Why Don't more people play light armor/weapon paladin

[moonfly7]

It took a long time for me to realise this, but there actually isn't any reason a paladin has to be the archetypal knight in heavy armor with a big sword. Smite, there spells, and every one of there features doesn't have to be used on the frontline to be optimal. Obviously it's the classic build, and you generally want your explosive nova fighter to have a big weapon and tanky armor, but a different approach to paladin would be very doable and I'm disappointed that we don't do see it more often.

[Amnestic]

Paladins are just cooler if you're a knight in shining armour.

That's just how it be.

[moonfly7]

Paladins are just cooler if you're a knight in shining armour.

That's just how it be.

I mean, maybe. But at this point I've played and played with every variation on "holy guy with a big stick" but no one has touched the concept of just, not being the heavy as the paladin. Rogue paladin Multiclass would be fun and very synergistic, but no one touches it because "rogues have small weapon paladin have big one"
This goes for a lot of combos honestly.

[Keravath]

Dex paladins can be a lot of fun.

However, they focus on one handed finesse weapons rather than great swords or polearms. A dex paladin can use a long bow effectively giving them a good ranged option but they don't have access to PAM or GWM for additional attacks or damage.

A dex paladin also doesn't have the same multiclass options unless they put a minimum 13 in strength in addition to focusing on dex which makes them even more MAD than usual. Many paladins like to have a bit of warlock, sorcerer or bard thrown in.

If you plan on playing a straight paladin from 1-20 then a dex paladin can make sense and still be a lot of fun to play but they will be limited to mostly using a rapier for melee with a shield (or possibly two weapon fighting but that hurts their AC and still doesn't match the damage output of PAM or similar) ... but it is a fun style of play.

[Keltest]

I mean, a dexadin is certainly a viable build, but i think its a bit hard to argue that its just as good as a str based pally. You cant initiate grapples as dex based, since the initiator has to use their Str (athletics) ability rather than the choice of athletics or acrobatics, you cant make effective use of heavy armor, and you need to use finesse weapons, which are overall just not as good as 2h at smacking things.

Multiclassing with rogue would get you sneak attack, and i could see a swashbuckler in particular having some synergy, but i dont think the rogue chassis by itself contributes much to the paladin.

[Topgoon]

A Dex-based Paladin is definitely viable, but is limited in a few ways, which is why you see them less.

- Most likely single class Paladin: Multiclass requirements means you still need 13 STR if you ever want to multiclass out of Paladin, making DEX-Paladin even more MAD. Paladin is a very popular multiclass choice

- The more popular melee weapon feats are for strength based - Polearm Master, Great Weapon Master

- Heavy armor proficiency is an incentive to go STR for a MAD class

[heavyfuel]

It's probably the game designer's fault.

Pallys don't get access to TWF style, which would actually be good on a Pally, since they love additional attacks (higher chance to smite-crit, and an extra d8 when they reach Tier 3); the multiclass requirement means you need Str unless you plan on going full-pally; and you have no native access to Dex-based skills.

If the first two "restrictions" were lifted, I'm sure Dexadins would be more popular.

In a houseruled game where Pallys were allowed TWF style and where TWF was slightly buffed, I did have a player go for Dexadin.

[Tanarii]

Because when you've got access to heavy armor and you're going to be fighting in melee, Str is a better route to go.

It has the option to do minorly more damage, but that's not the important part, unless you have access to feats and take GWM. Then it's extremely important, because it is majorly more damage.

What's important is it allows you to use a wider variety of magic weapons and armor, and specifically allows you to not have to compete with all the finesse weapon and light armor wanting allies. If you happen to know your party composition before hand, it's possible this won't be an issue because there are more Str-weapon HA-wearing allies than otherwise. But not all games work that way, and IMX those are typically in the minority anyway in any given party.

It also buffs up Athletics, Str-saves, and jump distances, all of which are important for front line melee combatants.

[stoutstien]

I have 3/11 paladins going either dex focused or Cha focused with 14 dex based on the copies of PC sheets I have on my desk from games over the last 3 years. This is discounting any multi-class with less than 5 levels of pally.

Hardly under representing IMO.

[iTreeby]

It works best in a party that is built for stealth as you dont automatically have disadvantage on stealth because of the heavy armor. If your party has a trickery cleric or someone else who can cast pass without trace you don't really need to worry about that anyway. The best thing about dex paladin might be the whip, a reach weapon that you can use with a shield without being mounted which is still lower AC than heavy armor.

[Porcupinata]

If you plan on playing a straight paladin from 1-20 then a dex paladin can make sense and still be a lot of fun to play but they will be limited to mostly using a rapier for melee with a shield (or possibly two weapon fighting but that hurts their AC and still doesn't match the damage output of PAM or similar) ... but it is a fun style of play.

On the other hand, two weapon fighting means an extra chance to crit and therefore an extra chance to boost that smite damage.

[sophontteks]

Smite, there spells, and every one of there features doesn't have to be used on the frontline to be optimal.
Not sure what you mean. Smite is limited to melee weapon attacks.

[Mellack]

It took a long time for me to realise this, but there actually isn't any reason a paladin has to be the archetypal knight in heavy armor with a big sword. Smite, there spells, and every one of there features doesn't have to be used on the frontline to be optimal. Obviously it's the classic build, and you generally want your explosive nova fighter to have a big weapon and tanky armor, but a different approach to paladin would be very doable and I'm disappointed that we don't do see it more often.

Actually paladins are basically required to be frontline. Divine smite and any of the smite spells only work with melee weapons, so ranged paladins lose out on quite a bit.

Since you have to be frontline and have the proficiency, it generally makes sense to go heavy armor. It gives a slightly better AC, requires less in your stats, and frees up magic items for other members rather than all being outfitted the same.

[Vegan Squirrel]

It works best in a party that is built for stealth as you dont automatically have disadvantage on stealth because of the heavy armor. If your party has a trickery cleric or someone else who can cast pass without trace you don't really need to worry about that anyway. The best thing about dex paladin might be the whip, a reach weapon that you can use with a shield without being mounted which is still lower AC than heavy armor.

Since the whip is a finesse weapon, you can use it just fine with strength.

[Dork_Forge]

I mean, a dexadin is certainly a viable build, but i think its a bit hard to argue that its just as good as a str based pally. You cant initiate grapples as dex based, since the initiator has to use their Str (athletics) ability rather than the choice of athletics or acrobatics, you cant make effective use of heavy armor, and you need to use finesse weapons, which are overall just not as good as 2h at smacking things.

Multiclassing with rogue would get you sneak attack, and i could see a swashbuckler in particular having some synergy, but i dont think the rogue chassis by itself contributes much to the paladin.

This is a bit of a contradictory mixed bag that isn't quite right:

-You absolutely can initiate grapples, not focusing on Str doens't mean dumping an 8 into it, grab Athletics proficiency and if you really want to grapple you can even just Guidance yourself

-MC'ing with Rogue would give you the option of Expertise in athletics

-That said, grappling doesn't even seem like a Paladin tactic to begin with, you can't do it and still attack if you're using a shield or a two handed weapon. That leaves you with one handing something like a longsword, which leaves you exactly where you get with a Rapier

-Unless you're going GWM (not the easiest on a Paladin since they're MAD to start with), the damage difference is on average 1-2 more for a heavy weapon. Meanwhile you can get a fixed +2 damage on a Rapier with Dueling. I'm not convinced you're missing out on anything here damage wise.

-Assuming a +4 Dex and +3 Cha (which I believe is conservative for a Rogue/Paladin MC), a Swash would get a +7 initiative bonus, as well as all of the other benefits of being high Dex (sneaky Paladins are more likely to be able to pull off surprise too...)

I'm a big fan of the Dexadin and personally in my games I remove the Str restriction from the MC, but you don't really need to do that, especially with races like Half Elf (and since Tasha's, the Mountain Dwarf).

[Corran]

Well, let's take archery out of the equation because paladins dont offer too much that way. So let's stick with the idea of a dex based melee warrior. The first thing that comes to mind is a ranger or a rogue. Both classes are closely associated with doing dexterous things during combat, and out of it as well. I mean, if you had a new player at your table asking you a quick advice on what to play, how would most people go about it? What would be the quickest way to help them pick between something like a paladin, a fighter, a ranger and a rogue? You tell them that the first two are heavily armored warriors and that the last two are lightly armored, or something along these lines. And once the player decides on DEX vs STR, you mention some further differences between either the paladin and the fighter, or between the ranger and the rogue, depending on what the player chose for a primary stat. So, it's what others are saying about how most people would identify the class. The knight in shining armor does not share anything with the lightly armored agile fencer.

To play a dex based paladin, I'd suspect that one must have had already decided on playing a paladin already. And for reasons other than being drawn to the class because of the aesthetics of its most associated theme, that of the knight in shining armor. Perhaps you've already played a paladin and you want to try again, though you want to do it in a slightly different way (that of going with the dex approach). Perhaps you are trying for something unconventional. Perhaps someone pointed you to playing this class, or you knew the name from somewhere but either way you dont know anything much about the class and its most common themes, and you just so happened that after picking the class for whatever reason, you decided to go with dex as your main stat (because you liked the idea of being stealthy or the idea of using a bow from time to time, or because someone told you that dex is a godly stat). In any way, I'd say that picking dex for a paladin seems to need some extra things to have occured. But you can think about it in the following way too. Want to play a heavily armored warrior? You need to pick between fighter and paladin. Want to play a lightly armored warrior? You need to pick between ranger, rogue, paladin and by extension fighter too (and barbarian as well, if the light attribute does not extend to weapons). All else being equal (and they are not if we take into account themes, but let's say they are for now), it's obvious that dex paladins will be less common than str based ones.

I cannot make my mind whether the game encourages or discourages dex based paladins. On one hand the multiclass requirements and the lack of a twf style on the paladin's list of options, do not make a good case for dex based paladins. Then again, multiclassing is optional and either way its requirements can be waved easily I would imagine, and the lack of the twf style is not a big deal since it's far from amazing and there are other options (protection, dueling, defense). Though I wouldn't be surprised if the lack of this fighting style has been a dealbreaker for some people as far as giving a dex based twf paly a go. On the other hand, there are new archtypes that expand the theme a little further than the shining knight archtype. In fact, as far as the other two PHB oaths go (ancients and vengeance), both of them strike me as the dex type warrior more. The ancients paly has a somewhat rangery or druidic feel I would say, and once you get over the mechanics of the vengeance oath, I'd say that it has a bit of a rangery or roguish touch (always seemed a bit of a bounty hunter to me, but maybe that's just me). My real gripe with dex based paladins has to do with one of two things. Twf as an option (not just the fighting style) seems a bit weak for my liking, even for paladins. And secondly, unequiping a shield uses an action and there's no easy way to speed this up. If just one of these was changed sufficiently, I'd suspect I'd play a lot more dex based paladins. But I dont think this has much to do with why dex based paladins are not as common as str based ones.

[MrStabby]

It took a long time for me to realise this, but there actually isn't any reason a paladin has to be the archetypal knight in heavy armor with a big sword. Smite, there spells, and every one of there features doesn't have to be used on the frontline to be optimal. Obviously it's the classic build, and you generally want your explosive nova fighter to have a big weapon and tanky armor, but a different approach to paladin would be very doable and I'm disappointed that we don't do see it more often.

Huh. I see them pretty often, especially in feat-free games.

I certainly see them more often than dex barbarian or dex melee fighters or dex blade locks (now).

And yes, they can be very effective.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I did play a Paly with a Rogue dip and Shield master, which was good, but...

I think one big issue is that paladins are a MAD class, particularly for those of us who value the Aura and Chanel Divinity, and there's a lot of competition to use ASIs for the attack stat, Chr, and at least one feat to enhance melee ability. So the end result is that it's not just a sacrifice of a single AC point if you use Dex ASIs for 4th and 8th. You're stuck with a 16 Chr and unless you are a VHuman no feat until 12th level.
On the other hand a Str based Paladin can be viable with a 16 Strength for longer because it's just your attack and not your AC in question. You have more opportunity to take Chr and/ or Feats if you want.

[GreatWyrmGold]

[Y]ou generally want your explosive nova fighter to have a big weapon and tanky armor.
You answered your own question.

You have to understand that, in any social system (whether it's a game or a government), there are certain incentives and paths to fulfilling them. In general, most things in D&D are either easy to get or gated behind combat; therefore, making a character effective at combat is a strong incentive, particularly when there isn't a strong disincentive elsewhere. The incentive for playing a swashbuckling-ey paladin are comparatively ephemeral; you sacrifice AC and weapon damage for playing a swashbuckling-ey character. Buckling swashes isn't rewarded the way AC and damage are.
(Yes, you can get comparable numbers if you invest enough in the right ability scores, but that isn't free.)

(There's also an aspect of genre expectations—a paladin is described as a knight in shining armor, so it feels more natural to toy with that idea rather than use the mechanical chassis for something radically different—but I think that the mechanical-incentives answer is more enlightening.)



It's probably the game designer's fault.
You're not wrong, but I don't like how this was framed. There are reasons that TWF wasn't allowed as a paladin fighting style, and implying that decision was a mistake feels unfair. Why should paladins be allowed to pick it up?
Remember, WotC isn't trying to create a toolbox you can use to design the most awesome combat monster possible. They were trying to design a game where that natural but mechanical impulse could still lead to enjoyable TRPG sessions. Making extremely powerful combos that don't fit a class's intended theme impossible to achieve without multiclassing seems like a logical way to do that.

[Dork_Forge]

You're not wrong, but I don't like how this was framed. There are reasons that TWF wasn't allowed as a paladin fighting style, and implying that decision was a mistake feels unfair. Why should paladins be allowed to pick it up?
Remember, WotC isn't trying to create a toolbox you can use to design the most awesome combat monster possible. They were trying to design a game where that natural but mechanical impulse could still lead to enjoyable TRPG sessions. Making extremely powerful combos that don't fit a class's intended theme impossible to achieve without multiclassing seems like a logical way to do that.

They have since walked that position back greatly with the multiclassing-lite feats they released in Tasha's.

[heavyfuel]

You're not wrong, but I don't like how this was framed. There are reasons that TWF wasn't allowed as a paladin fighting style, and implying that decision was a mistake feels unfair. Why should paladins be allowed to pick it up.

I didn't mean to imply to that game designers shouldn't restrict classes. They absolutely should. But, because they did restrict the pally in the ways I mentioned, it made the pally not an optimal candidate for Dex focused.

Was it a mistake though? I personally think so.

Paladins are trained combatants. If a paladin decided to train with two weapons, why wouldn't they gain the fighting style? There isn't anything universal to all paladin trainings that forbids them to practice with two weapons.

You can certainly say most paladins would prefer to learn a different style, but that's not to say a few paladins couldn't learn it.

I'm of the mind that any class with access to a Fighting Style should be able to choose whatever Fighting Style they want (with the exception of the so called "Fighting Styles" that actually grant you Cantrips).

Plus, it doesn't break anything from a game-balance perspective. It's certainly weaker than going PAM. So if a player wants to play a TWF-pally, why not let the player have their fun?

[LudicSavant]

In general, most things in D&D are either easy to get or gated behind combat; therefore, making a character effective at combat is a strong incentive, particularly when there isn't a strong disincentive elsewhere. That seems unlikely to be the incentive at work here, since Dexadins are among the best Paladin builds for combat.


It took a long time for me to realise this, but there actually isn't any reason a paladin has to be the archetypal knight in heavy armor with a big sword. Smite, there spells, and every one of there features doesn't have to be used on the frontline to be optimal. Obviously it's the classic build, and you generally want your explosive nova fighter to have a big weapon and tanky armor, but a different approach to paladin would be very doable and I'm disappointed that we don't do see it more often.

Many people just assume the way a character is “supposed to play," often before even playing the game.

Lemme know if you've heard any of these:

“The Clerics with a martial weapon proficiency must be the ones that are good at melee, right? That +1 damage on a single attack must matter more than subclass abilities.” “I’m just gonna assume light->medium->heavy are supposed to be big important upgrades rather than playstyle-based sidegrades.” “Wizards must always be squishy, nevermind that Abjurer over there shrugging off things that would kill a Barbarian.” “Clerics are just Cure Wounds healbots, nevermind the Light Cleric over there blasting everything in a 65-foot diameter.” And more and more and more.

There’s so many of these false stereotypes and assumptions and they really hold people back in terms of both optimization and flavor.

Dexadins are fantastic. People play them (heck, playing with one right now). Some folks just take a long time to realize what’s good... and many never do.

[Rerem115]

One of the most dangerous single-classed Paladins I've ever seen was a Dexadin. They were a Drow in an Underdark campaign, and they made impressive use of a Double Scimitar (and the relevant feat), Elven Accuracy, and Drow Spellcasting.

Dexterity, Darkvision, UA Blind Fighting, and all the Drow spells made for a close-quarters monster who could melt people with their 3 triple-advantage attacks per round, and their Charisma, RP chops, and skill proficiencies made them an effective party face. And, in a party that was pretty sneaky, they were able to keep up without giving everyone away.

[Waazraath]

It took a long time for me to realise this, but there actually isn't any reason a paladin has to be the archetypal knight in heavy armor with a big sword. Smite, there spells, and every one of there features doesn't have to be used on the frontline to be optimal. Obviously it's the classic build, and you generally want your explosive nova fighter to have a big weapon and tanky armor, but a different approach to paladin would be very doable and I'm disappointed that we don't do see it more often.

Don't they? At my tables I've seen em (dex pally's) just as much as STR based paladins I think. Given that you get most of your damage from smites anyway, I even think the dex pally 'optimal' when not going for a specific feat build (using PAM, HAM or the like). Optimal between ' ' cause I don't think it matters that much, but overall dex is a little better than str.

[da newt]

It took a long time for me to realise this, but there actually isn't any reason a paladin has to be the archetypal knight in heavy armor with a big sword. Smite, there spells, and every one of there features doesn't have to be used on the frontline to be optimal.

Most Smites require a melee weapon attack - it's hard to hit anyone with a melee weapon attack from the back line.

But otherwise, yes a perfectly functional Paladin can be built around MED armor and Finesse weapons but they need to be up in melee to be truly effective.

[LudicSavant]

Dexadin FAQ / mythbusting:

Q: "Wouldn't the lack of the TWF style make them bad at dual-wielding?"
A: Not really. The TWF fighting style doesn't add a lot of damage, and isn't needed for dual-wielding to work for Paladins -- just having an extra attack to attach a smite to, without spending a precious feat slot, is sufficient for them to use it sometimes.

Also, the TWF style might not even be the best style to take on a TWF-build. Consider instead Blind-Fighting, Defense, or Interception.

Q: "What about heavy armor? Won't I be squishy without that?"
A: We'll ignore for the moment the possibility of being a Dex build that still wears plate.

Full Plate is at best worth 1 AC over light armor +20 Dex... and even that is situational (because it also costs an extra 1425 gp, money which could potentially be converted into magic items that are worth more than 1 AC. There's also possibilities like, say, just having Mage Armor, in which case the AC is equal).

A 20 Dex Light Armor (or no armor) build provides other defensive advantages that are arguably worth at least as much: A higher initiative, a better Dex save (which tends to be worth a lot more than a better Str save), and excellent stealth. It also means you have a lot of extra money in your pocket. Even in a game where you can't buy magic items or anything, even just converting this into healing potions is a lot of healing potions. Or pricey spell components. Or the like.

Q: "What about GWM? Don't I need that to do Teh Big Damagez?"
A: Absolutely not!!

The higher your damage-per-attack, the less valuable GWM is for you (because the -5 is risking more damage, and the +10 is granting less of a percentage increase to your damage).

A Paladin with Divine Smite, Improved Divine Smite, and possibly even things like Hunter's Mark or Holy Weapon, can actually decrease their average damage output by taking GWM. And they're eating an ASI, and dropping a shield, and losing initiative, stealth, etc (which all contribute indirectly to damage). Initiative in particular is worth more than you might expect -- people keep overlooking it because it doesn't affect damage per round... instead it effectively gives you more rounds.

[Ogun]

I used to play dexy clerics, loved that style of play.
I can see playing a rogueish paladin of a trickster god,with mounted archery perhaps.

[Tanarii]

Dexadin FAQ / mythbusting:

Q: "What about heavy armor? Won't I be squishy without that?"
A: We'll ignore for the moment the possibility of being a Dex build that still wears plate.

Full Plate is at best worth 1 AC over light armor +20 Dex... and even that is situational (because it also costs an extra 1425 gp, money which could potentially be converted into magic items that are worth more than 1 AC. There's also possibilities like, say, just having Mage Armor, in which case the AC is equal).
... at level 8 earliest, and that's only if you don't raise Cha at all before then and start with Dex 16.

More generally speaking, you'll start with Dex 15 / AC 13 if you wear light armor instead of AC 16, and probably have AC 15 at level 4, AC 16 at level 12, and finally AC 17 at level 16 or 19. That's assuming no feats and maxing Dex and Cha with ASIs. It's not uncommon in a feats game for Paladins to have 16/16 (or lower) even at level 10 for the attack stat and Cha, so they can take a feat or two.

[LudicSavant]

... at level 8 earliest This is not true.

Earliest for 20 Dex is actually level 1 with rolling, and level 4 with point buy (via CL+Half Feat).

If you take longer, medium armor exists as an interim choice. And it, too, is only situationally behind heavy armor in AC (for example, at level 1, 50gp Medium Scale Mail is 16 AC, and 75gp Heavy Chain Mail is also 16 AC).


More generally speaking, you'll start with Dex 15 / AC 13 if you wear light armor instead of AC 16

This is also not true. It's not even true for the Dex score you chose, since Studded Leather is even cheaper than Chain Mail and provides 12+Dex.

Your starting AC for an even halfway optimized Dexadin build should be 16 or better. If it's not, you went awry somewhere.

[Tanarii]

This is not true.

This is also not true.I'll courteously direct you to the forum rules:
https://forums.giantitp.com/announcement.php?a=1

[LudicSavant]

I'll courteously direct you to the forum rules:
https://forums.giantitp.com/announcement.php?a=1

:smallconfused:

[Ir0ns0ul]

I'll courteously direct you to the forum rules:
https://forums.giantitp.com/announcement.php?a=1

Sorry for the off-topic: but I didn’t see any break in the rules. To be honest, Ludic post was quite informative and clear.

Back to the subject: Dexadins are great! My biggest pain when I played a Dwarf Paladin was long range combats. Being able to circumvent that by being super effective with a longbow is great. Dueling, Rapier, Studded Leather & Shield are a great setup!

[Verble]

I played a ratfolk sorcadin that used both UA subclasses, the Oath of Heroism and the Aberrant Mind Sorcerer. He grew up a rogue on the streets and living in the sewers, and picked up use of thieves tools. He was dex based and the sorcerer subclass gave him a base ac of 13+dex which with a shield made him pretty resilient. My DM appreciated me going dex based and removed the strength requirement for multiclassing. The ratfolk had a dex bonus and an interesting ability where they can move through enemy squares if they're medium size or bigger. He had a whip and a rapier which gave him mixed flexibility with range and OAs. He also had a riding dog that he used to help scent track. Unfortunately covid closed down that game which was a pity as I was excited by the character both story wise and mechanically.

I like dex paladins and wish they were more common, particularly in multiclassing.

[Jerrykhor]

Because Might makes Right!

[Witty Username]

Some of it is anchoring, rangers have something similar with GWF, they don't have the fighting styles and the artwork says the thing so players do the thing. Multi classing can also be more frustrating on a dex build because of the 13 str requirement. I see it as a non-problem, just players having behaviors.

[CheddarChampion]

To answer the OP: when you think of a Paladin, what comes to mind?

A high AC and high saving throws? Heavy armor lets you boost your Cha without losing out on AC. That requires Str.

Big melee damage? The melee weapons with the most damage require Str. Some tables let the great weapon fighting style work with divine smite and such.

A knight in shining armor, riding a mighty steed, charging forward to slay a dragon with their lance? Str.

Dex Paladin can be strong. It just doesn't fit the archetype as well as Str Paladin does. Moreover, being good at sneaking around, using lockpicks, and picking pockets might actively go against a Paladin's Oath/Archetype.

[Valmark]

Imo it's mostly the lack of ranged support, the strenght requirement for multiclassing and the heavy armor.

It just feels bad to go Dexterity and be told that your ranged attacks (one of the reasons to go dexterity) don't benefit from many of your features/spells.

And if you're going dex you still can't multiclass without putting points in strenght- that makes them a little MADder if you indeed want to multiclass. Unless you go Hexblade, since that means you don't need neither Dex nor Str.

Finally, many see heavy armor as an upgrade over other armors when it's really a sidegrade- and since those have a Strenght requirement you're even more prone to boosting strenght.


I'll courteously direct you to the forum rules:
https://forums.giantitp.com/announcement.php?a=1

Keep in mind if someone tells you that you're wrong it doesn't mean that they're telling you that you're lying. Assuming that's what you were referring to.

[MrStabby]

But what's in a name?

If you strip a class down to its mechanics that thematic cluster of abilities we call a paladin also works to a number of different archetypes as well.

My inquisitor, dedicated to hunting down evil in the shadows was a dexterity vengeance paladin. Subtle deception, intimidation, stealth all complimented smites for a quick assassination style kill, aura for resiliance to magic type effects, detect good and evil for confirming targets.

[JellyPooga]

To answer the OP: when you think of a Paladin, what comes to mind?

A high AC and high saving throws? Heavy armor lets you boost your Cha without losing out on AC. That requires Str.

Big melee damage? The melee weapons with the most damage require Str. Some tables let the great weapon fighting style work with divine smite and such.

A knight in shining armor, riding a mighty steed, charging forward to slay a dragon with their lance? Str.

Dex Paladin can be strong. It just doesn't fit the archetype as well as Str Paladin does. Moreover, being good at sneaking around, using lockpicks, and picking pockets might actively go against a Paladin's Oath/Archetype.

But what's in a name?

If you strip a class down to its mechanics that thematic cluster of abilities we call a paladin also works to a number of different archetypes as well.

My inquisitor, dedicated to hunting down evil in the shadows was a dexterity vengeance paladin. Subtle deception, intimidation, stealth all complimented smites for a quick assassination style kill, aura for resiliance to magic type effects, detect good and evil for confirming targets.

I've got to go with MrStabby on this one.

A Paladin without a title and with nothing but rags on his back is still a Paladin.

Being a Paladin is about the Oath. Without that, they are nothing. With it, they are everything.

Anything else is just details. When I think of a Paladin, I'm not seeing a knight in shining armour; that image goes to (honestly) the douche-bag monster-hunting fighter or crusader who is more interested in his own image and personal fame than actually helping anyone. I'm also not thinking of high AC and big damage; that's just numbers and I can get that with basically any Class.

When I think of a Paladin, I'm more inclined to think of...

...the kindly gentleman in plain clothes helping out down at the local soup-line, busting out a battered looking sword and some old leathers that belonged to his dad when bandits try and take advantage of the helpless and vulnerable.

...the simple traveller that shares her meal on the road, even though it's the last she has. In the dark of the night, when creatures foul attack the campsite, she is the light that drives them back, putting her own life at risk to protect those she barely knows. In the morning she parts ways with no expectation, let alone demand, of reward.

...the relentless hound that lets neither compassion or personal interest sway him from his task; namely the pursuit and execution of those that would do evil and harm. His is a lonely path, a rough one devoid of status or fame. No-one understands and they don't need to.

In short, when I think of a Paladin I'm mostly inclined to think of someone that, more than anything else, travels a lot. They do their thing (for good or for ill) and then move on to do their thing somewhere else. It is their job to remove problems, not to be the agent of lasting gain (or ill, for an evil Paladin). They are charismatic, so people trust them, but they are also dangerous and endowed with great power, which makes them ill suited to a settled life. Their Oath implies, if not dictates that they must move on once their job is done in a place. This wandering lifestyle lends itself to wearing and using that which is, above all, practical and comfortable. Heavy Armour is not this. The Paladins I've played have all worn light armour, if any.

Granted, 5e rules don't support this particularly, but that's just what I envision when Paladins come to mind.

[diplomancer]

Dexadin FAQ / mythbusting:

Q: "Wouldn't the lack of the TWF style make them bad at dual-wielding?"
A: Not really. The TWF fighting style doesn't add a lot of damage, and isn't needed for dual-wielding to work for Paladins -- just having an extra attack to attach a smite to, without spending a precious feat slot, is sufficient for them to use it sometimes.

Also, the TWF style might not even be the best style to take on a TWF-build. Consider instead Blind-Fighting, Defense, or Interception.

Q: "What about heavy armor? Won't I be squishy without that?"
A: We'll ignore for the moment the possibility of being a Dex build that still wears plate.

Full Plate is at best worth 1 AC over light armor +20 Dex... and even that is situational (because it also costs an extra 1425 gp, money which could potentially be converted into magic items that are worth more than 1 AC. There's also possibilities like, say, just having Mage Armor, in which case the AC is equal).

A 20 Dex Light Armor (or no armor) build provides other defensive advantages that are arguably worth at least as much: A higher initiative, a better Dex save (which tends to be worth a lot more than a better Str save), and excellent stealth. It also means you have a lot of extra money in your pocket. Even in a game where you can't buy magic items or anything, even just converting this into healing potions is a lot of healing potions. Or pricey spell components. Or the like.

Q: "What about GWM? Don't I need that to do Teh Big Damagez?"
A: Absolutely not!!

The higher your damage-per-attack, the less valuable GWM is for you (because the -5 is risking more damage, and the +10 is granting less of a percentage increase to your damage).

A Paladin with Divine Smite, Improved Divine Smite, and possibly even things like Hunter's Mark or Holy Weapon, can actually decrease their average damage output by taking GWM. And they're eating an ASI, and dropping a shield, and losing initiative, stealth, etc (which all contribute indirectly to damage). Initiative in particular is worth more than you might expect -- people keep overlooking it because it doesn't affect damage per round... instead it effectively gives you more rounds.

Hmm, after seeing your Mage Armor suggestion I'm thinking it might be fun to play a Mark of Warding Dexadin with Tasha's rules, having a free Mage Armor and Armor of Agathys on the spell list looks like a nice way to make your DM hate you :)

[Willie the Duck]

It took a long time for me to realise this, but there actually isn't any reason a paladin has to be the archetypal knight in heavy armor with a big sword. Smite, there spells, and every one of there features doesn't have to be used on the frontline to be optimal. Obviously it's the classic build, and you generally want your explosive nova fighter to have a big weapon and tanky armor, but a different approach to paladin would be very doable and I'm disappointed that we don't do see it more often.

I'm a little surprised that you haven't seen it more. I think Dexadin (more rapier/dueling and shield than bow or crossbow, since as people mention smiting is melee-based) and was a pretty common concept when the game came out. I think people (online, on boards like these) have since kind of come to the conclusion that martial character need to eventually be able to grab one of the... rather fighting-style preferential over-tuned combat feats like GWM/PAM/SS/XBE or the like (and designer rulings have excluded Shield Master from this list), and as such the build kind of loses out. This isn't strictly the case, as low consistent damage with smite-based smites still help out in a battle, and a dexaladin makes a good second frontliner alongside a PAM/GWM barbarian, or the like. Of all the martial classes, paladin makes a lot of sense as a 1h weapon-and-shield front-liner-- they are MAD, and as such would love to be able to stick all their ASIs into Dex and Cha instead of combat feats, they have smite (and Improved Divine Smite) to boost damage over the 1d8+stat+2+magic they otherwise would get), and they have a bunch of spells that they can actually use for spells sometimes instead of just smite fuel. Compare them to a fighter or the like, and the likelihood of the option makes all the sense in the world.

Aside from the above combat feat issue. I think there are a number of reasons you don't see them quite so much these days (again, online where people talk much more about optimal choices). Multiclassing being a huge reason. Sorcadins BitD, and hexblade dips, both conspire to make a 13 Str rather necessary, which can really constrain the options, particularly if using the array. The array, in general, disfavors frontline dex builds, as getting your pre-shield/pre-magic AC up to comfortable levels is a real challenge --Str-based start with chainmail, which is AC 16. Dex 16 builds start with AC 14 leather armor, which can get up to 17 with half plate or 16 with breastplate if you want to stealth (a reason to pick dex in the first place) once you have cash (at which point the Str guy is in AC 17 splint and halfway to full plate). You don't max out your studded leather to AC 17 until at least 8th level+, which is a long wait. Above all else, I think an issue holding it back is a major reason to use Dex is because it allows you to switch-hit between melee and ranged better. However, both the shield rules (full action to remove shield), and the smite rules conspire to make switching to longbow something you probably only do when the flying enemy shows up, and even then newer options conspire to make that less required of a choice (instead of going dexadin, you can do a 1-level dip into hexblade and pick up Eldritch Blast, or at later levels summon a Pegasus to solve the enemy flier issue, etc.).

All in all, Dexadins are... fine. They're fine. They fight some basic functions of the ruleset all the way along, but they work. I can imagine a single classed paladin with bow and rapier and shield doing some decent frontline fighting paired with either a big-ax barbarian or fighter helping or a ranger or fighter behind them peppering the enemies with XBE/SS damage or something, all while rocking a great Dex and Cha for spellcasting and save bonuses. It would work. It would just take a lot of work to finely tune to perfection and I think a lot of the people interested in fine-tuning things are playing around with 14 Dex 1h-quarterstaff-and-shield hexblade 1 paladin x-1s with polearm master and elven accuracy or some-such.

[CheddarChampion]

SNIP


SNIP

I don't mean to say "You can't make a thematically appropriate Dex-based Paladin." I just mean "I think most people envision Paladins in a certain way and that contributes to how they build them."

I admit my previous post didn't really come out like that. I'm also making a big assumption about how "The People" think of Paladins, so maybe I'm way off base.

[MrStabby]

I'm a little surprised that you haven't seen it more. I think Dexadin (more rapier/dueling and shield than bow or crossbow, since as people mention smiting is melee-based) and was a pretty common concept when the game came out. I think people (online, on boards like these) have since kind of come to the conclusion that martial character need to eventually be able to grab one of the... rather fighting-style preferential over-tuned combat feats like GWM/PAM/SS/XBE or the like (and designer rulings have excluded Shield Master from this list), and as such the build kind of loses out. This isn't strictly the case, as low consistent damage with smite-based smites still help out in a battle, and a dexaladin makes a good second frontliner alongside a PAM/GWM barbarian, or the like. Of all the martial classes, paladin makes a lot of sense as a 1h weapon-and-shield front-liner-- they are MAD, and as such would love to be able to stick all their ASIs into Dex and Cha instead of combat feats, they have smite (and Improved Divine Smite) to boost damage over the 1d8+stat+2+magic they otherwise would get), and they have a bunch of spells that they can actually use for spells sometimes instead of just smite fuel. Compare them to a fighter or the like, and the likelihood of the option makes all the sense in the world.

Aside from the above combat feat issue. I think there are a number of reasons you don't see them quite so much these days (again, online where people talk much more about optimal choices). Multiclassing being a huge reason. Sorcadins BitD, and hexblade dips, both conspire to make a 13 Str rather necessary, which can really constrain the options, particularly if using the array. The array, in general, disfavors frontline dex builds, as getting your pre-shield/pre-magic AC up to comfortable levels is a real challenge --Str-based start with chainmail, which is AC 16. Dex 16 builds start with AC 14 leather armor, which can get up to 17 with half plate or 16 with breastplate if you want to stealth (a reason to pick dex in the first place) once you have cash (at which point the Str guy is in AC 17 splint and halfway to full plate). You don't max out your studded leather to AC 17 until at least 8th level+, which is a long wait. Above all else, I think an issue holding it back is a major reason to use Dex is because it allows you to switch-hit between melee and ranged better. However, both the shield rules (full action to remove shield), and the smite rules conspire to make switching to longbow something you probably only do when the flying enemy shows up, and even then newer options conspire to make that less required of a choice (instead of going dexadin, you can do a 1-level dip into hexblade and pick up Eldritch Blast, or at later levels summon a Pegasus to solve the enemy flier issue, etc.).

All in all, Dexadins are... fine. They're fine. They fight some basic functions of the ruleset all the way along, but they work. I can imagine a single classed paladin with bow and rapier and shield doing some decent frontline fighting paired with either a big-ax barbarian or fighter helping or a ranger or fighter behind them peppering the enemies with XBE/SS damage or something, all while rocking a great Dex and Cha for spellcasting and save bonuses. It would work. It would just take a lot of work to finely tune to perfection and I think a lot of the people interested in fine-tuning things are playing around with 14 Dex 1h-quarterstaff-and-shield hexblade 1 paladin x-1s with polearm master and elven accuracy or some-such.

I think that the GWM/PAM/SS/XBE list was the case for a while, but has been erroded a little. Elven Accuracy was first - a good enough feat that worked just fine with dexterity. Even better on vengeance paladins who could get relatively easy access to advantage. I mean, its not game breaking but its not bad for a half feat. More recently Fey Touched is also pretty competative with GWM/PAM/SS/XBE for an ASI. Mobility being a bit of a challenge for the paladin sometimes and spells like Hex being a pretty good damage boost helps.

Now I would say that a dexterity build will be better some campaigns, worse on others. It depends on whether your DM likes high AC targets or not. Paladins get enough bonus action spells that the feats that give bonus action attacks are... well they are still good, but not as good as on other characters.

[JellyPooga]

I don't mean to say "You can't make a thematically appropriate Dex-based Paladin." I just mean "I think most people envision Paladins in a certain way and that contributes to how they build them."

I admit my previous post didn't really come out like that. I'm also making a big assumption about how "The People" think of Paladins, so maybe I'm way off base.

I don't think you're wrong. I imagine that most people think "Knight in Shining" when Paladin comes up; in part because of historical paladins, in part because of earlier editions, in part because of the artwork and in part because of the flavour text (the first line of which begins by literally describing gleaming armour). That's a lot of "parts" contributing to a very specific image.

I just happen to think it's a misplaced archetype! :smallbiggrin:

It probably stems from my dissatisfaction that the image of the KiSA and therefore Paladins are "supposed" to come from some kind of wealth. If your armour shines, it means that a) it's expensive to start with and b) someone spent a lot of time making it shiny. That means either you aren't spending your time doing Paladin-y stuff or you have someone to polish your gear, which itself doesn't sound too Paladin-y to me either. Either way it's more "douche bag, self-obsessed noble" than "righteous oath-bound warrior". Paladins (at least the Good ones) are supposed to be selfless, not selfish.

[Willie the Duck]

I think that the GWM/PAM/SS/XBE list was the case for a while, but has been erroded a little. Elven Accuracy was first - a good enough feat that worked just fine with dexterity. Even better on vengeance paladins who could get relatively easy access to advantage. I mean, its not game breaking but its not bad for a half feat. More recently Fey Touched is also pretty competative with GWM/PAM/SS/XBE for an ASI. Mobility being a bit of a challenge for the paladin sometimes and spells like Hex being a pretty good damage boost helps.

Oh, for sure. I personally have never toed the line on the 'must haves' --although I do recognize them as some clearly-best options that make me wonder who on the WotC staff loved hand crossbows and halberds (and whether 1H quarterstaff and shield was intentional or not). PAM/XBE work as long as you have a DM who plays ball and GWM/SS work if you have lots of ways to boost your to-hit or get advantage (in which case you are spending a lot of opportunity cost doing that). Fey Touched with Hex or Hunter's Mark on a paladin w/o Misty Step is another great option, along with EA. Options are opening up. I think the melee-only smites, difficulty in making a (non-emergency) melee-ranged switch-hitter, and prevalence of multiclassing are at this point major driving forces (along with the above-mentioned preference for a 'knight in shining armor' theme).


Now I would say that a dexterity build will be better some campaigns, worse on others. It depends on whether your DM likes high AC targets or not. Paladins get enough bonus action spells that the feats that give bonus action attacks are... well they are still good, but not as good as on other characters.
True, although Improved Divine Smite also helps up the overall damage. In general, I think fighters and barbarians are the obvious choices for PAM/GWM and XBE/SS, and the farther you move from that model, the more you are giving up for XBE/PAM.

[LudicSavant]

Overestimating GWM, particularly for Paladins, is a common mistake for new or non-optimizer players. This is because it takes extra effort to figure out how much things like accuracy, crit rate, buff synergy, init bonuses, and the like contribute to your offense.

GWM will actually often decrease a Paladin's DPR relative to just, say, taking a +2 Strength ASI. Seriously, jump on here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?582779-Comprehensive-DPR-Calculator-(v2-0)) and calculate some DPR, tossing in things like Improved Divine Smite, or Divine Smite, or Holy Weapon, or Hunter's Mark, or maybe even a Flame Blade. Look how often that -5/+10 is actually decreasing your damage output compared to +1/+1.

GWM shines best on characters who have a large number of hits, but low damage per hit, like many Fighters.

[Kane0]

Virtually all depictions and descriptions of paladins feature the heavy armor visualization.

Mechanically, there's nothing wrong with choosing dex at all. You lose a bit of AC and grappling in exchange for a more rounded set of skills that dex offers as well as keeping your stealth ability and adjusting your saves around a bit (they're still overall pretty high thanks to your Aura). You can still use a shield if you want too, and your ranged weapons are generally a bit better off using dex as you arent limited to thrown weapon ranges.

Honestly, I forget what classes get which fighting styles so have seen a few dual wielding dexadins and I have to say, it's pretty enjoyable to witness.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Imo it's mostly the lack of ranged support, the strenght requirement for multiclassing and the heavy armor.

It just feels bad to go Dexterity and be told that your ranged attacks (one of the reasons to go dexterity) don't benefit from many of your features/spells.

And if you're going dex you still can't multiclass without putting points in strenght- that makes them a little MADder if you indeed want to multiclass. Unless you go Hexblade, since that means you don't need neither Dex nor Str.

Finally, many see heavy armor as an upgrade over other armors when it's really a sidegrade- and since those have a Strenght requirement you're even more prone to boosting strenght.



Keep in mind if someone tells you that you're wrong it doesn't mean that they're telling you that you're lying. Assuming that's what you were referring to.

I think your point on needing the 13 strength is a good one. It doesn't seem like a huge issue at first glance, but when you want a level of Rogue, as I did with my Dex based Paladin, you now need 1) 13 strength, 2) Charisma as high as you can get it, 3) Decent Con, 4) At least 1 martial type feat to be competitive (assuming they are ok in your game), and 5) Dex getting to 20 as fast as possible for AC as well as attack. That starts to be a pretty restrictive list, and probably turns some players off.
That said, my 'Inquisitor' was really effective, so I'd say the 13 strength requirement was warranted.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Paladins are trained combatants. If a paladin decided to train with two weapons, why wouldn't they gain the fighting style? There isn't anything universal to all paladin trainings that forbids them to practice with two weapons.

You can certainly say most paladins would prefer to learn a different style, but that's not to say a few paladins couldn't learn it.
There's nothing universal to all wizards that forbids them to wear armor, except for their lack of proficiency with armor and genre conventions against armored mages. Paladins lack the TWF fighting style, and traditionally fight with the sorts of weapons a medieval knight might bring into battle (swords, lances, maybe a polearm, but certainly not two weapons at the same time).

Everyone has a different line for how far from genre conventions classes should stray. Some people would think that armored wizards are okay. Others blanch at the idea of paladins being anything but LG paragons.



This is not true.

Earliest for 20 Dex is actually level 1 with rolling, and level 4 with point buy (via CL+Half Feat).
Theoretically, you can get 20 Dexterity fairly quickly if you pour all your resources into it. Fun fact, paladins have things other than Dexterity to invest in! At best, you're left with a much more restrictive list of where you're spending your build resources; at worse, even with such a guide you won't be as effective.



It probably stems from my dissatisfaction that the image of the KiSA and therefore Paladins are "supposed" to come from some kind of wealth. If your armour shines, it means that a) it's expensive to start with and b) someone spent a lot of time making it shiny. That means either you aren't spending your time doing Paladin-y stuff or you have someone to polish your gear, which itself doesn't sound too Paladin-y to me either. Either way it's more "douche bag, self-obsessed noble" than "righteous oath-bound warrior". Paladins (at least the Good ones) are supposed to be selfless, not selfish.
That's a problem with fantasy literature in general. Like many of our sources (and our language), it equates noble birth with noble character. D&D is trying to replicate that standard fantasy setting more than it tries to innovate within it, so of course it does the same.

[LudicSavant]

Fun fact, paladins have things other than Dexterity to invest in!

And? The same is true for Strength.

[jaappleton]

My reasons:

It’s difficult to get a bonus action ability as a Paladin that doesn’t utilize Strength. No PAM, no shield bashing via Shield Master, etc.

I am a firm believer in fully utilizing action economy.

[MrStabby]

And? The same is true for Strength.

Slightly less true - diminishing returns for strength kick in earlier as once you have enough for your armour it only boosts attack and damage and skills. This frees you up to push charisma instead. For dexterity it is a bit of a harder choice.




My reasons:

It’s difficult to get a bonus action ability as a Paladin that doesn’t utilize Strength. No PAM, no shield bashing via Shield Master, etc.

I am a firm believer in fully utilizing action economy.

Seriously... take a look at their spell list.

[LudicSavant]

Slightly less true - diminishing returns for strength kick in earlier as once you have enough for your armour it only boosts attack and damage and skills. This frees you up to push charisma instead. For dexterity it is a bit of a harder choice.

You can push Charisma first as a Dexadin too; you just wear medium armor for a while.

[jaappleton]

Slightly less true - diminishing returns for strength kick in earlier as once you have enough for your armour it only boosts attack and damage and skills. This frees you up to push charisma instead. For dexterity it is a bit of a harder choice.





Seriously... take a look at their spell list.

I want to take a brief moment to recognize the irony of someone called MrStabby telling me that Paladin spell slots are utilized for more than Smite.
(Can’t figure out how to do Blue Text on mobile, so work with me here)

EDIT: more THAN Smite, get it together me.

[heavyfuel]

There's nothing universal to all wizards that forbids them to wear armor, except for their lack of proficiency with armor

There is a difference between "mages have to spend time studying and therefore don't have the time to learn how to properly use armor and weapons" and "paladins are trained with literally every weapon in existence and can learn how to use them more effectively via Fighting Styles, but for some reason they cannot possibly learn how to hit harder with their left hand"

[5eNeedsDarksun]

My reasons:

It’s difficult to get a bonus action ability as a Paladin that doesn’t utilize Strength. No PAM, no shield bashing via Shield Master, etc.

I am a firm believer in fully utilizing action economy.

You are right about Shield Master, but a 1 level dip in Rogue for Athletics expertise gives enough benefit that the 13/14 Str required is more than enough to make it work reliably.

[MrStabby]

You can push Charisma first as a Dexadin too; you just wear medium armor for a while.

I never said you couldn't, just that there was an extra marginal cost in terms of AC to doing it with dex.




I want to take a brief moment to recognize the irony of someone called MrStabby telling me that Paladin spell slots are utilized for more than Smite.
(Can’t figure out how to do Blue Text on mobile, so work with me here)

EDIT: more THAN Smite, get it together me.

Well... its just another form of smiting! Although spells like shield of faith help you to stay in the fight to stab them longer. Divine favour lets you stab them harder. Find steed lets you get to them faster to stab them sooner...

[LudicSavant]

I never said you couldn't, just that there was an extra marginal cost in terms of AC to doing it with dex.

Right, you said diminishing returns for Strength kick in earlier.

But that doesn't actually establish how good any given Strength build is compared to any given Dexterity build, so it kind of seems like a moot point.

[Potato_Priest]

Earliest for 20 Dex is actually level 1 with rolling, and level 4 with point buy (via CL+Half Feat).


Pardon me, but what's CL?

[LudicSavant]

Pardon me, but what's CL?

Custom Lineage (the Tasha's race option). It allows you to start with 17 in a stat, and get a half-feat, allowing you to start with an 18 using Point Buy or Standard Array.

[Ir0ns0ul]

CL Elf Vengeance Paladin with Elven Accuracy can be really brutal with a pair of Shortswords and Half-Plate. Just get Defense to compensate for lack of shield and heavy armor, and go TWF without trouble.

[Amdy_vill]

It took a long time for me to realise this, but there actually isn't any reason a paladin has to be the archetypal knight in heavy armor with a big sword. Smite, there spells, and every one of there features doesn't have to be used on the frontline to be optimal. Obviously it's the classic build, and you generally want your explosive nova fighter to have a big weapon and tanky armor, but a different approach to paladin would be very doable and I'm disappointed that we don't do see it more often.

5e lacks a lot of the interesting internal verity in some classes. paladin being one of them, heavy armor is the most optimal choice, the stereotypical choice and because of paladin's class design a required choice. to be honest the design space of a lightly armored paladin has been explored in many other classes most notably the soul knife. I would like to see 6e focus less on subclasses giving new design spaces to a class and more on them diversifying the design space of the base class. a paladin oath focusing on light armor and explosive attacks, more fighter archer subclasses, more ranger dual welder subclasses. instead of things like soul knife rogue, another ranger subclass that adds new gimics not related to the rangers base abilities, and another melee focuses fighter that is built around versatile or two handed weapons. i do think subclasses should still introduce new gimics and ideas but they should also build upon or reinvent the base class in some way.

[Angelalex242]

Look up Sir Lancelot or Sir Galahad on the internet. Notice what they tend to be wearing.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

I mean, maybe. But at this point I've played and played with every variation on "holy guy with a big stick" but no one has touched the concept of just, not being the heavy as the paladin. Rogue paladin Multiclass would be fun and very synergistic, but no one touches it because "rogues have small weapon paladin have big one"
This goes for a lot of combos honestly.

That's a common build.
I saw two of them in the same game.
One was a dual rapier in light armour and the second was heavy armour with a scimitar.

Both took swashbuckler as the rogue subclass.

[JellyPooga]

Look up Sir Lancelot or Sir Galahad on the internet. Notice what they tend to be wearing.

They both, notably and independantly of their personal fortune/wealth, have title and sponsership from a (famously successful) king and can be listed among those actively governing the realm.

It seems unfair to hold or compare all Paladins to such a lofty station.

My favourite and the most relatable Paladin I've ever read was Paksenarrion of Elizabeth Moon's Deed of.... The one time she ever wore plate, it was cursed. The rest of the time, as I recall, the heaviest armour she wore was a chain shirt.

[Dork_Forge]

Look up Sir Lancelot or Sir Galahad on the internet. Notice what they tend to be wearing.

...And what's to say they're Paladins and not just... y'know Knights? My Arthurian legend is very rusty but I don't recall them healing people or channeling divine energy through their weapons?

If you wanted to build them, wouldn't a Noble/Knight background Baneret be more appropriate?

[Lord Raziere]

If you wanted to build them, wouldn't a Noble/Knight background Baneret be more appropriate?

Or Noble/Knight Cavalier Fighter. either subclass works.

[LudicSavant]

Paladins who follow the Watchers' oath are ever vigilant in spotting the influence of extraplanar forces, often establishing a network of spies and informants to gather information on suspected cults.

Who says a Paladin is about being a big clanky man who ruins stealth for the party? A Watcher remains hidden in the shadows, ever vigilant for fiends from beyond. And when they appear, their oath demands swift death to evil.

Here we have a Dex-based Paladin that transforms all of their allies into a deadly alpha strike team. A holy ninja strike team leader, if you will. I imagine it kind of like, say, the Medjai secret society from The Mummy. Or a Templar assassin.

Example Dexadin: Swift Death to Evil
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/zxhO0u93bJ04SnNEWGQPnR-3uIYe4lAvb1ZOxFZKqhshfunt39DHIlKMtbGVrl6yY8eIcy6g1 5_DmdFTrqH8OucvhO_9hB9vBKzTgOWf1gBvEABtKxJ3

Mark of Shadow Elf Watchers Paladin 20
Starting Stats (point buy): 17 Dex / 16 Cha / 14 Con / rest to taste
ASIs: Revenant Blade, Elven Accuracy, Fey-Touched (Gift of Alacrity), Max Dex/Cha. In whatever order.
Fighting Style: Blind-Fighting

Cast Pass Without Trace to make everyone stealthy (you yourself have +21+1d4 stealth). Get surprise, make the whole party win initiative all the time with Gift of Alacrity+Aura of the Sentinel (you yourself have +10+1d8 initiative), and smite things into oblivion before they get a turn.

In tandem with your entire team. You are a charismatic strike team leader after all.

And that's just the first trick in your toolkit.

For starters...

You've also got the Darkness+Blind Fighting+Elven Accuracy crit-smite-fishing combo in there. As well as the team combos it enables.

You also can give yourself triple advantage criftishing and vision denial with Greater Invisibility.

You also wreck just about every kind of save even more than usual for a Paladin, thanks to your high Dex and Watchers abilities. And Counterspell, too.

Your stealthiness actually helps with your Channel Divinity, which is best used as a pre-cast.

Minor Illusion is one of the very few spells without a V component, so you can use it to mess with people or set up the field without revealing yourself.

Disguise Self is a level 1 non-Concentration infiltration tool, and you absolutely have the Charisma for Deception, Persuasion, etc, and the Dexterity for roguish activities. You've also got a free use of Invisibility every day. And a Misty Step. You're well-equipped to be a spy for the Watchers.

Harness Divine Power variant is great and you should use it.

If you get caught out of range (which should happen rarely, since you have the tools to get the drop on enemies), you can switch to a bow.

No multiclassing means you get Find Greater Steed, Improved Divine Smite, fear immunity aura, full ASIs, the big aura, capstone, full Lay on Hands, etc.

Consider asking your local mage for Mage Armor once you hit 20 Dex (unless you have magic armor). You can wear medium armor until you get your Dex high enough to switch to light / none.

Variants:
- The GWF fighting style works here too, particularly if your DM rules that it works with smites (contrary to the SAC ruling). Defense fighting style will give you an AC equivalent to wielding a shield.
- Ravnica backgrounds can get you even more spells. It can also be an alternate way to get Pass Without Trace, if you wanna be a different kind of elf.

[Valmark]

CL Elf Vengeance Paladin with Elven Accuracy can be really brutal with a pair of Shortswords and Half-Plate. Just get Defense to compensate for lack of shield and heavy armor, and go TWF without trouble.

CL can't be an elf though, unless you meant just switching the attribute increases around which is Customizing your Origin.

[Willie the Duck]

CL can't be an elf though, unless you meant just switching the attribute increases around which is Customizing your Origin.

By RAW, for sure. There seems to be some designer quotes going around suggesting that one of the intended uses was having L1 racial feats. IMO once you are looking at Custom Lineage, you are asking for a DM ruling to begin with, so ruling on this doesn't seem to be an additional hurdle.

[Garimeth]

There is a dexadin/celestial warlock MC in the game I am DMing right now with alternate rest rules that does pretty well - the only other "frontliner" is a drunken monk. The two of them work in tandem as kind of skirmishy tanks and the warlock spells get used on bless or faerie fire each combat - freeing up the pally slots for smites. Rest of the party is a fiend tomelock, a land druid, a storm sorc (lots of sailing) and a ranged fighter/rog.

As for bonus actions being tough not related to STR... the extra attack from TWF is a bonus action. This dexadin uses shield (and armor of shadows invo) to have 20 AC most of the time (defensive fighting style) and then on fights they need nova they TWF for three smites a turn with bless or advantage from FF.

Add on top of that they have Aasimar flight or Misty step for helping with mobility issues. Its been a pretty effective addition to the party.

[Angelalex242]

Arthurian Legend is mostly the basis for Paladins because of the Knightly Code, not the Knights using cool powers...

Though it happens. Gawain for some reason had increased strength between 9am and 12pm.

The Knights Code of Chivalry and the vows of Knighthood
The Knights Code of Chivalry described in the Song of Roland and an excellent representation of the Knights Codes of Chivalry are as follows:

To fear God and maintain His Church
To serve the liege lord in valour and faith
To protect the weak and defenceless
To give succour to widows and orphans
To refrain from the wanton giving of offence
To live by honour and for glory
To despise pecuniary reward
To fight for the welfare of all
To obey those placed in authority
To guard the honour of fellow knights
To eschew unfairness, meanness and deceit
To keep faith
At all times to speak the truth
To persevere to the end in any enterprise begun
To respect the honour of women
Never to refuse a challenge from an equal
Never to turn the back upon a foe
Of the seventeen entries in the Knights Codes of Chivalry, according to the Song of Roland, at least 12 relate to acts of chivalry as opposed to combat.

[LudicSavant]

Arthurian Legend is mostly the basis for Paladins because of the Knightly Code, not the Knights using cool powers...

Though it happens. Gawain for some reason had increased strength between 9am and 12pm.

The Knights Code of Chivalry and the vows of Knighthood
The Knights Code of Chivalry described in the Song of Roland and an excellent representation of the Knights Codes of Chivalry are as follows:

To fear God and maintain His Church
To serve the liege lord in valour and faith
To protect the weak and defenceless
To give succour to widows and orphans
To refrain from the wanton giving of offence
To live by honour and for glory
To despise pecuniary reward
To fight for the welfare of all
To obey those placed in authority
To guard the honour of fellow knights
To eschew unfairness, meanness and deceit
To keep faith
At all times to speak the truth
To persevere to the end in any enterprise begun
To respect the honour of women
Never to refuse a challenge from an equal
Never to turn the back upon a foe
Of the seventeen entries in the Knights Codes of Chivalry, according to the Song of Roland, at least 12 relate to acts of chivalry as opposed to combat.

Paladins draw on broader inspiration from fiction these days. For example the Oath of the Watchers is probably inspired in part by all the stories about secret societies standing vigilant for centuries against supernatural weirdness.

Classes are not a single character, or narrow band of characters. Conan can't shoot a bolt of lightning out of his chest. Some Barbarians can.

I think JellyPooga is on the mark, here.

[sithlordnergal]

I think the main reason why more people don't use light armor with Paladins is that, while you can do it there's little incentive to do it. Don't get me wrong, a Dexadin is extremely viable, but it runs into three issues:

1) Paladins are a front line class that tank with their AC. A Strength based Paladin with a 16 Strength can get 21 AC without any magical equipment or spells with the Defense Fighting Style, Plate Armor, and a Shield. In order to get comparable AC, a Dexadin that uses Light Armor needs 20 Dex and either Mage Armor or +1 Studded Leather. This is made worse by their starter kit. As per the PHB, Paladins start with Chain Mail and a Shield, that's 18 AC right there. For free.

2) Dexadins are a lot more MAD then Strength Paladins. Paladins are already MAD due to the need for Strength, Charisma, and Constitution. A decent Charisma is a must have for any Paladin due to their Aura being such a powerful ability. Thankfully you don't have to max out Strength to be a really good Paladin. In fact, from my time playing Adventures League, you usually only need a 16 Strength until about level 16. At that point you can buff Strength to an 18 and call it a day. You really can't do the same with Dex, you need that 20 Dex because it helps to determine your AC. So not only are you spending more ASIs on Ability Score increases, but you're trying to get 20 Dex as soon as you can.

3) Unless you house rule it, you need a 13 Strength to multiclass as a Paladin. Usually if you're making a Dex character, you can drop your Strength to 8 or 10. Now you're putting more resources towards your Strength that could be put elsewhere.

4) Paladins are very much an "In your face" class. They don't have any real support for fighting things at range outside of shooting twice with a bow or tossing a Javelin. Now, you could multiclass in order to become really good with ranged attacks...but why bother multiclassing into Rogue to be good with a bow when you can take two levels of Hexblade Warlock to get Eldritch Blast, Charisma as your primary attack stat, Short Rest spell slots, the Shield spell, a bonus action ability that increases Crit Range, and Invocations? Or instead of Warlock, take Sorcerer levels. Congrats, you now have Firebolt, Chill Touch and Booming Blade, take a few more Sorcerer levels and you can get Quick Spell to cast Booming Blade as a Bonus Action for an extra Smite.

[Dork_Forge]

Arthurian Legend is mostly the basis for Paladins because of the Knightly Code, not the Knights using cool powers...

Though it happens. Gawain for some reason had increased strength between 9am and 12pm.

The Knights Code of Chivalry and the vows of Knighthood
The Knights Code of Chivalry described in the Song of Roland and an excellent representation of the Knights Codes of Chivalry are as follows:

To fear God and maintain His Church
To serve the liege lord in valour and faith
To protect the weak and defenceless
To give succour to widows and orphans
To refrain from the wanton giving of offence
To live by honour and for glory
To despise pecuniary reward
To fight for the welfare of all
To obey those placed in authority
To guard the honour of fellow knights
To eschew unfairness, meanness and deceit
To keep faith
At all times to speak the truth
To persevere to the end in any enterprise begun
To respect the honour of women
Never to refuse a challenge from an equal
Never to turn the back upon a foe
Of the seventeen entries in the Knights Codes of Chivalry, according to the Song of Roland, at least 12 relate to acts of chivalry as opposed to combat.

Yes, that doesn't really strengthen your position though. Paladins in D&D are primarily defined by being martials with divine powers, you can choose to wear different armor or different weapons, but you can't change the fact that mecanically the class is a martial half caster.

The code of chivalry may have inspired the tenets of the Oaths, but at the end of the day that's a singular piece of fluff and isn't even clear. Oaths are sworn by all kinds of people in all kinds of professions and settings in history.

From the text of the PDK/Baneret- "Pledged to protect the crown, they take the fight against evil beyond the kingdom's borders. They are tasked with wandering the land as knights errant, relying on their judgment, bravery, and fidelity to guide them in defeating evildoers."

That also fits the coe of chivalry and would be a better fit for an Arthurian knight than a Paladin.

[Tanarii]

D&D Paladins are named after Charlemagne's Paladins, also knights of the realm. I can only assume that is where the association with historical Knights comes from. It's kind of right in the name, so to speak.

But I imagine it's also because of the 1e and BECMI art. Even Fighters were basically Knights in heavy armor in most of the art. Although strangely they also often wore chainmail. I guess those were all the low level Fighters that couldn't afford better. :smallamused:

[Keltest]

D&D Paladins are named after Charlemagne's Paladins, also knights of the realm. I can only assume that is where the association with historical Knights comes from. It's kind of right in the name, so to speak.

But I imagine it's also because of the 1e and BECMI art. Even Fighters were basically Knights in heavy armor in most of the art. Although strangely they also often wore chainmail. I guess those were all the low level Fighters that couldn't afford better. :smallamused:

In 1e, fighters were knights of a realm, while paladins were knights of a church. Fighters got castle's and retinues as high level class features, and paladins were considered a subtype of fighter for most purposes. In both cases the classes were explicitly considered to be equivalent to knights in practice, if not always in name.

[Angelalex242]

Depends on the Knight.

Most of Arthur's Knights were Oath of the Crown.
Sir Galahad specifically was Oath of Devotion (And that's why he had the holy power necessary to achieve the Holy Grail)
Sir Bors and Sir Percival, who also achieved the Holy Grail, may just be less cool Devotion Paladins.
The Green Knight (Gawain and the Green Knight) was Oath of the Ancients (That's how he can get his head chopped off with little effect.)
And Mordred? Oathbreaker, for obvious reasons.

Back in earlier editions, Lancelot would've been an Oathbreaker too for that whole adultery thing.

[Samayu]

I think the main reason why more people don't use light armor with Paladins is that, while you can do it there's little incentive to do it. Don't get me wrong, a Dexadin is extremely viable, but it runs into three issues:

1) Paladins are a front line class that tank with their AC. A Strength based Paladin with a 16 Strength can get 21 AC without any magical equipment or spells with the Defense Fighting Style, Plate Armor, and a Shield. In order to get comparable AC, a Dexadin that uses Light Armor needs 20 Dex and either Mage Armor or +1 Studded Leather. This is made worse by their starter kit. As per the PHB, Paladins start with Chain Mail and a Shield, that's 18 AC right there. For free.

Snip

Agreed. AC is key for paladins. They need to be in the thick of things to take best advantage of most of their abilities. Going down the list... lay on hands, fighting style, smite, extra attack, aura, aura, smite, cleansing touch.

[Dork_Forge]

I think the main reason why more people don't use light armor with Paladins is that, while you can do it there's little incentive to do it. Don't get me wrong, a Dexadin is extremely viable, but it runs into three issues:

1) Paladins are a front line class that tank with their AC. A Strength based Paladin with a 16 Strength can get 21 AC without any magical equipment or spells with the Defense Fighting Style, Plate Armor, and a Shield. In order to get comparable AC, a Dexadin that uses Light Armor needs 20 Dex and either Mage Armor or +1 Studded Leather. This is made worse by their starter kit. As per the PHB, Paladins start with Chain Mail and a Shield, that's 18 AC right there. For free.

You don't really suffer much from AC, just wear medium armor. If your DM doesn't want to let you swap out the Chain mail for Scale mail (which is cheaper...) then just take starting wealth. You start out with the same AC as a Chain mail Paladin and you can afford to upgrade to Half Plate before the Str Paladin can afford full plate. So at worst here you're on level footing for the early game unless the Str based wants to upgrade to Splint on the road to plate. If AC really feels like a concern (it shouldn't, Paladins have enough hp and lay on hands to hp tank as well) then just use the Defense style and Shield of Faith.


2) Dexadins are a lot more MAD then Strength Paladins. Paladins are already MAD due to the need for Strength, Charisma, and Constitution. A decent Charisma is a must have for any Paladin due to their Aura being such a powerful ability. Thankfully you don't have to max out Strength to be a really good Paladin. In fact, from my time playing Adventures League, you usually only need a 16 Strength until about level 16. At that point you can buff Strength to an 18 and call it a day. You really can't do the same with Dex, you need that 20 Dex because it helps to determine your AC. So not only are you spending more ASIs on Ability Score increases, but you're trying to get 20 Dex as soon as you can.

You only need a +2 Dex for AC, buffing Dex has a much bigger personal impact than buffing Str does though I don't see a Paladin really needing a high Cha. The aura is a nice ability, but at the end of the day unless you're rolling high stats you just have to pick a stat. You can start with a 16 in Cha and Dex with a 14 in Con (point buy, Half Elf) with all other stats at a 10 (you can dump whichever you want to an 8 to get a +1 Wis maybe, or dump Int and Wis if your DM uses the RAW MC requirements and you want to MC.

You can also just be a Dwarf, dump Strength and wear plate anyway or go V. Human, dump Strength, take Mobile and wear Plate anyway.


3) Unless you house rule it, you need a 13 Strength to multiclass as a Paladin. Usually if you're making a Dex character, you can drop your Strength to 8 or 10. Now you're putting more resources towards your Strength that could be put elsewhere.

On the one hand I feel like this is the requirements working as intended, you have to make sacrifices if you want it all. On the other hand I find it being Str stupid since Paladins are just Fighters with less martial options and Divine magic, so I make it Str or Dex.


4) Paladins are very much an "In your face" class. They don't have any real support for fighting things at range outside of shooting twice with a bow or tossing a Javelin. Now, you could multiclass in order to become really good with ranged attacks...but why bother multiclassing into Rogue to be good with a bow when you can take two levels of Hexblade Warlock to get Eldritch Blast, Charisma as your primary attack stat, Short Rest spell slots, the Shield spell, a bonus action ability that increases Crit Range, and Invocations? Or instead of Warlock, take Sorcerer levels. Congrats, you now have Firebolt, Chill Touch and Booming Blade, take a few more Sorcerer levels and you can get Quick Spell to cast Booming Blade as a Bonus Action for an extra Smite.

I... don't know why this is listed as a negative of a Dexaxdin? You'd still be up in people's faces just using a finesse weapon, Dex actually makes you better suited to switching to ranged since you can adequately fire a long bow when you need to. Since Tasha's you can also just take the style that gives you cantrips and take an offensive one. You don't need to MC to solve this and a Dex Paladin is in a better ranged position than a Str Paladin... Did I miss someone advocating for a ranged Dexadin? Unless the DM home ruled that smites worked on ranged attacks... what would be the point?

[TyGuy]

Curse of strahd.
DM asked us to roll stats in order.
We can switch two stats after rolling.
Wanted to play a paladin but rolled like a 10 Str and 17 dex, decent con, mediocre stats and high int.
Swapped int for cha and chose half elf.
Made him more of a woodsy swashbuckler.
Chose oath of ancients.
Ended up maxing dex with elven accuracy.
Opted for defense fighting style. 19 AC with shield.
Ended up with sun blade which allowed for dex attacks.

Was the most broken thing I ever played. (Largely because of the setting though)

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Curse of strahd.
DM asked us to roll stats in order.
We can switch two stats after rolling.
Wanted to play a paladin but rolled like a 10 Str and 17 dex, decent con, mediocre stats and high int.
Swapped int for cha and chose half elf.
Made him more of a woodsy swashbuckler.
Chose oath of ancients.
Ended up maxing dex with elven accuracy.
Opted for defense fighting style. 19 AC with shield.
Ended up with sun blade which allowed for dex attacks.

Was the most broken thing I ever played. (Largely because of the setting though)

Yeah, vampire spawn don't like radiant damage...
As I read this thread the 2 or 3 'sides' don't really seem to be disagreeing as much as talking past each other. Like you and a couple other posters I've found Dexadins really good. Mine was at his best when he snuck up and got an extra round of attacks off which more than compensated for any damage lost for not taking strength based. He also was more versatile from range.
At the same time, your build, the other one on this page, and mine are all very similar in terms of race and progression. As fun as it was to play, I still have to say I was on a pretty narrow path and deviating too much would start to get pretty sub-optimal. Mechanically if I did it again there would be a lot of similarities, which is maybe why I'm not in a rush to repeat.
Despite some others saying, 'just use medium armor' if you want to be stealthy and actually get the max from being Dex based that's a breastplate and 2 AC points off the Strength build. So Charisma ASI was off the table until I had a Feat and 20 Dex, something I didn't do for my Strength based Paladin.
Then there's the group that thematically sees Paladins as heavily armored. I mean, that's the way they see them, so that probably answers the OP's question as well as anything. Some people just aren't going to play a lightly armored Paladin.

[Segev]

Example Dexadin: Swift Death to Evil
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/zxhO0u93bJ04SnNEWGQPnR-3uIYe4lAvb1ZOxFZKqhshfunt39DHIlKMtbGVrl6yY8eIcy6g1 5_DmdFTrqH8OucvhO_9hB9vBKzTgOWf1gBvEABtKxJ3

Mark of Shadow Elf Watchers Paladin 20
Starting Stats (point buy): 17 Dex / 16 Cha / 14 Con / rest to taste
ASIs: Revenant Blade, Elven Accuracy, Fey-Touched (Gift of Alacrity), Max Dex/Cha. In whatever order.
Fighting Style: Blind-Fighting

Cast Pass Without Trace to make everyone stealthy (you yourself have +21+1d4 stealth). Get surprise, make the whole party win initiative all the time with Gift of Alacrity+Aura of the Sentinel (you yourself have +10+1d8 initiative), and smite things into oblivion before they get a turn.

In tandem with your entire team. You are a charismatic strike team leader after all.

(snip)

This makes me think of Saranrae, out of Pathfinder. Goddess associated with scimitars and mercy, but also the desert and conquest.

[Pex]

Why should they? For those who do hooray for them. For those who don't let them play.

[LudicSavant]

Don't get me wrong, a Dexadin is extremely viable, but it runs into three issues

I have a few quibbles and thoughts regarding this list of issues.


3) Unless you house rule it, you need a 13 Strength to multiclass as a Paladin. Usually if you're making a Dex character, you can drop your Strength to 8 or 10.

I agree with this one!


Paladins are a front line class that tank with their AC.
Sure, but that's no more a reason to overlook other variables than it is for a Barbarian to take Tough over Res(Wis) because they "tank with HP."


A Strength based Paladin with a 16 Strength can get 21 AC without any magical equipment or spells

That is true, but it is also true that a Dex-based Paladin can actually get 21 AC (or better) with less gold worth of equipment than a Strength-based one, by at least several different methods. It's not all that uncommon for a Dexadin to have similar (or sometimes even better) AC in published modules or other campaigns, in practice. The first instance of this is at level 1, where the medium armor equivalent to heavy chain mail is both cheaper, and provides the same AC. Other examples of Dex builds having similar AC include Mage Armor, some racial features, a whole bunch of magic items that cost less than the difference between medium and plate, and sometimes feats (for example, a glaive+PAM user doesn't get +1 AC, but a Revenant Blade does). This means that a Str build will only sometimes have more AC than a Dex build, in practice.

And in the times that heavy armor does provide a +1 AC difference, Light vs Medium vs Heavy armor is still a case of tradeoffs, pros and cons. A +1 AC helps your survivability, but so does a much higher initiative, much higher Dex saves (which is kinda like your AC against a lot of hard-hitting special attacks), and not ruining stealth for everyone in the party.


You really can't do the same with Dex, you need that 20 Dex because it helps to determine your AC.

You can do the same with Dex.

If you're talking about "without any magical equipment or spells," Half-Plate has the exact same AC as 20 Dex + Studded Leather.

[Segev]

and not ruining stealth for everyone in the party.

In optimizing for the party you're playing in, how big of a factor is this? Specifically, if there is at least one character (other than yours, call him "Bob") that will "ruin stealth for everyone in the party," regardless of whether you wear heavy armor and have a Dex of 3 or wear light armor and have a Dex of 20, would this make playing a Dexadin significantly less desirable because "stealth is already ruined for the party by Bob?" Or are the other trade-offs still solid enough that a Dexadin vs. a heavy-armor Strengthadin is a good choice? (Not "better," but "good and competitive?")

[LudicSavant]

Good question! I'll try to answer.


In optimizing for the party you're playing in, how big of a factor is this?

Basic sliding scale of benefits for stealth:
If nobody's stealthy, then you get no benefits from Stealth (no surprise there).

If just you are stealthy, then the benefit of Stealth is that you're hidden until your turn comes up (and thus are less vulnerable to people ambushing you or beating you in initiative), and get Advantage on your first attack of the combat. You also might be able to scout ahead of the party and get more information and pre-casts.

If everyone is stealthy, then you might start getting Surprise rounds, which give everyone an extra turn relative to Team Monster (and earlier turns tend to be worth more than later turns, for reasons like seizing better positions, controlling the flow of the combat, etc). They're quite potent.


Specifically, if there is at least one character (other than yours, call him "Bob") that will "ruin stealth for everyone in the party," regardless of whether you wear heavy armor and have a Dex of 3 or wear light armor and have a Dex of 20, would this make playing a Dexadin significantly less desirable because "stealth is already ruined for the party by Bob?" Or are the other trade-offs still solid enough that a Dexadin vs. a heavy-armor Strengthadin is a good choice? (Not "better," but "good and competitive?")

I think the other trade-offs are still solid enough to make you a good and competitive choice, in the sense you defined. Going from a -1 or 0 Init and Dex saves to +4 or 5 makes a very noticeable difference, and feats like Elven Accuracy are strong.

[Segev]

If just you are stealthy, then the benefit of Stealth is that you're hidden until your turn comes up (and thus are less vulnerable to people ambushing you or beating you in initiative), and get Advantage on your first attack of the combat. You also might be able to scout ahead of the party and get more information and pre-casts.

If everyone is stealthy, then you might start getting Surprise rounds, which give everyone an extra turn relative to Team Monster (and earlier turns tend to be worth more than later turns, for reasons like seizing better positions, controlling the flow of the combat, etc). They're quite potent.How well does a middle ground where several, but not all, of the party members are stealthy work? What about the semi-extreme case of exactly one "Bob" in a party of ninja? My first thought is that it's costing the party Surprise, but otherwise is going to be very similar to an entirely-stealthed party, but is that accurate?


Going from a -1 or 0 Init and Dex saves to +4 or 5 makes a very noticeable difference

It's funny that one of the more reliable ways to get Wisdom to contribute to Initiative is on the Ranger, and not the Paladin. Paladin being able to add Charisma to initiative - via spell or subclass - would make non-dexadins have a little more edge in that realm. Maybe they don't need it, though.

(Assassins definitely need more boosts to Initiative than they get. Grumble.)

[x3n0n]

Paladin being able to add Charisma to initiative - via spell or subclass - would make non-dexadins have a little more edge in that realm. Maybe they don't need it, though.

FWIW, that's almost exactly the level 7 aura for the Oath of the Watchers (but, per Tasha's trend, sub proficiency bonus for Charisma).

[sophontteks]

Good question! I'll try to answer.



Basic sliding scale of benefits for stealth:
If nobody's stealthy, then you get no benefits from Stealth (no surprise there).

If just you are stealthy, then the benefit of Stealth is that you're hidden until your turn comes up (and thus are less vulnerable to people ambushing you or beating you in initiative), and get Advantage on your first attack of the combat. You also might be able to scout ahead of the party and get more information and pre-casts.

If everyone is stealthy, then you might start getting Surprise rounds, which give everyone an extra turn relative to Team Monster (and earlier turns tend to be worth more than later turns, for reasons like seizing better positions, controlling the flow of the combat, etc). They're quite potent.



I think the other trade-offs are still solid enough to make you a good and competitive choice, in the sense you defined. Going from a -1 or 0 Init and Dex saves to +4 or 5 makes a very noticeable difference, and feats like Elven Accuracy are strong.
This doesn't come up in discussions very often, but with 5e's plain sight rules...
Peripheral vision > Being stealthy.

Everyone would need to be a wood elf, lightfoot halfling, or have the stalker feat, otherwise they are just going to see you coming anyway in most cases.

[Telwar]

Why should they? For those who do hooray for them. For those who don't let them play.

TBH, I had heard of Dexadins, but never really thought of them until this thread.

Whether or not it's an optimal build is really beside the point, but it's certainly a valid build, likely because paladin is such a strong chassis and Dexterity has so much going for it over Strength, especially in 5e. I don't think thar Dexadins would have been a thing in previous editions; I know not in 4e, and almost certainly not in 1 or 2. Maybe 3/PF?

[Garimeth]

This doesn't come up in discussions very often, but with 5e's plain sight rules...
Peripheral vision > Being stealthy.

Everyone would need to be a wood elf, lightfoot halfling, or have the stalker feat, otherwise they are just going to see you coming anyway in most cases.

Eh, depends on the DM and terrain.

Forest, urban, or verticality maps there is always a place to hide. I run a desert/sailing/urban based campaign where walking around heavily armed and armored draws suspicion from the occupying empire trying to make the character's homeland their new vassal state, and they've been invited in by the kingdom's sultaness.

This leads to very much heavy armor makes you drown if you fall off a ship, it makes you overheat faster in the desert, it draws suspicion in the city, AND it spoils stealth.

The whole party is moderately stealth and mostly plain clothes. They use stealth and get surprise rounds ALL THE TIME, and I run pretty lethal encounters so they want them - and they work for them.

Stealth and high initiative is something that is INCREDIBLY valuable especially as any character like a paladin with Sentinel. Both of those things means the paladin can pick where to plant their flag - both for area denial, but also their aura. The dexadin I mentioned above is frequently one of the first characters in battle, and has sentinel. They open with a cast of faerie fire or bless, then get in position to harry the most enemies with OAs and sentinel. That surprise round cast of the buff makes it hardly cost them anything (free extra round) and they just gave their party a massive boost for the whole battle.

[Tanarii]

This doesn't come up in discussions very often, but with 5e's plain sight rules...
Peripheral vision > Being stealthy.

Everyone would need to be a wood elf, lightfoot halfling, or have the stalker feat, otherwise they are just going to see you coming anyway in most cases.

Stealth check to see if you achieved surprise not hiding. It just requires DM's judgment that you can attempt an ambush.

[Willie the Duck]

TBH, I had heard of Dexadins, but never really thought of them until this thread.

Whether or not it's an optimal build is really beside the point, but it's certainly a valid build, likely because paladin is such a strong chassis and Dexterity has so much going for it over Strength, especially in 5e. I don't think thar Dexadins would have been a thing in previous editions; I know not in 4e, and almost certainly not in 1 or 2. Maybe 3/PF?

In both AD&D's all fighter-types wanted to have as high a strength and as high a Dexterity as they could, wear as heavy an armor as they could (and would get any AC bonus from Dex in any armor), and all of them would want to be good with sword, lance, and bow (and other weapons in theory, but both the weapon stat charts and magic item distribution leaned heavily in this direction). The primary reason, I think, that there weren't many Dex>Str paladins was that the prereqs were Str12, Con9, Wis13, and Cha17, leaving little room for an impressive Dex. In 3e, Paladins did not have so many prereqs, and now were roughly in the same boat as fighters -- if you wanted to go mostly Dex, you could. If you didn't, you probably still didn't dump Dex, since you probably eventually would get at least Mithril Plate mail, which would grant AC bonuses for Dex up to 16. There mostly the issue would be that you had lots of existing uses for feats, and as such couldn't afford the feats required to keep a Dex build going (in 3e Dexterity builds usually being either archery builds or some kind of two-weapon fighting, each of which took something like 6 to infinity feats to keep competitive as you rose in level).

[Pex]

TBH, I had heard of Dexadins, but never really thought of them until this thread.

Whether or not it's an optimal build is really beside the point, but it's certainly a valid build, likely because paladin is such a strong chassis and Dexterity has so much going for it over Strength, especially in 5e. I don't think thar Dexadins would have been a thing in previous editions; I know not in 4e, and almost certainly not in 1 or 2. Maybe 3/PF?

I don't mind if a player wants to play a DX based paladin, accepting he knows he needs to be in melee and smite while being decent with a bow for when he can't be in melee. I just don't see it as a problem if given most paladins are ST based. I question the thread question. No problem if the thread was asking how to make an effective DX paladin, but the thread question as is implies a wrongness in paladins using ST with which I disagree.

[Snails]

I don't think thar Dexadins would have been a thing in previous editions; I know not in 4e, and almost certainly not in 1 or 2. Maybe 3/PF?

In 1e/2e, having a high Dex was very nice, but you really needed a high Str to be a meleeist (assuming you were not swimming in just the right magic items from lowish levels).

In 3e, the Paladin class was painfully MAD. Plus Finesse to use Dex for attack bonus cost a Feat. Thus the Dex build could never be a standard Paladin build. It was not impossible, but a "once in a blue moon" event when multiple high stats were rolled. (The interesting thing about 3e MAD classes like the Paladin and Monk is they outright suck with standard array or similar stats, but are quite powerful with multiple very high stats.)

In 5e, the Dex Paladin works just fine, without any special or clever planning required. It is not fundamentally different from any other character who is not a primary spellcaster and chooses Dex (i.e. like Rogue or Ranger Dex builds). The downside, as noted upthread, is that you are barred from multiclassing unless you have a Str 13. The Paladin class now seems to get a reasonable amount of love from minmaxers, because they blend so well with the SAD Cha classes; the Str Paladin is the standard chassis for that, because it had to be.

[sophontteks]

Stealth check to see if you achieved surprise not hiding. It just requires DM's judgment that you can attempt an ambush.
Ambush is attacking from hiding. Typically the ambushers are attacking a moving group from a hidden stationary position.


Eh, depends on the DM and terrain.

Forest, urban, or verticality maps there is always a place to hide. I run a desert/sailing/urban based campaign where walking around heavily armed and armored draws suspicion from the occupying empire trying to make the character's homeland their new vassal state, and they've been invited in by the kingdom's sultaness.
There is a place to hide, but those hiding places are stationary. You are automatically revealed when you step between them, as you are in plain sight. "You can't hide from a creature that can see you."

Hiding while moving in forests is a racial trait of the wood elves. Halflings cover urban with hiding behind people (crowds). You may be inadvertantly giving those racial feats to everyone.


The cases where you can sneak and surprise is where they can't see you and aren't prepared for a fight. Like walking up to a door without making a sound while those on the other side are gambling.

[Garimeth]

Ambush is attacking from hiding. Typically the ambushers are attacking a moving group from a hidden stationary position.


There is a place to hide, but those hiding places are stationary. You are automatically revealed when you step between them, as you are in plain sight. "You can't hide from a creature that can see you."

Hiding while moving in forests is a racial trait of the wood elves. Halflings cover urban with hiding behind people (crowds). You may be inadvertantly giving those racial feats to everyone.


The cases where you can sneak and surprise is where they can't see you and aren't prepared for a fight. Like walking up to a door without making a sound while those on the other side are gambling.

I again say its DM dependent.

If the forest is dense, it is reasonable to assume that they have capabilities to move quickly and quietly between cover out to a certain distance, and then even within the distance by timing their moves to when people look away, etc. All of these are represented by the stealth check.

Additionally if there is verticality then you can add rooftops, balconies, hills of varying heights, tower walls, etc.

You are correct that you can't hide from someone who can see you, but ABILITY to see =/= actually DOES see. To trigger the rule the following must be met:

1. The character ALREADY sees them in plain sight in front of them.

OR both of the following

2. The character is not obscured somehow either through partial cover/concealment or lighting.

3. The detecting character's Perception is higher than the stealth check.


Mask of the Wild only applies to "lightly obscured" levels of foliage, per RAW dense foliage counts as heavy obscurement, and renders the person essentially blind! You can certainly hide from them.

This is why I say its DM dependent. What level of foliage is enough to render someone basically blind? There is certainly something in between "impossible to hide" and "makes you blind". If the DM runs stealth in a way that makes it never work - then yeah PCs are not going to build for it, just like not building faces if they don't work for the campgin/DM or not selecting charm and suggestion spells, or not taking familiars if the DM nerfs them etc.

Stealth is something that is very table specific I have found. In my groups case, we are all outdoors people and prior current military, so some of the basic adventuring stuff we have done IRL, and we're just not going to rule that our adventurers are less capable than us irl - cause I'm def not some Navy SEAL or anything.

EDIT: To clarify, I'm not trying to debate how stealth works, I'm just pointing out that its table dependent and that stealth, AND initiative, are very valuable for anyone in the Tank or Controller position, because ideally you need to move before the enemy to do your job well.

[sophontteks]

Just don't forget that if the foliage is rendering you blind, it's almost certainly going to be difficult terrain. I don't want to see you're party trying to run through them and get caught in pricker bushes or something. ;)

But yes to many specific situations. I like the verticality espesially. Any case where they can't see you it works. Just no to generally being able to just roll stealth as a party and be invisible. There are feats and features for that.

For sight in 5e it's basically a 360 degree area around them 5e doesn't even consider facing. We're talking about a rulset where enemies know your position when your invisible unless you roll stealth. It's espesially unforgiving when you aren't invisible.

And yes, many parties are very lax with stealth. Probably a roll over from previous editions. It does make dex builds much stronger.

[Bloodcloud]

There are certainly a few great Dexadin builds, especially with Tasha.

Mark of shadow elf, elven accuracy, revenant blade. Absolute combo made in heaven for a stealthier paladin. Kobold paladin. Goblin paladin.

[Tanarii]

Ambush is attacking from hiding. Typically the ambushers are attacking a moving group from a hidden stationary position.
There is no requirement to be hiding prior to attempting an ambush to achieve surprise. Nor is there a requirement that you meet the same requirements that hiding has to make the check to achieve surprise.

Edit: Since I was making categorical statements, I went and checked. The requirement is "one side is trying to be stealthy". Nothing about hiding. But note that attempting to be stealthy does have movement speed implications.

[sophontteks]

There is no requirement to be hiding prior to attempting an ambush to achieve surprise. Nor is there a requirement that you meet the same requirements that hiding has to make the check to achieve surprise.

Edit: Since I was making categorical statements, I went and checked. The requirement is "one side is trying to be stealthy". Nothing about hiding. But note that attempting to be stealthy does have movement speed implications.
I'm referring to the definition of an ambush.

I think some of the things you may have meant were mentioned, such as standing by a door, or dropping on people from a rooftop.

[Sorinth]

There is no requirement to be hiding prior to attempting an ambush to achieve surprise. Nor is there a requirement that you meet the same requirements that hiding has to make the check to achieve surprise.

Edit: Since I was making categorical statements, I went and checked. The requirement is "one side is trying to be stealthy". Nothing about hiding. But note that attempting to be stealthy does have movement speed implications.

I find in cases where you are visible but trying to be non-threatening in order to surprise someone it's good to make Deception vs Insight checks.

[Keltest]

I find in cases where you are visible but trying to be non-threatening in order to surprise someone it's good to make Deception vs Insight checks.

My general rule of thumb as a DM is that if you are visible and visibly armed, you cant surprise people who see you just by attacking them. You need SOMETHING in the equation that theyre unaware of otherwise youre just attacking them straight up.

[Garimeth]

My general rule of thumb as a DM is that if you are visible and visibly armed, you cant surprise people who see you just by attacking them. You need SOMETHING in the equation that theyre unaware of otherwise youre just attacking them straight up.

That makes sense in some contexts, but not others. In particular when everyone has weapons.

In Afghanistan, we all had weapons, right there, openly carried and loaded. So did our our local allies. Some of those allies were not allies, and they could and did get what would easily be the mechanical equivalent of a surprise round. In those cases something like insight would be more than appropriate.

I would extend it even to concealed weapons or magic threats:
Perception lets you notice the weapon, or spell bag, or focus.

Insight lets you see the tenseness, or nervousness, or shifty eyes that show something's up.

One is environmental and one is social, both will alert you if you notice them.

[Nagog]

To make a long story short: Dex weapons don't deal as much damage. Without the d10 weapons, you have to rely more on Smites for damage, which means less spellcasting. Beyond that, they don't have the baked-in mobility to survive having lower AC, particularly with the value of AC points being exponential (they're far more valuable from 16-25 than they are 10-16). So with lower AC, lower damage/higher resource cost for combat, etc., you're much better off playing a Rogue. Tbh I'd love a Paladin-esque Rogue subclass, giving them some healing, a few buff/support abilities, stuff like that. I'd be a blast.

[Keltest]

That makes sense in some contexts, but not others. In particular when everyone has weapons.

In Afghanistan, we all had weapons, right there, openly carried and loaded. So did our our local allies. Some of those allies were not allies, and they could and did get what would easily be the mechanical equivalent of a surprise round. In those cases something like insight would be more than appropriate.

I would extend it even to concealed weapons or magic threats:
Perception lets you notice the weapon, or spell bag, or focus.

Insight lets you see the tenseness, or nervousness, or shifty eyes that show something's up.

One is environmental and one is social, both will alert you if you notice them.

In that sort of circumstance, i might respond by giving the would-be surprising party advantage on their initiative rolls. I feel the surprised condition really only applies when there would be something that would actively be preventing you from being combat-ready for some reason, either because you dont have your equipment directly in your hands or available, or because youre trying to figure out where people are attacking from at all (say, wood elves attacking you in a forest) or some other circumstance where action is literally impossible.

[stoutstien]

To make a long story short: Dex weapons don't deal as much damage. Without the d10 weapons, you have to rely more on Smites for damage, which means less spellcasting. Beyond that, they don't have the baked-in mobility to survive having lower AC, particularly with the value of AC points being exponential (they're far more valuable from 16-25 than they are 10-16). So with lower AC, lower damage/higher resource cost for combat, etc., you're much better off playing a Rogue. Tbh I'd love a Paladin-esque Rogue subclass, giving them some healing, a few buff/support abilities, stuff like that. I'd be a blast.

The differences you are talking about are ~1 damage with a suboptimal weapon picl per attack unless we factor duelist. for AC it's dependent on tier and gear load out but the AC gap is at most 1 with both values falling on the upper end of the scale of +17 AC.

All paladins rely on balancing the use of spell slots for smites to feel like are being the most effective and as you level your weapon damage becomes less important as you gain more and higher spell slots. The reason pally/ caster multiclasses are so popular is gaining those slots faster to alleviate some of the opportunity costs but that comes with its own list of pros and cons.

in the end the difference isn't that pronounced. It's basically comparing the utility and flexibility of grapple shoving versus the power of having better saves and better initiative. Though I could see a few ways of having your cake and eating it too.

All in all the fact of the majority of paladins are strength in certain player cultures is a localized phenomenon that isn't necessarily mechanically driven.

[diplomancer]

To make a long story short: Dex weapons don't deal as much damage. Without the d10 weapons, you have to rely more on Smites for damage, which means less spellcasting. Beyond that, they don't have the baked-in mobility to survive having lower AC, particularly with the value of AC points being exponential (they're far more valuable from 16-25 than they are 10-16). So with lower AC, lower damage/higher resource cost for combat, etc., you're much better off playing a Rogue. Tbh I'd love a Paladin-esque Rogue subclass, giving them some healing, a few buff/support abilities, stuff like that. I'd be a blast.

It's lower AC only if the Str Pal is also using a d8 for damage, otherwise, even with worse armor, you're still ahead if wearing a shield.

Except for the PAM spear/staff+shield, of course. In that case, yes, lower AC.

[Dork_Forge]

To make a long story short: Dex weapons don't deal as much damage. Without the d10 weapons, you have to rely more on Smites for damage, which means less spellcasting. Beyond that, they don't have the baked-in mobility to survive having lower AC, particularly with the value of AC points being exponential (they're far more valuable from 16-25 than they are 10-16). So with lower AC, lower damage/higher resource cost for combat, etc., you're much better off playing a Rogue. Tbh I'd love a Paladin-esque Rogue subclass, giving them some healing, a few buff/support abilities, stuff like that. I'd be a blast.

This is overblown imo, the lower die of the weapon is neglible, you certainly don't need to blow smites to cover it. If you take a rapier then Dueling is an option and better damage (more reliable) than a d10 weapon. Or you can go TWF (take the feat for the style if you want) and get more chances to Smite and Improved Smite.

The benefits of higher initiative, saves and skills is arguably at least equal to if not greater than losing a single point of AC (potentially at some levels) and an average of 1 or 2 damage on the die. It only really falls down in multiclassing but even then it's just another hurdle not a wall.

[Sorinth]

My general rule of thumb as a DM is that if you are visible and visibly armed, you cant surprise people who see you just by attacking them. You need SOMETHING in the equation that theyre unaware of otherwise youre just attacking them straight up.

That's the whole trying to be non-threatening part. You have to be doing something to try to get them to relax (Usually talking). And that's where the deception vs insight comes in, are you able to get them to relax. And in some cases it would be impossible, some cases maybe it's at disadvantage/advantage depending on circumstances.

[Garimeth]

In that sort of circumstance, i might respond by giving the would-be surprising party advantage on their initiative rolls. I feel the surprised condition really only applies when there would be something that would actively be preventing you from being combat-ready for some reason, either because you dont have your equipment directly in your hands or available, or because youre trying to figure out where people are attacking from at all (say, wood elves attacking you in a forest) or some other circumstance where action is literally impossible.

If I were a PC and this is how my DM ruled I would have absolutely no problem with that.


To make a long story short: Dex weapons don't deal as much damage. Without the d10 weapons, you have to rely more on Smites for damage, which means less spellcasting. Beyond that, they don't have the baked-in mobility to survive having lower AC, particularly with the value of AC points being exponential (they're far more valuable from 16-25 than they are 10-16). So with lower AC, lower damage/higher resource cost for combat, etc., you're much better off playing a Rogue. Tbh I'd love a Paladin-esque Rogue subclass, giving them some healing, a few buff/support abilities, stuff like that. I'd be a blast.

I'm totally with Dork_Forge on this one, those differences are minimal. Feat support and multi-classing are the only good arguments I have seen for STR over DEX.

Which, for the record, I think are strong arguments.

The comparison to Rogue though is confusing.

Paladins get spells (Find Steed is practically a class feature in the right game)
Paladins get LOH
Paladins get Smites (which let them nova more than Rogues when something REALLY needs to die)
Paladins get Auras
Paladins get Channel Divinity

Even if you go Dexadin with a roguish feel to it (the Dexadin in my campaign has the urchin background) its just a completely different playstyle and character.

IRT STR vs. Dex you trade a marginal mathematical benefit in terms of DPR and AC for greatly increased VERSATILITY.

-Stealth (potentially very good)
-Long ranged attacks (yeah you aren't setting DPR records, but being able to longbow when you'd otherwise twiddle your thumbs is pretty dang nice.)
- Don't have to spend an ASI on GWM or PAM.
- Better Initiative
- Better DEX saves, which is AC against powerful magic and effects. (High DEX plus aura is potent, my Campaign's dexadin is also Ancients...)
- You + gear weigh less, which can end up saving your character in a variety of exploration situations (traps, rickety bridges, climbing, falling in deep water) or if the party has to drag your unconscious body out of somewhere. (I've definitely seen plenty of times where the KO'ed heavy armor PC was too heavy for others to egress with and it put the party in danger to have to stay or abandon them.)

The value of some of these (stealth, the longbow, the weight) is going to be DM and campaign dependent and in some games will be extremely valuable, and in others not so much. In my games I run, they are valuable.

The other aspects are valuable in ALL games.

[Garimeth]

If I were a PC and this is how my DM ruled I would have absolutely no problem with that.



I'm totally with Dork_Forge on this one, those differences are minimal. Feat support and multi-classing are the only good arguments I have seen for STR over DEX.

Which, for the record, I think are strong arguments.

The comparison to Rogue though is confusing.

Paladins get spells (Find Steed is practically a class feature in the right game)
Paladins get LOH
Paladins get Smites (which let them nova more than Rogues when something REALLY needs to die)
Paladins get Auras
Paladins get Channel Divinity

Even if you go Dexadin with a roguish feel to it (the Dexadin in my campaign has the urchin background) its just a completely different playstyle and character.

IRT STR vs. Dex you trade a marginal mathematical benefit in terms of DPR and AC for greatly increased VERSATILITY.

-Stealth (potentially very good)
-Long ranged attacks (yeah you aren't setting DPR records, but being able to longbow when you'd otherwise twiddle your thumbs is pretty dang nice.)
- Don't have to spend an ASI on GWM or PAM.
- Better Initiative
- Better DEX saves, which is AC against powerful magic and effects. (High DEX plus aura is potent, my Campaign's dexadin is also Ancients...)
- You + gear weigh less, which can end up saving your character in a variety of exploration situations (traps, rickety bridges, climbing, falling in deep water) or if the party has to drag your unconscious body out of somewhere. (I've definitely seen plenty of times where the KO'ed heavy armor PC was too heavy for others to egress with and it put the party in danger to have to stay or abandon them.)

The value of some of these (stealth, the longbow, the weight) is going to be DM and campaign dependent and in some games will be extremely valuable, and in others not so much. In my games I run, they are valuable.

The other aspects are valuable in ALL games.

EDIT: Also people have talked about using a feat on TWF, but imo for a human dexadin Resiliency: DEX is much more appealing. Its a half feat, and having a CHA+DEX+Prof Bonus dex save is insane.

[N7Paladin]

Putting in my two cents:

Instead of saying Dexadin shunners are all wrong and need to play better, I will share my personal experience.

I play a lot of paladins. A LOT. And even when my characters don't start as paladins, they often end up taking an oath anyway. Almost every single one of my paladins has been dex-based not str. I have never, ever, felt lagging behind in AC, nor lacking. Even with taking breast plate instead of half plate (bc I like stealth), I've never felt lacking. In fact, I don't even use a shield to bump my AC, because I prefer two-weapon fighting. My paladins are often the hardiest (or at least, one of the hardiest) PC in the group, in groups of good, technically-minded players.

I would suggest instead of basing the judgement against dex paladins based on theoretical gameplay, take a chance. Play one.

[Tanarii]

I would suggest instead of basing the judgement against dex paladins based on theoretical gameplay, take a chance. Play one.
AC 16 vs AC 18 base AC being an issue isn't theoretical in any way.

[diplomancer]

AC 16 vs AC 18 base AC being an issue isn't theoretical in any way.

At what level does that AC difference happen? Because I can only see it happening at level 1, when the Dexadin is with Scale Mail, Rapier, and Shield, while the Strengthadin is with Chain and Greatsword, but I believe, from the context, that's not what you mean

[Garimeth]

At what level does that AC difference happen? Because I can only see it happening at level 1, when the Dexadin is with Scale Mail, Rapier, and Shield, while the Strengthadin is with Chain and Greatsword, but I believe, from the context, that's not what you mean

Even then that wouldn't be the case

Studded Leather 12 + Dex 3 + Shield 2 = 17
Scale mail/breastplate 14 + Dex 2 + Shield 2 = 18

Chainmail 16 + GS 0 = 16.

Platemail 18 + GS/Glaive 0 = 18.

So, actually, unless the paladin is TWF, if they went with dueling instead for example, they have BETTER AC early game, and equal AC later game.

EDIT: In theory the STR build can also equip a shield and then would have 1 AC greater than the dex build at the start of game, but if they took a feat that supports their STR combat style they are unlikely to do this. Further, they are also less likely to take the defense FS over GWF, but I did not factor that into the AC calcs.

[1Pirate]

I think the misconception that Dexadin’s aren’t played as much is because a lot of the Paladin optimization guides either don’t mention them or only mention them in passing. As seen from a number of responses in this thread, they’re played a lot(so clearly this thread will be resolved by adding my own experiences to the mix.)

Opening up Elven Accuracy does a lot for paladins since crits are so good with smites. Initiative bonuses are also really great for getting those buffs up early(although I actually didn’t notice this as much due to someone with Gloomstalker levels and a Rogue with Alert). Also don’t discount having good Dex saves. A common tactic for wearing down martials is Save-for-Half effects and being able to pass them can keep you up for an extra round(in Tier 3 play, the evasion part of Shield Master alone has been worth the feat for the Fighter/Ranger)

A few downsides I’ve noticed since moving into Tier 3 play: AC value drops off a lot in higher level play. AC 20 is pretty good Tier 1-2, but when monsters start having +11 to hit with 3 attacks per turn, you can expect to get smacked around a lot(Defense style plus Shield of Faith or Haste can put me to 22, but with the damage rolls going up, concentration is getting harder to maintain).

Bonus actions are also a little harder to come by(though less so for me now due to a home brew Magic item I received). Some have cited the smite spells, but with the number of creatures that have magic resistance or flat immunity to the riders, I got more bang for my buck using concentration for other spells.

Resistance to nonmagical attacks also makes that Long Bow look less appetizing when I can’t(or don’t want) to get in melee or so I tend to go into support mode like a Str Paladin would. To be fair, in a different campaign getting a magic bow might not be as big a deal but my DM’s from the “Quality Not Quantity” school of magic item distribution(considering the aforementioned home brew item, they’d rightfully slap me for complaining about not having a magic bow).

One issue on the whole is my damage is very reliant on long rest resources that have to be managed much more carefully. I got reckless once, and when the BBEG (un)expectedly showed up...well the party would have been better off having a Hero’s Feast than bringing me along. That being said, this is more a weakness of sword & board then Dex, but Dex will have(generally) one less AC than a Str build.

[Tanarii]

At what level does that AC difference happen? Because I can only see it happening at level 1, when the Dexadin is with Scale Mail, Rapier, and Shield, while the Strengthadin is with Chain and Greatsword, but I believe, from the context, that's not what you mean
Good question, because it's around level 7. If play goes to 11th, that's something like the 2nd half of your career.

Before that you're at 12-13 vs 16 (chain) at level 1 (Paladins only get a Chain option)
And AC 15 (Chain shirt) vs 16 probably by mid 2nd
15 vs 17 (Splint) around mid 3rd
16 (breastplate) vs 17 late 4th
16 vs 18 (plate) around late 6th or early 7th.

Note we're talking about stealth medium armors in this sub thread so Scale isn't in the mix unless you're going with MAM.


So, actually, unless the paladin is TWF,They are.


Edit: I probably should have been clearer in my original comment, what's not theoretical to me is having seen the difference between front line AC 16 breastplate wearers and AC 18 plate wearers in mid Tier 2. Lots and lots of them. Those 2 points of AC make a huge difference. Just as shield does, but the trade off there is defense vs offense, not stealth + acrobatics vs grabbing + jumping + AC.

[Alcore]

Obviously it's the classic build, and you generally want your explosive nova fighter to have a big weapon and tanky armor, but a different approach to paladin would be very doable and I'm disappointed that we don't do see it more often.You say exactly why; it is classic. It is the archtype. What do you see when you hear paladin? Twenty years ago it was a knight templar in heavy armor and shield who walked the world to shove a peice of metal into the Lord of Terror. These days i tend to see a knight templar with big armor, bigger weapons striding through hellfire to reach the enemies of man and purge xeno filth for the Emperor. Honestly; not much has changed at all...

What do you see when you hear fighter? Probably as many answers as people. I see kung fu personally. The archtype that fighter follows would be better described as warrior or soldier. Even knight.



You answer your own question. If you feel so strongly do something different. I would no longer call that paladin a paladin even though he has the correct features; he is simply no longer the archtype.

Same thing with trolls. Being brought up on classic and WoW sources they tend to be far leaner, beautiful and civilized fay than what the masses believe. They draw from Tolkien or sources that draw from that. It is always a moment of dissonance when i see D&D troll art; they are not trolls.

[J-H]

Resistance to nonmagical attacks also makes that Long Bow look less appetizing when I can’t(or don’t want) to get in melee or so I tend to go into support mode like a Str Paladin would. To be fair, in a different campaign getting a magic bow might not be as big a deal but my DM’s from the “Quality Not Quantity” school of magic item distribution(considering the aforementioned home brew item, they’d rightfully slap me for complaining about not having a magic bow).

Instead of a longbow, you may want to do one of the Tasha's fighting styles that gives you 2 cleric cantrips. Sacred Flame is on-theme with a range of 60'; Toll the Dead is the same range for more damage, but necrotic.

Really, one is enough and there are only two damaging cantrips worth anything (Word of Radiance is almost always a terrible choice).
One of the "X cantrip and a spell" feats may be better.

[x3n0n]

Instead of a longbow, you may want to do one of the Tasha's fighting styles that gives you 2 cleric cantrips. Sacred Flame is on-theme with a range of 60'; Toll the Dead is the same range for more damage, but necrotic.

Really, one is enough and there are only two damaging cantrips worth anything (Word of Radiance is almost always a terrible choice).
One of the "X cantrip and a spell" feats may be better.

Although Guidance + your preferred damage cantrip is a nice pairing if you don't already have Guidance in the party.

[Tanarii]

It is always a moment of dissonance when i see D&D troll art; they are not trolls.
I dunno what D&D trolls draw from, but yeah, D&D trolls are D&D trolls. They're not the same as pretty much anything else.

[ezekielraiden]

The Paladin favors being adjacent to multiple allies, due to their auras. While it is certainly possible to go Dex-heavy (and even still use a shield), in general, this implies a lower AC than wearing heavy armor, and equal-or-less damage output, which makes being a front-line combatant less attractive. This also means archery is pretty wasteful, since it means choosing between "doing good ranged damage" and "actually making use of your class features." Further, as others have noted, the mechanical advantages to being a high-Dex Paladin are notably lower than they are for other classes: you end up needing to get Dex skills from background, you lack both TWF style and Archery style, you can't multiclass without becoming super MAD. So, while it is perfectly doable and not strictly "weak" by 5e standards, it's less attractive than it could otherwise be.

Thematically, as many have said, Paladin is the stereotypical "knight in shining armor." 5e is a very "tropey" game, intentionally. The designers made that goal exceptionally clear, albeit in not so many words. Thus, you should generally expect 5e play to hew to type more strongly than other games, because it was made to be that way. Thus, while it's absolutely possible and I'm 100% sure people will gladly dogpile me with examples of how they or co-players have defied class stereotypes up the wazoo, as a general trend you should expect most things to be more like their "standard fluff" than you would in other systems. Add in that Paladins, both in general and specifically in 5e, are about as strongly-flavored as classes get, and you've got a recipe for most people sticking to what's expected even in the absence of mechanical incentives.

When both mechanical incentives and thematic ones push you toward playing Strength-based, it's going to be notably uncommon, especially compared to classes like Fighter and Barbarian. Some will see it a lot, because that's how human variability works. This is a statistical thing, not a universal truth.

(As an aside, 3e and 4e were both more play-against-type games, but for very different reasons. 3e strongly encouraged optimization, which often flies in the face of standard thematics because the designers didn't really see how their rules worked against the theme they wanted to support. 4e was radically pro-reskinning, and its "everything is core and pretty balanced" approach made more people curious about fitting disparate parts together. Both end up at the same place, encouraging less "tropey"/stereotypical/"expected" approaches, but by nearly diametrically opposite paths.)

[AvatarVecna]

It took a long time for me to realise this, but there actually isn't any reason a paladin has to be the archetypal knight in heavy armor with a big sword. Smite, there spells, and every one of there features doesn't have to be used on the frontline to be optimal. Obviously it's the classic build, and you generally want your explosive nova fighter to have a big weapon and tanky armor, but a different approach to paladin would be very doable and I'm disappointed that we don't do see it more often.

Practicality and optimization.

At least by default, Paladins don't get archery or CQS fighting styles, and smite doesn't function with ranged attacks. That makes Paladin a frontliner regardless of what specific fighting style they're using, with a bow being a backup weapon at best (for when they can't get in stabbing range quickly). Frontliner means they need Con on top of the Cha they definitely will need for multiple reasons. And if you read the "Great Weapon Fighting" Fighting Style carefully, you'll see that it applies to any damage you roll as part of the attack, which includes smites. It also applies only to weapons wielded in two hands, so that means two-handed or versatile weapons - neither of which is ever Dex-based. So you're going to want big Str for your primary fighting style.

From there you have a choice to make about Dex and armor: even if you maxed out Dex despite it being a secondary stat at best for you, your AC would never be as high as if you went full plate (all other things being equal), and other reasons to invest in Dex (saves, init, and Stealth) aren't super-applicable to paladins anyway. You don't have stealth as a class skill. You'll get Cha to Dex Saves before too long, you'll have Cha-based self-healing, and you might even have advantage against spell saves depending on subclass. Init is unfortunate, but investing in Dex just to have good init makes it a weak secondary stat. You could be investing that in Wisdom for a good Wis save (disastrous when failed) and good Insight/Perception (which will allow you to avoid getting surprised, which is useful in the same way init is).

None of this is to say that a Dex paladin can't work: a lightly-armored, rapier-wielding paladin will still do fantastically. But it's not accurate to say that the class doesn't reward you for going with big weapons and heavy armor.

[stoutstien]

I dunno what D&D trolls draw from, but yeah, D&D trolls are D&D trolls. They're not the same as pretty much anything else.

Best guess would be the novel: three hearts and three lions. It has trolls with all the features the DnD trolls has including fire weakness, long limbs and nose, and regeneration.

[x3n0n]

And if you read the "Great Weapon Fighting" Fighting Style carefully, you'll see that it applies to any damage you roll as part of the attack, which includes smites.

Run this by your DM first. According to the Sage Advice Compendium:



If you use Great Weapon Fighting with a feature like Divine Smite or a spell like hex, do you get to reroll any 1 or 2 you roll for the extra damage?

The Great Weapon Fighting feature—which is shared by fighters and paladins—is meant to benefit only the damage roll of the weapon used with the feature. For example, if you use a greatsword with the feature, you can reroll any 1 or 2 you roll on the weapon’s 2d6. If you’re a paladin and use Divine Smite with the greatsword, Great Weapon Fighting doesn’t let you reroll a 1 or 2 that you roll for the damage of Divine Smite.

(I'm not telling you you're wrong--I just know that DMs don't always agree with each other, and some of them may look to the SAC for, well, advice.)

[LudicSavant]

It also applies only to weapons wielded in two hands, so that means two-handed or versatile weapons - neither of which is ever Dex-based.

You're mistaken. Revenant Blade is a two-handed Dex-based weapon. It's been mentioned multiple times in this thread.


And if you read the "Great Weapon Fighting" Fighting Style carefully, you'll see that it applies to any damage you roll as part of the attack, which includes smites. This is quite DM-dependent, because the official SAC says it's meant to apply to weapon damage dice, not smites. But even if your DM rules that GWF applies to smites, again, Revenant Blade exists and allows you to bump up your primary stat and get a PAM-like bonus action with the same ASI, in addition to reaping the benefits of being Dex-based.


in general, this implies (...) and equal-or-less damage output

Since when?

1) In a basic core featless game, Dex often outdamages equivalent Str builds. For example, Rapier & Board tends to beat Longsword & Board damage output because of factors like winning initiative (which effectively gives you more rounds to apply your DPR in).

2) In a feat game, GWM kind of falls off a cliff as soon as you get added damage on your attacks like IDS or Divine Smite. It's frequently worth less DPR than a raw stat bump for a Paladin. This is a well-known mathematical principle by optimizers: GWM is worth less the higher your damage-per-attack is, because the accuracy penalty becomes more and more impactful on DPR.

3) In a feat game, PAM spends a feat to give you the same bonus action attack that Dex builds already have multiple ways of getting, like, say, Revenant Blade (which not only gives you the bonus action+stat attack, but also bumps your primary stat). It gets a reaction attack, but this has to compete with the benefits of a primary stat bump, improved initiative, etc.

4) Strength builds have no equivalent to things like Elven Accuracy.

Speaking as an optimizer who has done quite a lot of mathematical analysis and testing of Paladin builds, from whence comes the assumption that Strength builds necessarily do more damage?

[x3n0n]

Since when?

1) In a featless game, Dex outdamages equivalent Str builds. Rapier beats Longsword damage output because of factors like winning initiative (which effectively gives you more rounds to apply your DPR in). Dual-wielding beats two-handed weapons because of the way that Paladins scale with multiple attacks.

2) In a feat game, GWM kind of falls off a cliff as soon as you get added damage on your attacks like IDS or Divine Smite. It's frequently worth less DPR than a raw stat bump for a Paladin. This is a well-known principle by optimizers.

3) In a feat game, PAM spend a feat to give you the same bonus action attack that Dex builds already have multiple ways of getting, like, say, Revenant Blade (which not only gives you the bonus action+stat attack, but also bumps your primary stat). It gets a reaction attack, but this has to compete with the benefits of a primary stat bump, improved initiative, etc.

4) Strength builds have no equivalent to things like Elven Accuracy.

I'm struggling to find a non-Eberron Dex TWF build that feels like like it's "online" by level 4 (and not miserable for 1-3) and feels like it's "worth it" vs a Str paladin.

TWF sketch:
V.Human Dual Wielder (Rapier/Whip, Studded or Scale)
Str 10, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (Can do Cha 14 to buy two more +2s; shuffle 8/10/12s as desired--note Str for Scale or half-plate encumbrance issues)
Fighting Style to taste based on party composition, I guess? (party-generated Heavy Obscurement -> Blind Fighting. lack of party Guidance -> Blessed Warrior? Defense for that last AC?)

Without Dual Wielder, a TWF build feels like it sacrifices more AC than I'd like, and can't even use the Whip, which seems like one of the most fun reasons to do this.

Non-TWF sketch:
Some Elf (Shield, Whip or Rapier)
Str 10, Dex 17, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (notes as above)
FS: as above, plus consider Interception (especially levels 1-3) or Dueling
Take Elven Accuracy (Dex) at 4

Without Heavy Obscurement and Blind Fighting, the best in-class advantage engine I see is Vengeance.

Others?

[LudicSavant]

I'm struggling to find a non-Eberron Dex TWF build that feels like like it's "online" by level 4 (and not miserable for 1-3) and feels like it's "worth it" vs a Str paladin.

TWF sketch:
V.Human Dual Wielder (Rapier/Whip, Studded or Scale)
Str 10, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (Can do Cha 14 to buy two more +2s; shuffle 8/10/12s as desired--note Str for Scale or half-plate encumbrance issues)
Fighting Style to taste based on party composition, I guess? (party-generated Heavy Obscurement -> Blind Fighting. lack of party Guidance -> Blessed Warrior? Defense for that last AC?)

Without Dual Wielder, a TWF build feels like it sacrifices more AC than I'd like, and can't even use the Whip, which seems like one of the most fun reasons to do this.

Non-TWF sketch:
Some Elf (Shield, Whip or Rapier)
Str 10, Dex 17, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (notes as above)
FS: as above, plus consider Interception (especially levels 1-3) or Dueling
Take Elven Accuracy (Dex) at 4

Without Heavy Obscurement and Blind Fighting, the best in-class advantage engine I see is Vengeance.

Others?

I can try to give build advice.

Can you give me a "sketch" of the Str build you want to feel worth it compared to, as well?

[Garimeth]

I'm struggling to find a non-Eberron Dex TWF build that feels like like it's "online" by level 4 (and not miserable for 1-3) and feels like it's "worth it" vs a Str paladin.

TWF sketch:
V.Human Dual Wielder (Rapier/Whip, Studded or Scale)
Str 10, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (Can do Cha 14 to buy two more +2s; shuffle 8/10/12s as desired--note Str for Scale or half-plate encumbrance issues)
Fighting Style to taste based on party composition, I guess? (party-generated Heavy Obscurement -> Blind Fighting. lack of party Guidance -> Blessed Warrior? Defense for that last AC?)

Without Dual Wielder, a TWF build feels like it sacrifices more AC than I'd like, and can't even use the Whip, which seems like one of the most fun reasons to do this.

Non-TWF sketch:
Some Elf (Shield, Whip or Rapier)
Str 10, Dex 17, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (notes as above)
FS: as above, plus consider Interception (especially levels 1-3) or Dueling
Take Elven Accuracy (Dex) at 4

Without Heavy Obscurement and Blind Fighting, the best in-class advantage engine I see is Vengeance.

Others?

V-human
RES: Dex or Sentinel or Alert or Mobile
16 Dex 16 Cha 14 Con, rest however you want.
Defense fighting style or dueling
Studded leather + shield against bruisers twf w/o FS or feat against all others.
If ancients use FF for advantage starting as soon as you get your oath
If Vengeance use you CD or Bless.
If Devotion use your CD or Bless.
Cast those buffs from stealth or surprise if possible.

Any elven race for Elven accuracy at level 4
18 Dex 16/14 Cha 14 Con
Defense fighting style or dueling
Studded leather + shield against bruisers twf w/o FS or feat against all others.
If ancients use FF for advantage starting as soon as you get your oath
If Vengeance use you CD and Bless.
If Devotion use your CD or Bless.
Cast those buffs from stealth or surprise if possible.

Those are all good from 1-20.

EDIT: Vengeance gives advantage, but its often overlooked that so does Ancients - from Faerie Fire, you just have to have a decent CHA, which you want anyway.

EDIT 2: It was pointed out that Faerie Fire is not on the Ancients list, which it is not. That is a house rule that I forgot is a house rule.

[x3n0n]

I can try to give build advice.

Can you give me a "sketch" of the Str build you want to feel worth it compared to, as well?

Hm...

Something like your PAM/Mounted Combatant build from the Fun and Effective Builds thread, but with an ASI at 4th level instead of MC?

V.Human PAM (Shield, Spear)
Str 16, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (MAD as ever. Shave Cha again? Shave Str? Shuffle Dex/Int/Wis as desired.)
FS as with the shield/whip build: something other than GWF. :)

That preserves a BA attack like the TWF build.

See also V.Human HAM/GWF 2d6: the half feat helps with the Str/Cha MADness and the damage output makes you a target to reap benefits from HAM.

[Dork_Forge]

I'm struggling to find a non-Eberron Dex TWF build that feels like like it's "online" by level 4 (and not miserable for 1-3) and feels like it's "worth it" vs a Str paladin.

TWF sketch:
V.Human Dual Wielder (Rapier/Whip, Studded or Scale)
Str 10, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (Can do Cha 14 to buy two more +2s; shuffle 8/10/12s as desired--note Str for Scale or half-plate encumbrance issues)
Fighting Style to taste based on party composition, I guess? (party-generated Heavy Obscurement -> Blind Fighting. lack of party Guidance -> Blessed Warrior? Defense for that last AC?)

Without Dual Wielder, a TWF build feels like it sacrifices more AC than I'd like, and can't even use the Whip, which seems like one of the most fun reasons to do this.

Non-TWF sketch:
Some Elf (Shield, Whip or Rapier)
Str 10, Dex 17, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (notes as above)
FS: as above, plus consider Interception (especially levels 1-3) or Dueling
Take Elven Accuracy (Dex) at 4

Without Heavy Obscurement and Blind Fighting, the best in-class advantage engine I see is Vengeance.

Others?

V.Human (Fighting Initiate: TWF), take Defense as your Paladin style, use two shortswords.

Assuming point buy your standard is two attacks for 1d6+3 at 1-3.That's a pretty strong start and opening tier 2.

[1Pirate]

Instead of a longbow, you may want to do one of the Tasha's fighting styles that gives you 2 cleric cantrips. Sacred Flame is on-theme with a range of 60'; Toll the Dead is the same range for more damage, but necrotic.

Really, one is enough and there are only two damaging cantrips worth anything (Word of Radiance is almost always a terrible choice).
One of the "X cantrip and a spell" feats may be better.

This character started pre-Tasha’s. Also with the aforementioned frequently encountered magic resistance, save cantrips are really underwhelming. I can at least Branding Smite with the bow.

[LudicSavant]

Hm...

Something like your PAM/Mounted Combatant build from the Fun and Effective Builds thread, but with an ASI at 4th level instead of MC?

V.Human PAM (Shield, Spear)
Str 16, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (MAD as ever. Shave Cha again? Shave Str? Shuffle Dex/Int/Wis as desired.)
FS as with the shield/whip build: something other than GWF. :)

That preserves a BA attack like the TWF build.

See also V.Human HAM/GWF 2d6: the half feat helps with the Str/Cha MADness and the damage output makes you a target to reap benefits from HAM.


I'm struggling to find a non-Eberron Dex TWF build that feels like like it's "online" by level 4 (and not miserable for 1-3) and feels like it's "worth it" vs a Str paladin.

TWF sketch:
V.Human Dual Wielder (Rapier/Whip, Studded or Scale)
Str 10, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (Can do Cha 14 to buy two more +2s; shuffle 8/10/12s as desired--note Str for Scale or half-plate encumbrance issues)
Fighting Style to taste based on party composition, I guess? (party-generated Heavy Obscurement -> Blind Fighting. lack of party Guidance -> Blessed Warrior? Defense for that last AC?)

Without Dual Wielder, a TWF build feels like it sacrifices more AC than I'd like, and can't even use the Whip, which seems like one of the most fun reasons to do this.

Non-TWF sketch:
Some Elf (Shield, Whip or Rapier)
Str 10, Dex 17, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 16 (notes as above)
FS: as above, plus consider Interception (especially levels 1-3) or Dueling
Take Elven Accuracy (Dex) at 4

Without Heavy Obscurement and Blind Fighting, the best in-class advantage engine I see is Vengeance.

Others?

So, let's call these Sketch A (VHuman Dual-Wielder), Sketch B (R&S Elf), and Sketch C (VHuman PAM)

Sketch A
IMHO, the problem with Sketch A is that Dual-Wielder is not a particularly efficient use of a feat.

If you want to be a TWF Paladin build, you usually do not want the Dual Wielder feat, or even the Two Weapon Fighting style. You shouldn't assume that you need these things in order to TWF, any more than you need Mage Slayer to slay mages or Find Traps to find traps.

The reason to consider a TWF Paladin is because of low overhead -- e.g. not spending a feat to get a bonus action attack. If you're not taking advantage of that (such as by eating feats on Fighting Style or Dual-Wielder) your TWF build will likely be a worse version of something else (like Revenant Blade or Polearm Master);

Instead, a TWF Paladin should be taking the opportunity to invest in other things, like Blind-Fighting, Fey-Touched, or Inspiring Leader. This also gives them the freedom to swap between shield and TWF whenever they like.

Sketch B
Sketch B should be able to keep up just fine though, with the right choice of elf. Yeah, a Sketch C VHuman is going to be scarier at 1-3, but that's more a "VHumans are scary at 1-3" thing than a "Str vs Dex" thing. If you're, say, a Vengeance Paladin, you've got uses for your bonus action without PAM, like Hunter's Mark (both casting it and swapping it) and your Channel Divinity, and possibly something from your elf-ness (I recommend the MTOF Eladrin).

Edit:
Elaborating: The MTOF Eladrin's features aren't hard to justify as being worth a feat compared to the VHuman, I think.

First, their bonus action teleport is really good, and recharges on a short rest, meaning you can expect around 3 a day. Imagine getting 3 Misty Steps a day... then consider that the MTOF bonus action teleport is far, far superior to Misty Step. It's also giving you the ability to Frighten foes, crushing their offense and mobility. Or to do an automatic-damage AoE (no save, nothing). Or to pull an ally with you. It also doesn't count as a spell, so you can port then cast a spell.

You let me Frighten someone and teleport as a bonus action, and I'm a happy tank.

Seriously, these riders are good, especially at low level. That automatic damage AoE is better than an Action spent on Word of Radiance. That Frighten effect is worth almost as much as a 1st level slot, Action, and Concentration spent on Cause Fear (just without the potential for a longer duration from repeated failed saves).

Second, Charm Resistance is a lifesaver. It covers a broad range of nasty effects, from Hypnotic Pattern to Harpy songs and pretty much everything that takes control of your character. Combined with wis prof and aura, it makes you nearly immune to these effects, which is a good thing, because the consequences of losing control of your character for even 1 turn are severe ("I turn around and dump 3 max level smites on my ally" costs you those slots, your turn, your ally, and whatever actions your team has to do to de-charm you).

Third, you don't need to be the guy who makes the party have to start lighting torches in the underdark. Or paying for Goggles of Night. One of those things. :smalltongue:

Fourth, you get +1 on a primary stat, which means you can take a half-feat at 4. (So really, the VHuman is only half a feat ahead, not a full feat).

Fifth, if you're a Vengeance Paladin, between the MTOF teleport, casting+swapping Hunter's Mark, and Channel Divinity, you've got plenty to spend your bonus action on.

Sixth, being Dex-based means you will go before Team Monster more often (which is a substantial difference in damage output in fights where it happens). Having access to a teleport means you're also less likely to spend rounds out of melee range due to CC, kiting, or just a fight starting far away.

So yeah, that all seems worth it to me.

[diplomancer]

The one Paladin I played up to 20 was a Strengthadin; but the next time I play one, I think I will go Dexadin, though I'd prefer to go Halfling; I might ask my DM to let me get the Revenant Blade feat, though, only reason to limit it to elves is racial bias (double scimitar is two-handed, but not heavy). If he doesn't; it's still a decent choice to go Conquest and get Spiritual Weapon as the main Bonus Action; plus, a Halfling Conquest Paladin is hilarious "all these fearful big people; I'll TEACH them to be brave or die"

[JellyPooga]

If you want to be a TWF Paladin build, you usually do not want the Dual Wielder feat, or even the Two Weapon Fighting style. You shouldn't assume that you need these things in order to TWF, any more than you need Mage Slayer to slay mages or Find Traps to find traps.

The reason to consider a TWF Paladin is because of low overhead

This is a solid overview. The advantage of Dexadin isn't in damage or AC; as has been pointed out, Dexadin falls slightly behind in both regards. The advantage of Dexadin is essentially in versatility. Where a Strengthadin will usually either choose sword-and-board or two-handed weapon and in order to capitalise, lock themselves in to that style with Fighting Style and Feats, the Dexadin can choose not to invest and happily switch between TWF, S&B and ranged combat and still largely compete while allocating their resources into other fields (Charisma for class features/spellcasting, non-combat or non-attack based Feats, etc.). The converse typically won't happen, because if you want the versatility of not turning yourself into a one-trick "grog smash" pony, you'll want, perhaps even need the Dex anyway and Dexadin doesn't have the required support to double-down on one trick in the same way that Strengthadin can.

Also, damn! I'd never looked at MtoF Eladrin before and now I want to play one! They've definitely borrowed some ideas from 3e Killoren material (Races of the Wild) and I'm not complaining.

[ezekielraiden]

Since when?

1) In a basic core featless game, Dex often outdamages equivalent Str builds. For example, Rapier & Board tends to beat Longsword & Board damage output because of factors like winning initiative (which effectively gives you more rounds to apply your DPR in).
"Winning initiative" isn't higher damage. Yes, it's useful for doing damage before your opponent is allowed to, but that's not actually the same as having higher base damage, which is what I was talking about: Strength has the option to go sword-and-board, which is equivalent base damage (since rapier is 1d8 and the typical non-finesse weapon choices are also 1d8), or it can go for two-handed weapons, forgoing the bonus AC for higher base damage.


2) In a feat game, GWM kind of falls off a cliff as soon as you get added damage on your attacks like IDS or Divine Smite. It's frequently worth less DPR than a raw stat bump for a Paladin. This is a well-known mathematical principle by optimizers: GWM is worth less the higher your damage-per-attack is, because the accuracy penalty becomes more and more impactful on DPR.
Literally wasn't thinking about feats.

Literally was just saying, the best you can do for weapon damage is 1d8 as a finesse weapon user. It's easy to do better than 1d8 as a non-finesse weapon user.


3) In a feat game, PAM spends a feat to give you the same bonus action attack that Dex builds already have multiple ways of getting, like, say, Revenant Blade (which not only gives you the bonus action+stat attack, but also bumps your primary stat). It gets a reaction attack, but this has to compete with the benefits of a primary stat bump, improved initiative, etc.
Again not relevant because I wasn't talking about feats.


4) Strength builds have no equivalent to things like Elven Accuracy.
Non-Elves have no equivalent to things like Elven Accuracy, and again, not relevant to the base damage, which is what I was pretty obviously talking about.


Speaking as an optimizer who has done quite a lot of mathematical analysis and testing of Paladin builds, from whence comes the assumption that Strength builds necessarily do more damage?
The fact, as stated, that your effective weapon-specific damage floor with a Strength-based melee character is 1d8, while the actual weapon-specific damage ceiling for a Dexterity-based character is 1d8.

Literally that was the long and short of it: Str lets you use greatswords, which do more damage than rapiers. That's it. It's not fancy. It's not complex. It's literally a simple weapon damage die comparison.

Edit: And the specific reason I included that "generally" in the front, which you cut out, is because I recognize that there are probably cases where it's possible to do better. But, in general, without serious optimization-fu (as much as 5e has "serious optimization-fu"), Strength-based Paladins are going to either do equivalent damage (because a Paladin with a shield and a rapier and 20 Dex does the same damage as a Paladin with a shield and a longsword and 20 Str), or they're going to do more damage (because a Paladin with a greatsword and 20 Str has no directly comparable Dex counterpart--only indirectly comparable ones like TWF, which, as stated, is sub-par for Paladins).

[LudicSavant]

Literally wasn't thinking about feats.

Literally was just saying, the best you can do for weapon damage is 1d8 as a finesse weapon user. It's easy to do better than 1d8 as a non-finesse weapon user.

Again not relevant because I wasn't talking about feats.

Non-Elves have no equivalent to things like Elven Accuracy, and again, not relevant to the base damage, which is what I was pretty obviously talking about.

The fact, as stated, that your effective weapon-specific damage floor with a Strength-based melee character is 1d8, while the actual weapon-specific damage ceiling for a Dexterity-based character is 1d8.

Literally that was the long and short of it: Str lets you use greatswords, which do more damage than rapiers. That's it. It's not fancy. It's not complex. It's literally a simple weapon damage die comparison.


which is what I was pretty obviously talking about.

It was not obvious to me that...



While it is certainly possible to go Dex-heavy (and even still use a shield), in general, this implies a lower AC than wearing heavy armor, and equal-or-less damage output, which makes being a front-line combatant less attractive.
...was intended to be comparing base damage dice on the weapon table rather than the overall damage output of Str and Dex builds and their effectiveness as frontliners.

If you meant something else, I'll take your word for it.


And the specific reason I included that "generally" in the front, which you cut out

:smallconfused: What are you talking about? I actually did not cut out the "in general" at the front...

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/445485023299108875/814846881624227840/unknown.png

[x3n0n]

So, let's call these Sketch A (VHuman Dual-Wielder), Sketch B (R&S Elf), and Sketch C (VHuman PAM)

Sketch A
IMHO, the problem with Sketch A is that Dual-Wielder is not a particularly efficient use of a feat.

If you want to be a TWF Paladin build, you usually do not want the Dual Wielder feat, or even the Two Weapon Fighting style. You shouldn't assume that you need these things in order to TWF, any more than you need Mage Slayer to slay mages or Find Traps to find traps.

The reason to consider a TWF Paladin is because of low overhead -- e.g. not spending a feat to get a bonus action attack. If you're not taking advantage of that (such as by eating feats on Fighting Style or Dual-Wielder) your TWF build will likely be a worse version of something else (like Revenant Blade or Polearm Master);

Instead, a TWF Paladin should be taking the opportunity to invest in other things, like Blind-Fighting, Fey-Touched, or Inspiring Leader. This also gives them the freedom to swap between shield and TWF whenever they like.

Sketch B
Sketch B should be able to keep up just fine though, with the right choice of elf. Yeah, a Sketch C VHuman is going to be scarier at 1-3, but that's more a "VHumans are scary at 1-3" thing than a "Str vs Dex" thing. If you're, say, a Vengeance Paladin, you've got uses for your bonus action without PAM, like Hunter's Mark (both casting it and swapping it) and your Channel Divinity, and possibly something from your elf-ness (I recommend the MTOF Eladrin).

Edit:
Elaborating: The MTOF Eladrin's features aren't hard to justify as being worth a feat compared to the VHuman, I think.

<snip>

So yeah, that all seems worth it to me.

Thanks! I was myopically chasing the "have a reliable BA attack to offer more chances to hit and crit" goal while maintaining the "use a whip" minor goal. I think I overestimate how many rounds there will be in a given combat day and how many BAs I'll be "wasting" by having small numbers of SR-recharge things vs something always on. (Comes from playing Rogues, Monks, Goblins, PAM users, and XBE users, I expect.)

And yes, MToF Eladrin is a great pick! This looks like it will really come alive at 3rd level between Vengeance features and Fey Step riders.


<snip build sketches>
Those are all good from 1-20.

EDIT: Vengeance gives advantage, but its often overlooked that so does Ancients - from Faerie Fire, you just have to have a decent CHA, which you want anyway.

Thanks also for these!

Where do you see Faerie Fire in the Ancients spell list? It's not in my PHB, nor in dndbeyond. (According to those, Ancients' 1st-level domain oath spells are Ensnaring Strike and Speak with Animals.)

[Garimeth]

Where do you see Faerie Fire in the Ancients spell list? It's not in my PHB, nor in dndbeyond. (According to those, Ancients' 1st-level domain oath spells are Ensnaring Strike and Speak with Animals.)

Wow, you are correct! That was a house-rule I forgot was a house rule. Sorry about that. I'll edit the previous post.

I'm glad those builds were helpful. The eladrin build Ludic posted is probably mechanically superior to the elven one I posted, I just know not everyone allows non "core" races.

[moonfly7]

That seems unlikely to be the incentive at work here, since Dexadins are among the best Paladin builds for combat.



Many people just assume the way a character is “supposed to play," often before even playing the game.

Lemme know if you've heard any of these:

“The Clerics with a martial weapon proficiency must be the ones that are good at melee, right? That +1 damage on a single attack must matter more than subclass abilities.” “I’m just gonna assume light->medium->heavy are supposed to be big important upgrades rather than playstyle-based sidegrades.” “Wizards must always be squishy, nevermind that Abjurer over there shrugging off things that would kill a Barbarian.” “Clerics are just Cure Wounds healbots, nevermind the Light Cleric over there blasting everything in a 65-foot diameter.” And more and more and more.

There’s so many of these false stereotypes and assumptions and they really hold people back in terms of both optimization and flavor.

Dexadins are fantastic. People play them (heck, playing with one right now). Some folks just take a long time to realize what’s good... and many never do.

I'm glad somebody gets it. I've always been frustrated by this. It's what stops some people from playing great ideas like "full plate rogue on horseback" which was one of my favorite characters ever. Or the heavy armor wizard, our ranger who was the AC tank, our dodgy dex skill monkey barbarian(VERY fun character), cleric as literally anything(those suckers fill any role. Had a cleric as our scout, cleric as nova tank, cleric as mobile skirmisher, stealth cleric, summoner, the list goes on) and I think people miss out because they're caught up in the myth that the idea on the box for every class is the only way to play it and be useful or have fun. Seriously treat yourself to Heavy rogue one of these days. Perhaps don't indulge in War Pick sorcerer, that didn't go to Well.

[Tanarii]

I'm glad somebody gets it. I've always been frustrated by this. It's what stops some people from playing great ideas like "full plate rogue on horseback" which was one of my favorite characters ever. Or the heavy armor wizard, our ranger who was the AC tank, our dodgy dex skill monkey barbarian(VERY fun character), cleric as literally anything(those suckers fill any role. Had a cleric as our scout, cleric as nova tank, cleric as mobile skirmisher, stealth cleric, summoner, the list goes on) and I think people miss out because they're caught up in the myth that the idea on the box for every class is the only way to play it and be useful or have fun. Seriously treat yourself to Heavy rogue one of these days. Perhaps don't indulge in War Pick sorcerer, that didn't go to Well.
Most of those require Multiclassing dips or heavy feat investment to work.

Dexadins actually stand out in that all they need is level advancement and ASIs in Dex first to (almost) catch up.