that bonus to saves is what makes them. That's kind of how supports work, they multiply the power of everyone else and thus are always rated highly.

[Dudewithknives]

It is because the rest of your group is full of flimsy glass cannons.

Rogues and monks have crap ac under most cases.
Druid’s are not front liners unless they are moon Druid’s or the new spore.
Warlocks are just eldritch blast artillery unless they are hexblade the. They are halfassed paladins with a. Eldritch blast.

Also this group falls victim to the biggest pitfall of 5e design: the classes are built around a 6 ish adventure day but no table I have ever seen runs a game like that and. O module I have played does either.

90% of games use the 15 min adventuring day, which is a slap in the face of warlocks monks and rogues.
The Druid is both long and short rest based so thy are fine.

Essentially your in a group with 1 combat class and 4 support classes and a very well rounded class in Druid.

Unless the paladin is a half elf, which most are, he is not going to be doing much outside combat.

[sophontteks]

It is because the rest of your group is full of flimsy glass cannons.

Rogues and monks have crap ac under most cases.
Druid’s are not front liners unless they are moon Druid’s or the new spore.
Warlocks are just eldritch blast artillery unless they are hexblade the. They are halfassed paladins with a. Eldritch blast.

Also this group falls victim to the biggest pitfall of 5e design: the classes are built around a 6 ish adventure day but no table I have ever seen runs a game like that and. O module I have played does either.

90% of games use the 15 min adventuring day, which is a slap in the face of warlocks monks and rogues.
The Druid is both long and short rest based so thy are fine.

Essentially your in a group with 1 combat class and 4 support classes and a very well rounded class in Druid.

Unless the paladin is a half elf, which most are, he is not going to be doing much outside combat.
Don't forget that the 6 encounters thing is all encounters. Its not just combat. Its puzzles, traps, tracking, social events, mysterious happenings, investigations, etc. More people adhere to it on average then they realize. My bard used more spells out of combat then in combat.

[Torgairon]

Don't forget that the 6 encounters thing is all encounters. Its not just combat. Its puzzles, traps, tracking, social events, mysterious happenings, investigations, etc. More people adhere to it on average then they realize. My bard used more spells out of combat then in combat.

while true, this doesn't really help the OP and his accusation which is laser-focused on combat viability, which in turn points to use of resources. I use lots of different events and roleplay opportunities inbetween my combats, but they rarely drain resources or spell slots unless they're basically on the verge of being labeled a combat anyway (traps, puzzles with damaging punishments).

[NecessaryWeevil]

It might help to occasionally make the paladin's combat prowess less relevant. Have some encounters where "be the last man standing" is not the victory condition. Paladin can be awesome keeping the attention of the enemies while the squishies complete the objective.

Or vary the enemy tactics sometimes. For example, we recently had a fight under a manor in tight quarters. My paladin was able to stand in a doorway, pop Shield of Faith, and take the Dodge action making the enemies target AC 21 with disadvantage. Meanwhile my party sent a blizzard of arrows, javelins, handaxes and firebolts over my shoulder to slowly eliminate the room full of enemies I was obstructing. I felt awesome as I had built my character to tank. But I'm darn lucky that none of those bugbears thought to grapple me and pull me out of that doorway.

[sophontteks]

while true, this doesn't really help the OP and his accusation which is laser-focused on combat viability, which in turn points to use of resources. I use lots of different events and roleplay opportunities inbetween my combats, but they rarely drain resources or spell slots unless they're basically on the verge of being labeled a combat anyway (traps, puzzles with damaging punishments).

Combat is a boring slog. Its the other stuff thats interesting to me. There are many opportunities here you may be missing, espesially in an open campaign where the players have to figure out for themselves what needs to be done. What proportion of spells are designed for use out of combat? Thats a good indicator of how the designers intended other encounters to be.

You kinda need the right players though. If the players don't put work into non-conbat encounters and all they can do is fight, your kind of stuck as a DM as you can't throw challanges at them out of combat. They miss out on a huge portion of the game in my opinion.

[MaxWilson]

The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.

Convince me paladins aren't broken compared to the rest of the classes? Suggestions for exasperated GMs for how to deal with this discrepancy in durability?

Use more monsters who stand off and use ranged attacks. Goblins, hobgoblins, dragons, manticores, etc. Paladins are almost useless at ranged combat--they're like a weak fighter with no Archery, fewer feats, and no third attack. Druid will also suffer under those conditions but rogues should be fine. Monk will be slightly better off than the Paladin due to higher Dex, missile catching, and high mobility including wall-climbing.

Also, your party probably needs to improve their tactics. They should definitely not be "running around screaming trying not to die" against something that a single Paladin can face down solo.

[Dudewithknives]

Don't forget that the 6 encounters thing is all encounters. Its not just combat. Its puzzles, traps, tracking, social events, mysterious happenings, investigations, etc. More people adhere to it on average then they realize. My bard used more spells out of combat then in combat.

Shock a bard used a lot of spells out of combat..

The paladin will almost never spend resources out of combat.
Most groups also stick with the plan of, don’t spend resources, we might have a fight in a bit.

The game is set so people with resources that have to be spent get more impressive abilities out of it and those with short rest or no resource get weaker ones.

However, when only the support classes actually spend anything out of combat, the in combat resource users on a long rest class like a paladin will face roll the first combat of the day, but very few games regularly use more than one fight a game day.

This is because people who are all long rest mechanic resources will whine, “but I am out of spells.” And the dm will cater to the full resource classes and not hold them back, so the short or. I reaource classes have weaker abilities that last longer, but don’t have to last longer than long rest classes usually.

When was the last time you have heard someone say, “wow, we were all out of spells when that fight started, I am sure glad the rogue was here!” Compared to, ok fight starts and the full casters just throw out their highest 2 spells and the fight is over, but they get to rest before they need them again.

On top of that, half the full casting classes get at least a few resources back on a short rest.

It really pissed off the warlock in the group when the sorcerer regularly recovered more spell levels than he did, and did. It rest at all.

[LudicSavant]

One of the things to consider is that a lot of classes can vary wildly in durability based on how they're built and played. Like, really widely. One Wizard might get knocked over by a stiff breeze, while another will make the raging Barbarian jealous.

If you're playing at a table where your Rogue's best idea of how to survive is to put on studded leather and 16 dexterity, then that's going to be a huge difference from someone playing a 20 base AC Arcane Trickster throwing down illusions and Shields and control tricks while making careful use of resources like Uncanny Dodge.

[sophontteks]

Paladins have plenty of out of combat spells. Bless alone has serious out of combat potential in dangerous areas. Healing may also be on the paladin.

But I'm just informing what they mean by 6 encounters. Its not 6-8 combat encounters. Try not to rip my head off for explaining this.:smalleek:

[ad_hoc]

They're overpowered if:

1. They can smite all the time because there is no pacing. This goes for all long rest classes.

2. Monsters attack them rather than just walking around and attacking the weak characters. Being the last to die still means you're dead.

2.5: combats are so easy that the only real competition is trying to be more effective than other party members. This makes their high AC seem more effective than it would be in harder combats.

[LudicSavant]

Help me out friends. I have played a good amount of 5e on both sides of the DM screen and across different groups have felt the Paladin is by far the most durable, obnoxious class to deal with in combat. They have high ACs, boost to all saves, high hit dice, the most reliable healing ability in the game (high one action heal without rolling in lay on hands) and reliable HIGH damage from smites. And that is befroe you start messing with find steed.

The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.

Convince me paladins aren't broken compared to the rest of the classes? Suggestions for exasperated GMs for how to deal with this discrepancy in durability?

You've given us very little information about the specifics of your party. If you gave me specific stats, I could probably optimize your Druid, Rogues, Warlock, and Monk to be more competitive with, or potentially even outcompete, your Paladin player.

We could talk about the overall balance of classes all day, but I doubt anything would solve your problem as directly as that.

[Foxhound438]

The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.

I've seen the same scenario play out with barbarians swinging GWM with reckless attack, and I've seen the same also happen with F1/bladelock-x's running in with armor of agathys, and I've seen the same thing happen with battlemaster polearm master fighters. It's the archetype of tanks, paladin gets a tiny bit more self-sustainability with lay on hands, but have worse resource consumption issues than any of the others mentioned there, and generally worse damage if they burn all their smites unwisely. Paladins get to have better save bonuses with charisma to all saves, but a +3 isn't going to save the average paladin from the average dex save, where a barbarian probably has advantage for seeing it and the fighter can just re-roll when the result looks to be ugly.

[Man_Over_Game]

One of the things to consider is that a lot of classes can vary wildly in durability based on how they're built and played. Like, really widely. One Wizard might get knocked over by a stiff breeze, while another will make the raging Barbarian jealous.

If you're playing at a table where your Rogue's best idea of how to survive is to put on studded leather and 16 dexterity, then that's going to be a huge difference from someone playing a 20 base AC Arcane Trickster throwing down illusions and Shields and control tricks while making careful use of resources like Uncanny Dodge.

Will be honest, a 20 AC is gonna be pretty tough for a MAD Rogue to obtain. Level 1 fighter + Dual Wielder+Str+Plate? Level 1 Ranger + Medium Armor Master+Dual Wielder + Defensive Fighting Style (Probably the most likely option here)?

[LudicSavant]

Will be honest, a 20 AC is gonna be pretty tough for a MAD Rogue to obtain. Level 1 fighter + Dual Wielder+Str+Plate? Level 1 Ranger + Medium Armor Master+Shield (Probably the most likely option here)?

Not hard at all. Even just getting Medium Armor + Shield will put you up to 19 AC, and all that takes is half a feat. A half-feat that boosts Dexterity no less.

Why are you MAD again? :smallconfused:

[Dudewithknives]

Not hard at all. Even just getting Medium Armor + Shield will put you up to 19 AC, and all that takes is half a feat. A half-feat that boosts Dexterity no less.

Why are you MAD again? :smallconfused:

Or you could play a str based rogue and stay at 14 dex.

You have to use a finesse weapon, nobody said you have to use the finesse trait.

I have seen a hobgoblin rogue who took medium armor and fought with a short sword and a shield melt some faces.

[LudicSavant]

Or you could play a str based rogue and stay at 14 dex.

You have to use a finesse weapon, nobody said you have to use the finesse trait.

I have seen a hobgoblin rogue who took medium armor and fought with a short sword and a shield melt some faces.

Yeah, there are a lot of options for Rogue tanks.

[Man_Over_Game]

Not hard at all. Even just getting Medium Armor + Shield will put you up to 19 AC, and all that takes is half a feat. A half-feat that boosts Dexterity no less.

Why are you MAD again? :smallconfused:


Or you could play a str based rogue and stay at 14 dex.

You have to use a finesse weapon, nobody said you have to use the finesse trait.

I have seen a hobgoblin rogue who took medium armor and fought with a short sword and a shield melt some faces.

The medium armor and shield is one thing I considered, but doffing the shield would be a pain, and the alternative is putting away your weapon. Unless you're using magic items, or you have the warcaster feat, you wouldn't be able to cast the Shield spell.

As for the heavy armor idea, it isn't the worst, but then you're looking at a character with 15 Str, 13 Dex (to satisfy Rogue multiclass conditions) and using Intelligence for your spellcasting, and Concentration to hold them, not to mention having terrible stealth, which is pretty important for an Arcane Trickster.

Without magic items or reaching really high levels of play (for Medium Armor Master + shield + 1 level into multiclass+War Caster= Level 5/9 character), I don't see too many ways for an Arcane Trickster to feasibly reach that high of an AC and still cast Shield. I get it was an example to emphasize a point, but it was a nearly impossible one to compare to.

I think a 16 Dex Rogue with Medium Armor is just fine, as long as he's not planning on being a consistent melee warrior and planning on taking any hits. If subclasses haven't been picked yet, it might be beneficial for the Paladin to pick the Oath of the Crown, as it's primary job is to protect weaker allies.

------------

Sorry, didn't mean to sidetrack the post. Have your Pally look into Oath of the Crown or Oath of Redemption, or even Oath of Conquest, as they all deal with mechanics that focus around protecting allies and keeping enemies focused on them.

[Dudewithknives]

The medium armor and shield is one thing I considered, but doffing the shield would be a pain, and the alternative is putting away your weapon. Unless you're using magic items, or you have the warcaster feat, you wouldn't be able to cast the Shield spell.

As for the heavy armor idea, it isn't the worst, but then you're looking at a character with 15 Str, 13 Dex (to satisfy Rogue multiclass conditions) and using Intelligence for your spellcasting, and Concentration to hold them, not to mention having terrible stealth, which is pretty important for an Arcane Trickster.

Without magic items or reaching really high levels of play (for Medium Armor Master + Shield + 1 level into multiclass), I don't see too many ways for an Arcane Trickster to feasibly reach that high of an AC and still cast Shield. I get it was an example to emphasize a point, but it was a nearly impossible one to compare to.
Well the medium armor and shield build is not good for an arcane trickster, it it is great for a thief or a swashbuckler.
Scout is a better archer, assassin is just meh, inquisitive can fight however so anything works, mastermind is kind of open too.

[BoxANT]

Paladin vs Fighter with Healer feat?

honestly, the paladin is great, but it is a rigid class, less flexibility in play.

[Kane0]

Like barbarians, distance and attrition will demolish most paladins. They are melee powerhouses until they run out of steam, so stop engaging them on their terms.

[Dudewithknives]

Like barbarians, distance and attrition will demolish most paladins. They are melee powerhouses until they run out of steam, so stop engaging them on their terms.

Also, just use large numbers, paladins have almost no ranged abilities or aoe What they do have is the best ability to nova down a boss in about a round by using most of their resources.

[LudicSavant]

The medium armor and shield is one thing I considered, but doffing the shield would be a pain, and the alternative is putting away your weapon. Unless you're using magic items, or you have the warcaster feat, you wouldn't be able to cast the Shield spell.

Neither of these things are really a problem. Warcaster is a top-shelf feat for Arcane Tricksters already. Booming Blade OA AT setups are mean, and retaining your Concentration is important.

As for magic items, we're not talking about something Legendary, or Rare, or even Uncommon. We're talking about something Common. As in, a 51-100gp magic item that can be easily located or crafted via any of the various DMG or XGtE guidelines. Yeah, that's not gonna help you if you're in a "no magic items at all" campaign but as we've already established that's not only option.


Sorry, didn't mean to sidetrack the post.

Anyways, I think this discussion kinda demonstrates my point about not everyone necessarily knowing how to go about making their rogues durable. :smalltongue:

If the OP would be willing to post the 'busted' Paladin in question, I would be happy to post some competitive builds for the other classes to compare to it. Otherwise we're kinda just stuck shooting at phantom Paladin builds.

[Benny89]

As Inexperienced as I am in 5e for now, I think it's maybe because too many long rests are allowed and there might be only one "big bad guy" during adventure, which (if pattern) is a clear signal for Paladin "time to go all out" and burn everything to smoke that big baddie (which is his job).

They are burst melee class with a lot of support included. With Shield of Faith + Shield they are really tanky, they give huge boost with Bless, they are very mobile with Steed spells etc.

But it's all a "long rest" usage. So maybe force him more to save that assets and give them more than one big baddie in adventure so he find himself "empty" in nex encounter and wish he had save some of his assets.

And in this case Rogues or Fighter will shine as their consistent DPR will allow them to carry long-time-encounters while Paladin is more imo "this is bad situation, time to call my divine powers!".

Just my few cents

[Karl Aegis]

It sounds like you just need to get advantage somehow. Flank the Paladin or something. It'll drop just as fast as any other class. Your other party members probably aren't investing their resources properly.

[Contrast]

Help me out friends. I have played a good amount of 5e on both sides of the DM screen and across different groups have felt the Paladin is by far the most durable, obnoxious class to deal with in combat. They have high ACs, boost to all saves, high hit dice, the most reliable healing ability in the game (high one action heal without rolling in lay on hands) and reliable HIGH damage from smites. And that is befroe you start messing with find steed.

As others have mentioned we appear to be dealing with a hypothetical paladin here who gets all his benefits without giving anything up.

You can have a good AC but maxing that means you're reducing your damage by not taking great weapons/polearms - besides in 5E no AC is really good enough to mean you can just face tank. Of course if you take those you're not taking ASIs which means your strength and cha will suffer meaning the bonus to saves is less substantial.

The main swing for paladins is that they are more powerful the fewer fights you do per long rest as they can nova their abilities quite efficiently. You could consider trying out the gritty realism rest variant if you want to space out your encounters a bit timewise but still fit more in per long rest.


The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.

For what its worth my experience is that rogues and druids are much more durable than paladins generally because the paladin just has to stand there taking damage while the druids and rogues can do shenanigans to soak/avoid it.

[Malifice]

Help me out friends. I have played a good amount of 5e on both sides of the DM screen and across different groups have felt the Paladin is by far the most durable, obnoxious class to deal with in combat. They have high ACs, boost to all saves, high hit dice, the most reliable healing ability in the game (high one action heal without rolling in lay on hands) and reliable HIGH damage from smites. And that is befroe you start messing with find steed.

The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.

Convince me paladins aren't broken compared to the rest of the classes? Suggestions for exasperated GMs for how to deal with this discrepancy in durability?

My bet is your DM doesnt police the Adventuring day. Accordingly you probably only get 1-3 encounters per long rest, making the Paladin Uber good (he can spam Smites on virtually every single attack) meanwhile your non long rest dependent classes and the Warlock (short rest heavy) are made to suck.

To combat this your DM stuffed up again, and simply ramped up encounter difficulty. This (of course) forces the Paladin to Smite, and makes the other classes look even weaker (they're even more outclassed).

If I was the DM, I'd simply enforce a longer adventuring day (more encounters per long rest).

TL;DR - it's not the class, its the DM.

[SociopathFriend]

Busted no- powerful in proper situations yes.
Do those situations arise more often than not? Sure- but that's on the DM.
I've played Paladin quite a few times, wholesay and multiclassing, so I like to think I've some experience in this area.

Yes, they get better saves, but having a high Cha tends to mean their battle stats like Str or Con aren't that high either- so they would logically be worse in melee to some extent.
Yes, they hit hard when they smite, they get to do so very few times a day; to the point where multiclassing actually ends up giving them spell slots.
Yes, they get flat heals instead of rolling, they also cannot augment said healing in any way; you cannot make a "better" Lay on Hands effect. What you use is what you get.

They get buffs to their saves yes- but they still have no proficiency in any physical save such as Str, Dex, or Con; the only frontline class to have such a blatant lack of martial saves. Have enemies use nets, traps, throw powder in their face, fight dirty.
They get to hit hard- in melee. At range they're packing no smiting of any kind. The bane of a Paladin's existence is an enemy flying around or sitting atop a ledge and shooting at him. Don't fight fair- fight dirty.
Their flat heals only come back after a long rest and also take a full action- no Bonus Action Word of Healing to get an ally up. They also don't undo practically any nasty debuff you're given either- so it's literally only healing in most cases. Throwing debuffs around makes the Paladin start coming up short fairly quickly. Fight dirty.

Wanna challenge a Paladin? Give them a meaty opponent that can take more than a single round or two of nova-damage. The thing doesn't even have to hit hard- just make something have enough HP that the Paladin can't nuke it dead in a round or two. Then include a few more a few minutes later. Paladin's don't do well in sustained fights. A Paladin without spell sots is an inferior Fighter. In my experience DMs do one of two things: tons of fodder or one really big guy. You want the middle ground when Paladins are involved. Give them something they have to work to kill but not so nasty that it's a proper boss on its own.

Don't get me wrong, I'm currently playing an Ancients Paladin and think it's one of the best tanks the game has to offer while still dealing very respectable damage plus my aura brings all sorts of goodness to allies in the form of better saves plus spell resistance.
I still have no ranged options. I still am not proficient in martial saves. My intelligence is still a dump stat.
There's always trade-offs, you just have to find them. Every time there's been a flying opponent I've been screwed- same with a really big bad with a nasty save (Feeblemind- bleh!)

[MaxWilson]

Every time there's been a flying opponent I've been screwed- same with a really big bad with a nasty save (Feeblemind- bleh!)

It doesn't even have to be a flying opponent. Even something as simple as a Dire Wolf with 50' movement will put the Paladin at a disadvantage: if the Paladin is in melee with it, it bites him and then moves 50' laterally or behind him (classic wolf tactics), taking one opportunity attack (at disadvantage if it knocked him prone) instead of a full Extra Attack sequence. If he had good ranged attacks this would invite the Paladin to use his Action on ranged attacks instead of Dashing, but... a stereotypical paladin like OP's friend is apparently playing does not. The Paladin's damage is being effectively cut in half, or by even more if he's relying on Polearm Master.

Melee-only specialization is a huge liability in 5E's ruleset.

[Corran]

The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.
This is the problem. While the paladin has the tanking capacity to face the problem better and in a way that it will make it seem less of a problem for them, the other classes do not (or maybe they can, for example the rogues and monk can skirmish, but maybe you don't handle that very well? Dunno). That leads you to the conclusion that the paladin is overpowered, but in fact what it does, is that it masks the problem. What the real problem is? Lack of battlefield control. Someone should pick up some cc. Or alternatively the DM could tailor the fights somehow so that the enemies wont take that much advantage of the lack of cc your party suffers from (use lower number of enemies and have most of them focus on the paladin perhaps?), so that the rest of you guys can enjoy your characters more instead of being chased around by enemies in every encounter.

(The paladin could easily add some cc by taking the sentinel feat, by some channel divinities assuming they pick one of the relevant oaths, maybe even by using compelled duel more - though probably it shouldn't come to that last one).

[JellyPooga]

Paladins are good, yes, but they need party support as much as they support the party. Without a trapfinder, their heals and HP can be cut in half before they even see a fight. Without a lockpicker, they might not even get as far as traps. Without any AoE or melee friends, they can struggle against hordes. Without a pathfinder they'll get lost in the woods or up a mountain pass. Without an archer, they'll die to missile fire or kiting before they can close the range (if they can at all). Yes, they can get many things from Background, but they won't be as good as when they have that support.

[jdolch]

In my Opinion it is a cheap cop-out to say "The Paladin is OP. Please help me design encounters to specifically counter him"

I think it is more than a bit disturbing that in a Group of 6 Players nobody can build a Character that can match the power level of a simple Run-of-the-Mill Paladin (We are not even talking about a Sorcadin or Padlock here)

The reason this Group is unbalanced isn't the Paladin. To me it appears that, and you probably don't want to hear this, the other members of the group don't know how to build and play effective Characters OR the Characters the want to build and play are ill suited to the type of campaign you are running.

As others have said, you are running around with 4 glass cannons. And apparently none of them specced into heal, buffing or CC to at least be in a support role. So the Paladin is the only player who took it upon himself to Tank for the Party, Heal for the Party and Buff the Party (at least through AoP).

It seems to me that the Paladin Player is the only one who actually does what he is supposed to do and I think it's unfair to punish him for it. Instead look at where all players can change their playstyle to make a better TEAM. Have someone be a Healer, Buff each other. Get a second meatshield.

And just in general learn how the game works. If you are a group of purists who like to play "this one way" and only "this one way" even if it is "bad", then fine, but don't hold that against other Players.

Even without multiclassing you can easily build lots of characters who can match a Paladin. But with multiclassing it gets even easier. Here is one cheap way: Why didn't the Warlock start out as a Level 1 Fighter and then proceeded to Warlock from level 2 forward? He would be so much stronger and even better at what a Warlock does. He could function as a Tank as well as a Caster.

Stop trying to reign in the one "overachiever" and instead look at yourselves and where you can be better. There are LOTS of ways to be just as good as that Paladin. If you all elect to ignore them, that really isn't his problem. It's yours.

Or just make a decision that at your table people can't go above a certain (low) power level and that's fine too.

(And if you just need some Inspiration, just look at the "Ultimate Optimizer's Multiclass Guide" on this very Forum.) [No you don't have to be an "Ultimate Optimizer" to get to the power level of a simple Paladin but the Guide is still good.]

[Amdy_vill]

Help me out friends. I have played a good amount of 5e on both sides of the DM screen and across different groups have felt the Paladin is by far the most durable, obnoxious class to deal with in combat. They have high ACs, boost to all saves, high hit dice, the most reliable healing ability in the game (high one action heal without rolling in lay on hands) and reliable HIGH damage from smites. And that is befroe you start messing with find steed.

The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.

Convince me paladins aren't broken compared to the rest of the classes? Suggestions for exasperated GMs for how to deal with this discrepancy in durability?

when i played a paladin i did the same. here is the thing, paladins have one big problems. they burn out there power way to fast. just give drop more encounters.

[Willie the Duck]

boost to all saves, ... reliable HIGH damage from smites. ...The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.

The reliably high damage is dependent on what you mean by reliable, because as others have mentioned, smites can run out.

The rest-what level is this? Clearly over 6 if they have a save boost. And below 11 I am guessing? You don't have a fighter in the party to make it glaringly obvious, but the paladin only having 2 attacks all game is a genuine constraint for a martial character. The rest of this party don't get a third attack, but they do get other compensatory stuff while the paladin gets... +1d8 per attack. One of the reasons why paladins look so good is that the place where they shine the brightest is also a well loved level range.


honestly, the paladin is great, but it is a rigid class, less flexibility in play.

Very much. I feel that, while they look very nice on paper (and springboard into many a point-of-discussion-heavy back-and-forths on forums when pulled into Cha-based MC builds, and thus are interesting to talk about), the number of situations where the inflexibility of the class won't show up are remarkably limited. I would think that you would almost stumble on those scenarios unless the PCs have complete control of the whens and hows of their engagements.

[Keravath]

One thing the OP didn't mention is magic items.

With D&D 5e and its idea of bounded accuracy ... magic items make a huge difference.

A paladin in plate plus a shield has an AC of 20 (which is really good). However, if the DM likes giving out magic as in previous editions and the paladin happens to have +3 plate and a +3 shield for an AC of 26 ... that makes for a significantly more powerful character.

Another aspect is a paladin with the lucky feat. For most characters this can represent a second chance at a save. However, in the case of a paladin or other front line it is a crit avoidance system. As long as the paladin has a luck point left, the odds of ever critting them go way down.

Finally, as many others have mentioned, a paladin is long rest dependent. They are not supposed to be able to smite all day long. If they use up all their capabilities in the first fight ... they won't have anything left for the 3rd. However, if there isn't a third fight then the paladin is ahead of the game.

Anyway, the basic paladin chassis has some really great features as do all the other classes in 5e (one of its strengths is that all the classes are playable) .. but that balance shifts based on the number of long vs short rests and encounters in a day. Long rest characters need to conserve resources for the day and many players don't understand that or play that way.

In the situation described by the OP, the only way the paladin can be staying up through the fight and everyone else is going down -
1) Paladin has an AC that is particularly high and the typical monsters encountered have a low to hit
2) However, the OP mentions that all the other characters are taking damage/almost dead. This implies that the monsters are ignoring the paladin to focus on the squishies. Most rogues don't wind up staying in melee ... they either use ranged, bonus action disengage, swashbuckler or mobile. Moon druids can be found in melee but they can also use summons and other spells to pad the party or barkskin to increase their AC in beast shape. They can also use spell slots to heal as a bonus action. A non-moon druid is probably not in melee ... so if they are getting hit then the paladin is not managing to keep the attention of the monsters focused on them. Same goes for the wizard. The situation sounds like the DM has the monsters go after everyone else since he figures he can't do much to the paladin ... however, the paladin still winds up an 1/2 hit points ... what would happen if all the monsters went after the paladin? Maybe one knocks the paladin prone and the rest (maybe with pack tactics) start eating him. What happens if a pack of 8 dire wolves swarms the paladin?

Anyway ... there are options to deal with the paladin and good choice of opponents and focused attacks are probably the best choices.

[Tanarii]

90% of games use the 15 min adventuring day,And 98% of statistics are made up on the spot. :smallamused:

[Dudewithknives]

And 98% of statistics are made up on the spot. :smallamused:

Well my sample size comes from frequenting the only 3 gaming shops within 100 miles, being very close friends every group who gamed there, played in 10+ campaigns and helping plan out or troubleshoot dozens more, and spent a considerable amount of time online networking with many other DMs/game designers/playtesters across the country, almost every one of them have talked about how almost all their groups still use the 3.5/pathfinder style of the one big combat a day, and other just gruntwork otherwise.

Paladins do one thing better than anyone; blow most of their resources in one round to completely wipe the floor with the biggest threat.

The issue with this is 3 fold:

1. Most of the time there is just one huge threat in the big fight and then the collection of mooks for support or just to add numbers.
2. Most of the time there will be a long rest before a pretty dangerous encounter again.
3. Paladins are NOT going to be the guy blowing spell levels to help out of combat because people know what they can do in combat, out of combat support is more for people with a much deeper spell pool.

[dmteeter]

It appears to me that everyone else in your party either doesn't understand their role, or they didn't build their characters very well.


Your druid if they went moon druid should be able to consistently out tank your paladin.

Both of your rogues should be dropping much higher DPR over the course of an adventuring day.

Monk is a hyper mobile damage machine, If they effectively use their movement speed and KI points they should easily match the paladin in DPR and control. Especially if they have the stunning strike ability.

If your warlock is getting outclassed in this party for any reason it's because they aren't using the rest mechanics correctly and obviously didn't pick the right spells and invocations.


All things considered this party should not have any problems if you worked to your strengths and effectively used your abilities.

[Tanarii]

Well my sample size comes from frequenting the only 3 gaming shops within 100 miles, being very close friends every group who gamed there, played in 10+ campaigns and helping plan out or troubleshoot dozens more, and spent a considerable amount of time online networking with many other DMs/game designers/playtesters across the country, almost every one of them have talked about how almost all their groups still use the 3.5/pathfinder style of the one big combat a day, and other just gruntwork otherwise.
Wait, you were serious and are doubling down on 90%? I thought you were aware of your own hyperbole.

Let me laugh even harder. /bender

[Dudewithknives]

Wait, you were serious and are doubling down on 90%? I thought you were aware of your own hyperbole.

Let me laugh even harder. /bender

Yes I was serious, I talk to dozens of DM's from all around my area or online on a weekly basis, and for the far higher than just a base majority, it is still just the basic 15 min adventuring day.

It was not a hyperbole at all it was a derived statistic, no more a hyperbole than when WOTC does a survey after a UA comes out and gets results.

I do not get the /bender thing.

[Unoriginal]

I do not get the /bender thing.

Bender is a character in the cartoon Futurama. He is an irreverent robot who is notably involved in this gag:


https://youtu.be/o8dKczJj3ks

[Dudewithknives]

Bender is a character in the cartoon Futurama. He is an irreverent robot who is notably involved in this gag:


https://youtu.be/o8dKczJj3ks

Ah, I do not watch much television and when I do it is almost never comedies.

[LudicSavant]

Yes I was serious, I talk to dozens of DM's from all around my area or online on a weekly basis, and for the far higher than just a base majority, it is still just the basic 15 min adventuring day.

It was not a hyperbole at all it was a derived statistic, no more a hyperbole than when WOTC does a survey after a UA comes out and gets results.

I do not get the /bender thing.

Saying "90% of games" when you really mean "an amount higher than base majority for a sample size of dozens" is... pretty much the definition of hyperbole.

[Dudewithknives]

Saying "90% of games" when you really mean "an amount higher than base majority for a sample size of dozens" is... pretty much the definition of hyperbole.

No, that is the definition of a statistic based on a sample size.

Could you argue that probably 40's or so DMs all saying that the almost all just see the 15 min adventuring day or just one big fight a session, as not being a big enough sample size, but when something is so consistent across a sample it a pattern not hyperbole.

[jdolch]

Can we get back to the original Topic?

[LudicSavant]

No, that is the definition of a statistic based on a sample size.

Could you argue that probably 40's or so DMs all saying that the almost all just see the 15 min adventuring day or just one big fight a session, as not being a big enough sample size, but when something is so consistent across a sample it a pattern not hyperbole.

I don't think you get it. Saying that you observe a pattern amongst a plurality of your local gamers and saying "90% of games" are not the same kind of statement.

[Dudewithknives]

I don't think you get it. Saying that you observe a pattern amongst a plurality of your local gamers and saying "90% of games" are not the same kind of statement.

I did not say they were all local, I talk to many DMs from across the country and quite a few that are not even from my country.

I said I talk to many local dm's and personally know just about all of them that run an AL game within 100 miles.

Check the message boards alone, most complaints of how powerful certain classes are is because they still use the 15 min adventuring day.

[dmteeter]

Oh look a blue vase

[Willie the Duck]

I did not say they were all local, I talk to many DMs from across the country and quite a few that are not even from my country.

I said I talk to many local dm's and personally know just about all of them that run an AL game within 100 miles.

Check the message boards alone, most complaints of how powerful certain classes are is because they still use the 15 min adventuring day.

None of which (message boards included) are representative enough of the general gaming population that making a statement with a specified percentage is anything except hyperbole. Hyperbole is the accurate description of your statement (and that is fine). Hyperbole is not inherently a bad thing. It is a valid conversational technique. Outlandish exaggeration ('110% of all D&D games end up being 5 minute workdays.') is also perfectly valid, provided everyone acknowledges that's what's going on. This could have all been avoided by you responding to the 'And 98% of statistics are made up on the spot' rejoinder with something like, 'Absolutely. No idea what the actual percentage is, but I feel confident that it is high.' The situation would be resolved in a moment and we could be moving on with the meat of the discussion.

[LudicSavant]

None of which (message boards included) are representative enough of the general gaming population that making a statement with a specified percentage is anything except hyperbole. Hyperbole is the accurate description of your statement (and that is fine). Hyperbole is not inherently a bad thing. It is a valid conversational technique. Outlandish exaggeration ('110% of all D&D games end up being 5 minute workdays.') provided everyone acknowledges that's what's going on. This could have all been avoided by you responding to the 'And 98% of statistics are made up on the spot' rejoinder with something like, 'Absolutely. No idea what the actual percentage is, but I feel confident that it is high.' The situation would be resolved in a moment and we could be moving on with the meat of the discussion.

This, exactly.

[Dudewithknives]

None of which (message boards included) are representative enough of the general gaming population that making a statement with a specified percentage is anything except hyperbole. Hyperbole is the accurate description of your statement (and that is fine). Hyperbole is not inherently a bad thing. It is a valid conversational technique. Outlandish exaggeration ('110% of all D&D games end up being 5 minute workdays.') is also perfectly valid, provided everyone acknowledges that's what's going on. This could have all been avoided by you responding to the 'And 98% of statistics are made up on the spot' rejoinder with something like, 'Absolutely. No idea what the actual percentage is, but I feel confident that it is high.' The situation would be resolved in a moment and we could be moving on with the meat of the discussion.


This, exactly.

Or, the alternative, people could not reply with snarky sarcasm.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

I bet the DM has been accidently designing encounters in which Paladins shine.

Throw a group of bad guys at them. 10 cr 1/4 somethings and a bard or spellcaster who can cast Heat Metal or something with an intelligence or dex save.

A wall of fire or similar AOE really sucks for a pc in heavy armor or with poor dex.

[Willie the Duck]

Or, the alternative, people could not reply with snarky sarcasm.

I assure you, I don't care. Tanarii shouldn't have sarcastically snarked, or you shouldn't have lashed out at the snark. It doesn't matter. I was just pointing out where you seemed not to know what the actual issue of the disagreement was. I have no horse in this race.

Regardless, we're stuck here discussing whether 90% of games use the 15 min adventuring day, when no one on the thread actually believes that that is a scientifically verified percentile (and instead of any functional discussion on the subject of paladins). If everyone could drop it and discuss paladins instead, we'd all stop wasting virtual angst and moments of our lives.

Now, on to that, the OP mentioned "Paladin is by far the most durable...They have high ACs", does anyone else agree? Now obviously, they are heavy armor proficiency bearing classes with an incentive to have enough Strength to wear platemail, and access to the defensive fighting style. Beyond that, noting in particular. I've tended to find Str-based EKs (with access to shield spell), or even 1-level fighter dip wizards (who have the same armor, and even more shield spells to cast) to max out the AC column (outside of deliberate 'for contest' builds). Anyone have any thoughts?

[MaxWilson]

No, that is the definition of a statistic based on a sample size.

Could you argue that probably 40's or so DMs all saying that the almost all just see the 15 min adventuring day or just one big fight a session, as not being a big enough sample size, but when something is so consistent across a sample it a pattern not hyperbole.

You may find the poll results here interesting: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?469801-(Poll)-How-much-combat-per-adventuring-day

Do note that Paladins shine brightest in the "one Medium/Hard combat between long rests" scenario, because in a deadly combat they often don't have enough spell slots to make a real dent in the aggregate enemy HP. There isn't much overlap in the poll between those who do 1-2 fights per day and those who use only 0-50% of the adventuring day budget, so we can infer that those who do do 1-2 fights per day apparently make their fights pretty deadly, in terms of XP budget at least. (Terrain, tactics, and other things contribute to actual deadliness but do not show up in those poll results.)

The survey sample size is small, but based on those results it doesn't seem likely that many people actually do only one Medium/Hard combat between long rests, which is where Paladins would really shine.


Now, on to that, the OP mentioned "Paladin is by far the most durable...They have high ACs", does anyone else agree? Now obviously, they are heavy armor proficiency bearing classes with an incentive to have enough Strength to wear platemail, and access to the defensive fighting style. Beyond that, noting in particular. I've tended to find Str-based EKs (with access to shield spell), or even 1-level fighter dip wizards (who have the same armor, and even more shield spells to cast) to max out the AC column (outside of deliberate 'for contest' builds). Anyone have any thoughts?

Does "durable" mean "most likely to survive a deadly fight/near TPK" or "most likely to not ask for a rest after a few easy fights" or "best candidate to block a chokepoint during a regular fight so the other PCs can hide behind"?

I could plausibly see a Paladin/Sorcerer with Shield and Absorb Elements as a good candidate for most durable in the latter sense, probably tied with Moon Druid (each is superior in certain situations) and with the same weakness vs. Constitution saves (e.g. when fighting Yetis) as a Moon Druid. A single-classed Paladin is considerably worse due to lack of Shield, though you could mitigate with Defensive Duelist and Heavy Armor Master--but Paladins are more MAD and have fewer ASIs than a Fighter, so if you're going that route you are still trading worse durability vs. weapons for better Wis/Dex saving throws than the equivalent fighter (same Con saves). Considering that Con saves are usually the worst saves to fail and that weapon-based attacks are far more common than Wisdom attacks, I'd have to give the nod in that case to the Fighter. A tanking-specialized Eldritch Knight in particular will blow a single-classed Paladin out of the water when it comes to chokepoint tanking, but a Paladin 6/Divine Soul 1 will be approximately competitive with the EK.

Aside: one nice thing about Paladin auras is that they can help protect against friendly fire, e.g. you can drop a Hypnotic Pattern right on top of a Paladin of Devotion 7+ in the middle of a mob of enemies and he's completely immune.

I share your overall assessment: EKs and Fighter 1/Wizard X or Cleric 1/Wizard X are both better at tanking than a pure-classed Paladin.

[ad_hoc]

Well my sample size comes from frequenting the only 3 gaming shops within 100 miles, being very close friends every group who gamed there, played in 10+ campaigns and helping plan out or troubleshoot dozens more, and spent a considerable amount of time online networking with many other DMs/game designers/playtesters across the country, almost every one of them have talked about how almost all their groups still use the 3.5/pathfinder style of the one big combat a day, and other just gruntwork otherwise.


Your sample size is meaningless.

There are 12-15 million people playing (I believe that was just in NA).

The sorts of people playing at 'gaming shops' is insignificant and are outliers. People who have played 3.5 or Pathfinder and play 5e are in the minority now too.

WotC published adventures are all written with time as a significant factor in most chapters.

[jdolch]

Ok but the real solution here HAS to be more constructive than "let's just make the Paladin run out of resources hard" so he is just as helpless as we are.

IMO it is well established that when 5 players can't manage to build characters that can't compete with a (run of the mill) Paladin then the problem is not with the Paladin Player or with the Paladin class. It's with people who fail to educate and better themselves and instead want to nerf everybody to the lowest common denominator.

Getting to the power level of a normal single-class Paladin does NOT require min-maxing or some sort of extensive powergaming.

[And IF the reason these other characters cannot compete is that the players don't want to compete and enjoy having their fun elsewhere, (e.g. roleplaying or out of combat skills, etc.) something that happens often with people i play with, then where is the problem? ]

Solution:

1. Learn the game and build better characters. It's not that hard to compete with a simple Paladin.
2. Realize that this is a TEAM game, not a competition. Everybody should build and play their character so that the TEAM can thrive.

And that's basically all that has to be said about this. We don't need any discussion á la "let's nerv the paladin" here, because at least in this case that is clearly not the problem.

[MaxWilson]

Ok but the real solution here HAS to be more constructive than "let's just make the Paladin run out of resources hard" so he is just as helpless as we are.

IMO it is well established that when 5 players can't manage to build characters that can't compete with a (run of the mill) Paladin then the problem is not with the Paladin Player or with the Paladin class. It's with people who fail to educate and better themselves and instead want to nerf everybody to the lowest common denominator.

Getting to the power level of a normal single-class Paladin does NOT require min-maxing or some sort of extensive powergaming.

[And IF the reason these other characters cannot compete is that the players don't want to compete and enjoy having their fun elsewhere, (e.g. roleplaying or out of combat skills, etc.) something that happens often with people i play with, then where is the problem? ]

Sure, but since the OP probably isn't even reading this thread any more and sure isn't posting, there is nothing we can say that will ever make those 5 players get better at playing the game.

[jdolch]

Sorry I edited my post after you replied. Just FYI.

[LudicSavant]

Ok but the real solution here HAS to be more constructive than "let's just make the Paladin run out of resources hard" so he is just as helpless as we are.

Indeed, there is a real solution much more constructive than that. Though it's hard to give the real answer while we're dealing with Schrodinger's Paladin, and the OP hasn't replied at all.

As I said back on page 1, if anyone would provide a specific Paladin build I would be happy to stat up a Rogue, Warlock and Druid to compete with it. And there's been nothing at all in response but silence.

Edit Response to edit:



1. Learn the game and build better characters. It's not that hard to compete with a simple Paladin.

Yep, this is basically what I suspected the issue was back on page 1. Was all ready to teach how to build stronger Rogues/Warlocks/Druids/Monks but the OP seems to have made exactly 1 post and never returned.

[Dudewithknives]

I assure you, I don't care. Tanarii shouldn't have sarcastically snarked, or you shouldn't have lashed out at the snark. It doesn't matter. I was just pointing out where you seemed not to know what the actual issue of the disagreement was. I have no horse in this race.

Regardless, we're stuck here discussing whether 90% of games use the 15 min adventuring day, when no one on the thread actually believes that that is a scientifically verified percentile (and instead of any functional discussion on the subject of paladins). If everyone could drop it and discuss paladins instead, we'd all stop wasting virtual angst and moments of our lives.

Now, on to that, the OP mentioned "Paladin is by far the most durable...They have high ACs", does anyone else agree? Now obviously, they are heavy armor proficiency bearing classes with an incentive to have enough Strength to wear platemail, and access to the defensive fighting style. Beyond that, noting in particular. I've tended to find Str-based EKs (with access to shield spell), or even 1-level fighter dip wizards (who have the same armor, and even more shield spells to cast) to max out the AC column (outside of deliberate 'for contest' builds). Anyone have any thoughts?

I think the Paladin durability is also coming from their non-physical defenses:

Ex, path of the ancients:

They start with plate proficiency and shield use if they want to use them. So non-magical AC is covered well.
They get a fighting style choice, and Defense is always a consideration, no matter what their build is.
They get great saves thanks to adding their CHA to their saves on top of their normal save stat/proficiency, and so do your allies, if they stand close.
They also get resistance to magical damage, and so do your allies if they are close enough. This is a massive defensive bonus.

I think another thing that is so powerful about them is how easy it is to patch up their holes in their toolbox with a very small dip.

2 warlock hex blade lets you be a straight charisma build, adding it to your to hit, damage, and all saves, and it gives you the best ranged cantrip in the game with recurring spell slots to smite with.
1 Barbarian lets you rage and take half damage from all weapon attack while you do it, and since smiting is not casting spells you can smite while you rage.
of you take a 2nd level of barbarian you get advantage any time you want while raging, like when you are attacking the big bad to nova it down.

So with Hexblade 2/Barbarian 2/Ancients paladin 7 you have:
1/2 damage from all sources (magic from paladin, non-magic from barbarian)
At least tied for the best AC in the group more than likely
Can use your one important non-physical stat for your all saves, all to hits, all damage you will probably be using, and quite a few nice skills on top
Average of 1d10 HP across the 11 levels.
Only need a 15 str and as much CHA as you can pile on to cover just about everything.

They are one of the most well rounded defensive machines in the game.

A moon druid once they get high enough levels can take a beating but that is more through just having mountains of HP and they get more movement options, no that their actual defenses are better.

[MaxWilson]

I think the Paladin durability is also coming from their non-physical defenses:

Ex, path of the ancients:

They start with plate proficiency and shield use if they want to use them. So non-magical AC is covered well.
They get a fighting style choice, and Defense is always a consideration, no matter what their build is.
They get great saves thanks to adding their CHA to their saves on top of their normal save stat/proficiency, and so do your allies, if they stand close.
They also get resistance to magical damage, and so do your allies if they are close enough. This is a massive defensive bonus.

They only get resistance to damage from spells, not magical damage in general. Dragon breath weapon? No resistance. Amnizu psychic attack? No resistance. It can be a massive defensive bonus in certain types of campaigns, but if you're just playing against monsters from the MM it's a niche defensive bonus.

[Sexyshoeless]

Sure, but since the OP probably isn't even reading this thread any more and sure isn't posting, there is nothing we can say that will ever make those 5 players get better at playing the game.

Apologies to MaxWilson, Ludic and otehrs, I just posted yesterday - seems a little early to be writing me out. My apologies if the expectation is to be checking/replying more frequently.

I really appreciate all the varied answers everyone has provided.
I definitely think folks hit it on the head in the following areas:
we definitely play with less encounters than recommended, and our paladin player is EXTREMELY stingy with using any of his resources outside of combat - even his luck points from the lucky feat.

For those curious, we're level 8. he's an Aasimar devotion paladin with the mounted combatant and lucky feats.
I play a human moon druid (most ASIs went to WIS and warcaster), a thief rogue archer, a thief/cleric multiclass, a fey tomelock, and a way of shadow monk.

We definitely are largely more RP focused players, so there is a mismatch in expectations, and as folks ahve mentioned, the discrepancy in our how stat rolling has also contributed to this feeling of inequality.

I did want to clarify that I am not advocating for a nerf of the paladin class or the player. I wanted to put my observation out there and see what the community thought, especially watching my DM tear his hair out over this. I still personally find the combination of bonus to saves and high AC to be very, very strong, but as many folks have pointed out this is mitigated in situations with poorer stats or where the rest of the party plays at a similar level.

As the druid and fellow power gamer, I personally don't feel outshone or out done, and am having fun. It seems the consensus is that the paladin class itself is fine when the rest of the party keeps up.

[Unoriginal]

Apologies to MaxWilson, Ludic and otehrs, I just posted yesterday - seems a little early to be writing me out. My apologies if the expectation is to be checking/replying more frequently.

I really appreciate all the varied answers everyone has provided.
I definitely think folks hit it on the head in the following areas:
we definitely play with less encounters than recommended, and our paladin player is EXTREMELY stingy with using any of his resources outside of combat - even his luck points from the lucky feat.

For those curious, we're level 8. he's an Aasimar devotion paladin with the mounted combatant and lucky feats.
I play a human moon druid (most ASIs went to WIS and warcaster), a thief rogue archer, a thief/cleric multiclass, a fey tomelock, and a way of shadow monk.

We definitely are largely more RP focused players, so there is a mismatch in expectations, and as folks ahve mentioned, the discrepancy in our how stat rolling has also contributed to this feeling of inequality.

I did want to clarify that I am not advocating for a nerf of the paladin class or the player. I wanted to put my observation out there and see what the community thought, especially watching my DM tear his hair out over this. I still personally find the combination of bonus to saves and high AC to be very, very strong, but as many folks have pointed out this is mitigated in situations with poorer stats or where the rest of the party plays at a similar level.

As the druid and fellow power gamer, I personally don't feel outshone or out done, and am having fun. It seems the consensus is that the paladin class itself is fine when the rest of the party keeps up.

I just have one question: could you describe say, the last three encounters your group went through?

[ad_hoc]

For those curious, we're level 8. he's an Aasimar devotion paladin with the mounted combatant and lucky feats.
I play a human moon druid (most ASIs went to WIS and warcaster), a thief rogue archer, a thief/cleric multiclass, a fey tomelock, and a way of shadow monk.

6 PCs is hard for the game to handle. Things tend to get very swingy. 6 PCs are about twice as powerful as 4.



We definitely are largely more RP focused players, so there is a mismatch in expectations, and as folks ahve mentioned, the discrepancy in our how stat rolling has also contributed to this feeling of inequality.

Yeah, I think rolling for stats just doesn't work in 5e. Using feats just makes it much worse. There is little trade off when your primary stat is already 20.

One thing that I've seen groups do is have a long rest at the end of every session. Then they say they can't possibly have 6-8 encounters per long rest. 1 long rest might take 2-4 sessions depending on how much time is spent in the Social Interaction and Exploration pillars (length of session and time spent joking around are also significant factors).

I think my group averages 1 long rest per 2 sessions. We play for 4 hours and spend a lot of time joking around.

[Sexyshoeless]

I just have one question: could you describe say, the last three encounters your group went through?

I'm going to assume you mean combat encounters- I love our DM for how many different social and exploration based challenges he throws at us.

1. Recent "boss" fight - 4 higher level monks including a vampire with class levels vs the party in an open arena. We managed to focus fire the mooks while our paladin dueled the boss.
2. Alley ambush - we split the party, half the party got ambushed while the rest rushed to their aid. multiple bruisers attacking from both sides of the alley with the other half of the party arriving well into the fight.
3. attacked in the inn by a tamed mindflayer and a mob of red shirts during the night. Big brawl in the hallway with restricted movement due to all the bodies in the room. Very nice place for warlock and druid to bake everyone in an AoE sauna.

[LudicSavant]

For those curious, we're level 8. he's an Aasimar devotion paladin with the mounted combatant and lucky feats.

Would it be possible to provide the actual sheet? Specific numbers for AC and stats and such?

[Sexyshoeless]

I don't have access to his numbers or his sheet- I know his Cha is 20, con and STR are at least 16, and his other stats are all either +2 or +1. He sits with defense style, splint and shield at 20 AC and regularly throws down shield of faith as well. HP is highest in the party just by virtue of hit dice but I'm not sure by how much.

Sorry I don't have more info.

[Dudewithknives]

I don't have access to his numbers or his sheet- I know his Cha is 20, con and STR are at least 16, and his other stats are all either +2 or +1. He sits with defense style, splint and shield at 20 AC and regularly throws down shield of faith as well. HP is highest in the party just by virtue of hit dice but I'm not sure by how much.

Sorry I don't have more info.

I assume you all rolled for stats or you are like level 12+?

[MaxWilson]

I'm going to assume you mean combat encounters- I love our DM for how many different social and exploration based challenges he throws at us.

1. Recent "boss" fight - 4 higher level monks including a vampire with class levels vs the party in an open arena. We managed to focus fire the mooks while our paladin dueled the boss.
2. Alley ambush - we split the party, half the party got ambushed while the rest rushed to their aid. multiple bruisers attacking from both sides of the alley with the other half of the party arriving well into the fight.
3. attacked in the inn by a tamed mindflayer and a mob of red shirts during the night. Big brawl in the hallway with restricted movement due to all the bodies in the room. Very nice place for warlock and druid to bake everyone in an AoE sauna.


I don't have access to his numbers or his sheet- I know his Cha is 20, con and STR are at least 16, and his other stats are all either +2 or +1. He sits with defense style, splint and shield at 20 AC and regularly throws down shield of faith as well. HP is highest in the party just by virtue of hit dice but I'm not sure by how much.

Sorry I don't have more info.

Aha. Sounds like (1) things are going fine, and also (2) the reason everyone else except you, the Moon Druid, feels panicked is because they are squishy backline characters who don't do well when surrounded by enemies, and your DM likes to use big mobs who attack you from multiple directions.

Honestly it sounds like a fun game, but if I were in your party and I were the rogue, monk, or warlock, I would spend time thinking about how to get OUT of combat, not into it. Once the monk hits 9th level and gets wall running, he can either e.g. sit up on a ledge above the alley and snipe with arrows, or (if he's got the Mobile feat) he can dart in and out of combat smacking bad guys around in melee before retreating back to the ledge. That ought to make him significantly less panicked. The warlock might want to experiment with high-level Armor of Agathys, and both the thieves and the warlock might want to experiment more with picking favorable terrain that prevents multiple enemies from approaching at once. Use the paladin as a stalking horse to get enemies to clump up, and then blow them all away with an AoE (ideally one the paladin is immune or at least resistant to).

Fundamentally you should be looking for opportunities to gain tempo and reclaim the initiative in every fight. It's not really a paladin thing; it's a tactics thing.

As a Moon Druid you are well-placed to alter the situation. For example, if you get ambushed in an inn by a Mind Flayer and a bunch of red shirts coming in from multiple directions, you can throw down a Spike Growth right on top of the party before transforming into Giant Constrictor Snake form. Now any red shirt enemies who approach you take a bunch of damage (~6d4ish) before they even reach melee range, and they're moving at half-speed due to difficult terrain, and the warlock can hopefully (depending on his invocations) blast them right back across the spikes for d10+4d4+CHA damage per hit even if they do somehow survive the initial approach. Meanwhile the rogues are peppering evertbody with arrows and the monk is just running along the walls completely ignoring the spikes on the ground, and the paladin is just doing his thing (hunting down the Mind Flayer? that unlocks the rogues' ranged Sneak Attacks against the Mind Flayer and is a strong play) and trying to avoid the spikes, and you're in Giant Constrictor Snake form restraining whoever you feel like with your attacks and opportunity attacks.

Can you see how that completely transforms the feel of the fight from a panicky "we're being swarmed!" into a calm, measured "we're holding a defensive strong point against the opposition until they grind themselves away to nothing"?

As a DM I find spells like Evard's Black Tentacles and Spike Growth immensely frustrating (from a monster's point of view). Use them to protect your party. Conjure Animals is great too.

[Sexyshoeless]

I assume you all rolled for stats or you are like level 12+?

We all rolled.

[Dudewithknives]

We all rolled.

That could be a big issue, with the concept of “bound accuracy” rolling stats can make a huge imbalance.

[Foxhound438]

We all rolled.

that's probably the biggest issue. If the warlock rolled into a 20 charisma and very positive in everything else while the paladin had like a +3 in strength and nothing better in con or charisma, then the warlock would seem to vaporize everything in the game while the paladin would serve as a meager speed bump as your only frontline character. Point buy puts everyone on an even playing field, mechanically.

[Matticusrex]

I think all martial classes should have been balanced to the paladin's level, they are the perfect amount of power for someone whos not a full caster.

[LudicSavant]

For those curious, we're level 8. he's an Aasimar devotion paladin with the mounted combatant and lucky feats.


I don't have access to his numbers or his sheet- I know his Cha is 20, con and STR are at least 16, and his other stats are all either +2 or +1. He sits with defense style, splint and shield at 20 AC and regularly throws down shield of faith as well. HP is highest in the party just by virtue of hit dice but I'm not sure by how much.

Sorry I don't have more info.

NP, that's helpful. The combination of knowing his feats and the stat information you just gave is enough to roughly determine how good his stat rolls are.

So yeah, this guy has very good stat rolls. A normal point buy Aasimar (I'm guessing Fallen Aasimar?) with Mounted Combatant and Lucky would have only 16 Cha and Str, and much lower in all their other stats. In order to match this guy's stats (using uncapped point buy) you'd need 47-56 point buy (http://chicken-dinner.com/5e/5e-point-buy.html#aasimar&fallenaasimar&15&14&14&14&14&18&0&0&27&18&8&19&15&12&9&7&5&4&3&2&1&0&1&2&4&6&9&4&4&4&4&4&4) (depending on how many of those stats are +2s or +1s), up from 27.

This is important, because if we're going to decide if the problem is the class or some entirely different variable, we need to compare to others assuming they have access to similar resources (like 56 uncapped points worth of attributes).

The equivalent resources Rogue could be something like...

Variant Human Arcane Trickster 8
8 Str, 20 Dex, 18 Con, 16 Int, 14 Wis, 10 Cha (a whopping 55 points on uncapped point buy)
War Caster / Moderately Armored (bumps the 19 Dex to 20) / Alert
Cantrips: Minor Illusion / Booming Blade / Conjure Bonfire / Ledgerdemain Mage Hand (much better than regular mage hand)

Being a Rogue means that you're very useful out of combat. But you seem to be most interested in what's happening in combat, so let's skip to that.

Durability-wise, you're a full-fledged tank. You have 19 base AC, more hp than the Paladin (because of the higher Con score, since you're more SAD than he is), Evasion (which with a +8 base Ref save means that Fireballs are lucky to so much as singe the hem of your skirt), Uncanny Dodge (which halves the damage of an attack that hits you, at will), and access to defensive spells like Mirror Image or Blur (which means that most enemies can just kiss their chances of hitting you goodbye). The Alert feat even makes it so that enemies can't get Advantage on you using one of the more common methods of getting Advantage (which you can think of as a sort of situational AC bonus). On top of all that you've got all of the versatility afforded by Cunning Action and the survivability it confers.

+10 to initiative means that you go first more often than not, and it's hard to oversate how valuable going first is in 5th edition. The fact that you're also stealthy means that there's a fair chance you'll get surprise and go first, which means you're up two full rounds of actions over the case where you lost initiative. Likewise, you're immune to the enemy surprising you, which means you avoid losing a round of actions in those scenarios. Also, going first often has a less easily quantifiable benefit in terms of gaining the best positioning... which often can mean quite a lot.

Your resourceless shtick is to open combat with Booming Blade sneak attacks with Advantage from your familiar, and then have your enemy make a choice between attacking you (likely a waste of their action due to your AC and Uncanny Dodge, or Evasion if they use anything Ref-based on you), or making a ranged attack against someone else (which has Disadvantage since they're in melee with you, and many enemies have weaker ranged attacks than melee to boot), or move out of range of you and try to melee someone else.

If they move out of range of you, your rider damage from Booming Blade triggers, and you get to use another Booming Blade (the rider of which will also trigger) and an extra sneak attack. The total punishment for this mistake on your enemy's part is 8d8+8d6+10 (average 74) damage. That's also coming quite reliably, thanks to your high attack bonus (+8 base) and the ability to grant yourself Advantage when you want it.

You also have the option of blocking a narrow choke point with Conjure Bonfire, standing behind it, and then trapping anyone who tries to go through there on the spot and watching them burn to death or explode by trying to walk away from your Booming Blades. Or of using Minor Illusion for all the nice things that Minor Illusion is good for. And so on and so forth. Oh, and your critical hits are nastier than normal (since so much of your damage comes in the form of dice), and come more frequently than most (again, due to your regular access to Advantage).

You also have your bonus action free for your Cunning Action, which allows you to move, disengage, hide, or ledgerdemain in addition to any of the options I just said.

On top of the resourceless shtick summarized in the last 4 paragraphs, you have spell slots which can be used for things like Shield (in situations where it'd be even better than Uncanny Dodge), Absorb Elements (for those odd elemental attacks that DON'T hit Reflex), Hold Person, Invisibility, Mirror Image, Blur, etc. And your Concentration is very likely to be broken due to +4 with Advantage combined with your general resistance to damage (which means you'll make less Concentration saves, and that when you do the saves will have lower DCs).

Just next level, at 9, you can give enemies Disadvantage to saving throws against your spells as much as you want, which means that you get pretty good at just shutting enemies down outright when you really need to.

You don't walk around giving everyone in the party a bonus to saves, but then, a great party is one that has synergy, and if you had 2 paladins your auras wouldn't stack.

[Malifice]

Yes I was serious, I talk to dozens of DM's from all around my area or online on a weekly basis, and for the far higher than just a base majority, it is still just the basic 15 min adventuring day.

It was not a hyperbole at all it was a derived statistic, no more a hyperbole than when WOTC does a survey after a UA comes out and gets results.

I do not get the /bender thing.

If those DM's run games featuring the 15 minute adventuring day, then that's on them.

My games I run dont feature the 5MWD. Neither do most of the games I play in.

If you have either a good group of players (players that arent trying to game the system), or a good DM (who understands the meta behind 5E's rules) or better yet, both, the 5MWD isnt a thing.

Personally, I always consider time constraints for my quests. Always. And thats even in games that dont heavily feature a resource management mechanic like 5E.

That doesnt mean every quest or mission is a race against time, but most of my quests and missions and adventures feature time constraints/ pressure to move forward of some kind or another.

If there is no time pressure to move the story/ mission/ quest along, why is it even happening? How on earth is such a story or quest remotely intresting?

[LudicSavant]

*snip*

Another example of a Rogue expanding on my last one, since the last one is basically SAD... but we've got the resources to abuse being MAD. So we could have something like, say, Barb 1 / Rogue 7 and have a Rogue with base 22 AC (naked w/ 20 con/dex and a shield), Uncanny Dodge, Evasion, significantly more hit points than the Paladin, access to rage or defensive spell slots, and the harder to quantify security of expertise in stealth, Cunning Action, and higher initiative.

So yeah.. basically...


Suggestions for exasperated GMs for how to deal with this discrepancy in durability?

Other characters can get really durable too if we're giving them crazy rolls, building them better than the other players, and playing in a campaign that presents scenarios that play to their strengths.

Hope that helps put things in perspective! :smallsmile:

If you want, I can post something for other classes too.

[djreynolds]

Help me out friends. I have played a good amount of 5e on both sides of the DM screen and across different groups have felt the Paladin is by far the most durable, obnoxious class to deal with in combat. They have high ACs, boost to all saves, high hit dice, the most reliable healing ability in the game (high one action heal without rolling in lay on hands) and reliable HIGH damage from smites. And that is befroe you start messing with find steed.

The paladin in our group regularly solo face tanks half of every encounter coming out above half HP while the rest of us combined (druid, 2 rogues, warlock, monk) run around screaming trying not to die from the same enemies. I have seen the same play out in other groups as well.

Convince me paladins aren't broken compared to the rest of the classes? Suggestions for exasperated GMs for how to deal with this discrepancy in durability?

It seems the player could be the key here. Perhaps he/she is a really good player? I've seen plenty of paladins die.

I've seen players, who are awesome, regardless of the build. They know the spells and class abilities, and create a character that fits the party.

I'd have to see the spells that are prepared, the archetype, stats, etc. Did the DM drop plate armor too soon, and the paladin is rocking an AC of 23 with plate armor, a shield, defensive style, and shield of faith? This happens

Are the rogues using cunning action and disengaging, or are they going in for the big hit and staying in melee. Perhaps they have 2 short swords, and missed with the 1st strike and decided to use the off hand strike for another chance to score their sneak attack and now are stuck in melee with leather armor and maybe a 15AC

Same for the monk, if you use your BA for another unarmed strike, you can't spend a KI point and the bonus action to disengage with step of the wind and now you're stuck in melee, or you can't use a KI point/bonus action to dodge with patient defense after attacking.

I see many 5th level monks go in and attack with 2 attacks and then of course they use their BA for another unarmed strike and then spend a KI for FOBs, and now they are stuck in melee with probably a 16 AC at most and get messed up.

Rogues and monks are skirmishers and strikers, they need to move in and out of the fray.

A druid's wild shape might have an AC of 13 to 14, they are going to take hits. They could cast barkskin for a 16AC. Are they even concentrating on a spell while in beast form like say moonbeam.

The warlock might be in melee using booming blade, and then stay and get attacked.

A great player can make a paladin shine, I guessing this is the reason the paladin looks OP.

[LudicSavant]

While we're on the subject of comparative durability, even the lowly Monk class is a lot tougher when given access to the kind of resources we're told this Paladin has.

Ex: Level 8 Way of the Long Death Monk

Stats after ASIs: 20 Wisdom / 20 Dexterity / 18 Constitution / 8 Str / 10 Int / 8 Cha (A whopping 55 point buy, comparable to the Paladin's rolls)
ASIs: Observant, +2 Dex, Defensive Duelist


Base AC 20
A whopping 23 passive perception means that nothing's getting the drop on you, be it traps, ambushes, whatever.
If you are hit by an attack, you can use a reaction to raise your AC by 3. It's like a mini-Shield, except it's At Will.
You are a creepy monk boy who can eat bugs to maintain 13 extra temporary hit points, which means that you effectively have more hit points than characters with higher hit dice (if you don't already because of raw Constitution score).
Tons of bonus action options, including Disengage, Dash, Flurry of Blows, and of course Dodge. Dodge is a powerful action which makes you dramatically harder to hit, both with attack rolls and Dex-save effects... and you still get to punch and try to Stun people while you're at it. Combined with your high AC, this means you are very difficult to hit, especially for swarms. The sheer number of goblins or bandits it would take to even start to break even with your Touch of Death temporary hit point generation is staggering.
You have Evasion, a +8 Dexterity save, and the ability to get Advantage on dex-saves as a bonus action. You are practically immune to dragon breath, fireballs, etc.
45 foot base move speed, further augmented by access to things like Step of the Wind, good Acrobatics, and the ability to run on walls. This confers positioning advantages that further decrease the enemy's ability to harm you.
Hour of Reaping allows you to frighten all enemies within 30 feet of you for a turn, which means that they can't move closer to you and have Disadvantage on their attacks. This doesn't even take ki points. You can just do this all day to make low-wis-save enemies impotent. Melee enemies can't even approach you, and ranged enemies can't hit you (and even if they do, you have Deflect Missiles)
If you are hit by a ranged attack, you can use a reaction to reduce the damage by 1d10+13 (average 18.5). And if this reduces the damage you'd take from the attack to zero, then you get to sling the attack right back at them.
Falling damage is of no concern to you.
When you hit a creature, you can try to Stun them. You can do this up to 4 times in a single turn, and if any of these attempts succeeds the enemy loses their turn and all damage that might have come from said turn (not to mention taking a lot more damage from your allies due to the Advantage you granted them, or the fact that they automatically fail str/dex saves, or the fact that you broke their concentration, etc).
If you become Frightened or Charmed despite your great Wisdom save, then you can just use an action to remove the effect. Yep. That's it. Doesn't even take ki.