In a 3PC party with AT and Cl1/DivWizX - would Paladin fit better than EK?

[Wasp]

Hi everyone

we recently started a campaign where one of the players, who was going to play a Lore Bard, dropped out before the first session.

This means we are now a 3 player party and we were planning to play an Elven Accuracy Arcane Trickster (me), a Knowledge Cleric 1/ Divination Wizard X and a Dex based Eldritch Knight. The first adventure was a bit rough with none of us really being able to stay out of melee. We are all also worried that we won't have enough healing later on when the Cleric goes full Wizard. And finally, we are kind of worried that my Arcane Trickster and the Eldritch Knight could feel too similar in combat both of us being Dex based and using a Rapier and Booming Blade...

The DM would allow us this early in the game to respec and change classes and the player of the EK is considering to maybe go straight Devotion Paladin instead of EK, allowing us some divine magic support, getting STR and CHA into the group and maybe better front liner capabilities while keeping at least some of that armored magical fighter flavor even if it's less spells and more smite maybe...

What do you think? Would it makes sense to change to Paladin for this group set up? Or would you recommend something else? If Paladin, what build would you recommend? The player doesn't want to play a character that's too dark, so conquest, oathbreaker and vengeance just like Warlock multiclass is off the table. Play will be from level one up to potentially 12 (or now after the first session from level 2 to level 12ish).

What do you guys think?

[Mastikator]

One thing is that damage mitigation is almost always better than healing, a well placed Shield spell is often more valuable than a cure wounds. With that said I'd say that you should consider pure hexblade as an option. It's SADer than paladin, gishier than EK and is a fully armed and operational warlock caster. And it follows very similar themes as EK's (EKs have their weapon bonds they can summon, casts arcane spells, etc)

That said, paladins are really good, well rounded and powerful. Thematically they're very different than EKs, arguably they should consider updating their character's values and beliefs when switching to a paladin.

[Eldariel]

Well, obviously Cleric, Druid, or frontlinish Bard (or perhaps CelLock) would be better than Paladin in bringing the full suite of restorative abilities and frontlining to the table. Paladin is certainly better than EK here too, given what the party does and does not have. In general, specialists like Fighters are probably easier to fit into a large party.

[Khrysaes]

Hi everyone

we recently started a campaign where one of the players, who was going to play a Lore Bard, dropped out before the first session.

This means we are now a 3 player party and we were planning to play an Elven Accuracy Arcane Trickster (me), a Knowledge Cleric 1/ Divination Wizard X and a Dex based Eldritch Knight. The first adventure was a bit rough with none of us really being able to stay out of melee. We are all also worried that we won't have enough healing later on when the Cleric goes full Wizard. And finally, we are kind of worried that my Arcane Trickster and the Eldritch Knight could feel too similar in combat both of us being Dex based and using a Rapier and Booming Blade...

The DM would allow us this early in the game to respec and change classes and the player of the EK is considering to maybe go straight Devotion Paladin instead of EK, allowing us some divine magic support, getting STR and CHA into the group and maybe better front liner capabilities while keeping at least some of that armored magical fighter flavor even if it's less spells and more smite maybe...

What do you think? Would it makes sense to change to Paladin for this group set up? Or would you recommend something else? If Paladin, what build would you recommend? The player doesn't want to play a character that's too dark, so conquest, oathbreaker and vengeance just like Warlock multiclass is off the table. Play will be from level one up to potentially 12 (or now after the first session from level 2 to level 12ish).

What do you guys think?

I would recommend looking at LudicSavants Giftlock or Celestial Tomelock. Both would be cool.

For mitigation though, I think Shepard Druid would be great with the Aura providing Temp HP and using Summons as meat shields. Since you don't have a lot of people, conjure animals won't be too impactful by taking up too many turns.

[Pildion]

Hi everyone

we recently started a campaign where one of the players, who was going to play a Lore Bard, dropped out before the first session.

This means we are now a 3 player party and we were planning to play an Elven Accuracy Arcane Trickster (me), a Knowledge Cleric 1/ Divination Wizard X and a Dex based Eldritch Knight. The first adventure was a bit rough with none of us really being able to stay out of melee. We are all also worried that we won't have enough healing later on when the Cleric goes full Wizard. And finally, we are kind of worried that my Arcane Trickster and the Eldritch Knight could feel too similar in combat both of us being Dex based and using a Rapier and Booming Blade...

The DM would allow us this early in the game to respec and change classes and the player of the EK is considering to maybe go straight Devotion Paladin instead of EK, allowing us some divine magic support, getting STR and CHA into the group and maybe better front liner capabilities while keeping at least some of that armored magical fighter flavor even if it's less spells and more smite maybe...

What do you think? Would it makes sense to change to Paladin for this group set up? Or would you recommend something else? If Paladin, what build would you recommend? The player doesn't want to play a character that's too dark, so conquest, Oathbreaker and vengeance just like Warlock multiclass is off the table. Play will be from level one up to potentially 12 (or now after the first session from level 2 to level 12ish).

What do you guys think?

They've got some options, Paladin is always good so that's option 1 as you said.
They could also look at Arcana Cleric with Shillelagh\Green Flame Blade\Booming Blade as an option to bring in a full Cleric.
They could also go with a HexBlade for a SAD Cha character \ Face for the party while keeping the Gish.
Another option is Moon Druid, get the healing out of combat and a great melee for Tier1 and good melee for Tier2.

[Catullus64]

A Paladin sounds like it would complement this party just fine, especially since you're lacking a high-Charisma character for social roleplay. A single-classed Paladin is an asset to pretty much any party; the class is probably tied with Rogue in my book for most solid class fundamentals. That said, I hardly see your party struggling if the player wants to stick with Eldritch Knight. Healing doesn't exactly follow the same progression curve as damage; having the Cleric/Wizard be able to throw out emergency Healing Words to get you through the fight is often enough, and remember that they still have the option to drop their spell slots on scaled-up Cure Wounds. The rest can be handled with smart play. Consider, especially, that if your DM uses some of the rules from Xanathar's Guide, a character proficient with an Herbalism Kit can provide a lot of fairly cost-effective backup healing by brewing potions.

[nickl_2000]

Short answer, yes.

Longer answer, yes a Paladin would be a great fit into that party. They get healing with spells and lay on hands. They get Lesser Restoration with Lay on of hands (meaning that it doesn't hurt that the Cleric/Wizard doesn't have it). They tank effectively Sword and Board. They boost like crazy once they get their auras. They can be very effective support characters with their casting. Frankly, I don't see a better option for this party than a Paladin.

[Corran]

Is paladin better than EK for this group? Well, in some ways yes, in some ways no. I think the EK will be overall more useful.

Let's start with party size. There are only 3 of you. Which means, that it is extremelly important not to suffer in the action economy department. One way you can lose acions is if someone gets dropped. So, is the paladin better than the EK at not getting dropped in this party? I think not, but let's get back to this later. Another way to lose action economy is by getting paralyzed, charmed, sometimes restrained too. And generally, any condition that even weakens one of you (even if it does not outright deny actions), is generally more hurtful than it would likely be for a bigger party. Why? Because affecting negatively one 1 of 3 pc's is worse than affecting 1 out of, say, 5. Both because in the smaller party the individual contribution is more important, but also because in the smaller party you will generally have less tools to cancel, prevent or diminish such effects. And most such effects will target a save. So, the smaller your party gets, the more you've got to have your saves covered.

Now, the paladin has saves covered better than the EK, obviously. But what do you give up for that. You (the rogue) would have to give up mobility and range whenever you want to profit from the paladin's aura. Which under certain circumstanes it might not be too bad, but generally you'll want to avoid sticking to such an approach since this cancels your mobility and also since it would mean that the group's ranged damage falls close to nothing (unless of course you plan for shield and maybe armor proficiency, invest heavily on defensive spells and aim for sentinel relatively early; again though, party loses heavily in range attacks). The wizard would also have to stay close to the paladin, so armor is the first step (which they got), boosting concentration heavily is the second. Still, whenever the wizard is casting that one spell that really suits the encouter, putting the primary enemy target near the enemies is not a good idea even with AC and concentration improvements. The paladin's healing is not much for out of combat recovery, at least not until they get to level 9 and get aura of vitality. Lay on hands is mostly about in-combat survivability, so lets get back to tanking.

A singleclass paladin is ok at tanking lots of hits, better than your average fighter I would say. Except the EK. Their spellcasting makes them a better sponge than the paladin, and despite smite, their OA's also get stronger and they keep going as they level. So, while a paladin will need more often melee support (which you or the wizard will need to provide, neither of which is a really good idea unless you don some armor/shield), the EK can do fine (definitely better than the paladin) even on their own. Their spellcasting is limited which mean they'll have to be a little picky about when to cast shield/blur/mirror image (they might have to rely on dodging & positioning more than they might like), and this can be a bit of a problem since good out of combat healing is lacking in this party, but overall it does a better job at tanking than the paladin I'd say, and unlike the paladin they dont need to rely as much on melee support from allies. And if they are hurt, they can stay back and shoot a bow without losing as much in effectiveness as even a DEX based paly would (in which case either you or the wizard could fill in, or both, or none, depending on the encounter).

So, between the two, I'd go with the EK. And then I'd try to find ways to boost saves. Protection from good and evil would be among my spell picks, and I would grab resilient wisdom either at level 8 or 12 (depending how much I'd feel confortable risking it). Indomitable will help, but it's only as good as your base chance, but that's ok, since resilient would already be in my plans. If I were you, I'd similarly not delay resilient con either. Same for the wizard. Divination rolls will in all likelihood need to be used defensively more often. One reason being the saves, another that a lack of AoE will push the wizard more towards concentration AoE's than single target debuffs which tend to be the main consumers of low-average portent rolls.

If I could pick anything, then I'd pick something that would cover for all of the following. Boosting saves, good out of combat healing, good defenses (to the extent that they wouldn't make me an obvious good choice for the enemies to focus on; oh, in a small party, you have to be well rounded, cause if you have a weak spot/character that the enemy can focus on, then that's very bad cause it means you can easily lose action economy), and as much dpr as I could squeeze without overcommiting. A lore bard starting with a 1 level dip in hexblade covers all of the above (EB, GFB/BB, shield and hex), eventually taking a 2nd level in warlock for the agonizing and repelling blast (delaying the second warlock level after additional magical secrets for sure, and maybe all the way till character level 11 when I'd get the 3rd beam and after 5th level spells). Inspiration would cover for saves (I'd still bost the other character's saves) and aura of vitality as one of my additional magical secrets. A moon druid could also work, but I would prefer the safety of bardic inspiration overall (even if everyone grabs resilient and with all of indomitable, evasion, fey ancestry and potentially portent rolls in play; most of which will only be circumstancially useful).

==========

I touched on this before but I want to emphasize it. In a small party you dont want to provide the enemy with a good target. In low levels, the rogue will be the juciest target for the enemy, which is not bad, since prioritizng rogues and dropping them is harder than trying to do the same for a grea number of other pcs (especially after they get cunning action).

As levels goes by this focus will probably change to the wizard, but if they grab one or two concentration feats (which emphasis on whatever is boosting actual saves, so resilient con), they've done their job. After that it's a matter of picking and using the right spells (hopefully they dont miss the need for AoE despite portent pushing to the other direction). While also not neglecting at least a spell that can help with resting (so rope trick or tiny hut; since you can rely on cure wounds, ineffective as it may be, long rests are probably more important hence unless the DM is really using time elements I'd go with tiny hut), and with a spell that can help with escape (dimension door).

The EK (assuming EK), well, if they are dex based and they pick warcaster and some spells that are hard to miss, then they've done their job and from then on they have to be mindful of when to use their resources and of choosing positioning which can range from shooting from behind cover to rushing ahead to tank everything on their own. These will be important decisions, but they can be built to support them and thus choose the one that serves the party best at a given time.

Rogues have their damage built in, as well as survival tools, and the AT can push both of these even more. But it wouldn't hurt planning for some contingencies. What if a nasty enemy manages to focus on you and tries to take you out. Pick something for that, on top of what uncanny dodge will already do for you after level 5. Maybe a spell that boosts defenses like mirror image, maybe a spell that creates obscurement inside which you try to hide (though in a small party you probably dont want to do that unless you hve blindsense already or something similar). Or maybe you try to be more proactive, grabbing expertise in perception and observant, which means enemies will be far less likely to sneak up on you (also both are useful during scouting; which is even more important for small parties, since with a smaller party having the right tools by chance is harder than in a larger party). Maybe you pick some speed bumps so you can keep your distance more easily, while also sticking to a longbow for a longer range. Or grab athletics and stealh expertise and try to get yourself to a good position before the encounter begins, so you can shoot your enemies from relative safety whenever you can. What if you are needed in the front line? Not just to hit and run, but to absorb some attacks. This may happen more often that you'd like without a good source of out of combat healing patching up the EK after fights during which they didn't really want to commit any resources. You have spells helping you defend again a larger number of foes (much like uncanny dodge and mirror image can be good against a single baddy chasing you), but to support them you kind of need an AC and a concentration bump as well. Which are not cheap to get unless you are multiclassing (even then they are not exactly cheap, but they are cheaper and dont hallt your feat progression which is what can help you actually cover lots of roles, both in and out of combat). You dont have to do all of this, you dont even have to do any of it for your rogue to be a good fit to the party. But that's the general idea I would use when optimizing my AT for a small party. Make them more well rounded and able to respond in many differen situations, sometimes like an archer, sometimes like a brute and sometimes like a nuisance moving around and making enemies chase after them. Cause even in a large party (I play an AT in a party of 5), having multiple ways to approach combat is something worth aiming for IMO. I think I rambled long enough.



PS: I've been doing some internet searching regarding steady aim. Here's an idea that may interest you. Say your rogue is hidden (prone) behind total cover. Then on your turn, you use half your movement to stand up (allegedly this is not the same as moving), use your bonus action with steady aim, attack, and then as a free action you fall prone, thus benefiting once more from whatever is giving you total cover. Might want to check with your DM (since at least IMO, this whole maneuver does not mess with how I envision using steady aim), and I am not sure if it's ok with RAW to do that (didn't care enough to look up the exact rules), but if it can work at your table, and you have no problem using it, then it's a clever trick of gaining advatage with steady aim while also not losing on the total cover.

[solidork]

The DM would allow us this early in the game to respec and change classes and the player of the EK is considering to maybe go straight Devotion Paladin instead of EK, allowing us some divine magic support, getting STR and CHA into the group and maybe better front liner capabilities while keeping at least some of that armored magical fighter flavor even if it's less spells and more smite maybe...

People talk a lot about Palaidns and Smites, but don't think that's all that their spell slots are useful for - they've got access to a variety of good defensive and utility options, and their subclass bonus spells can extend that further. Smite provides a baseline effectiveness for each spell slot, but in the situation where the spell half is useful it's probably going to be better than some damage.

Basically, Paladin has more magic than EK, not less.

[Wasp]

Wow! Already so many helpful answers with lots of things to consider! Please keep opinions common, we really need to reflect on things!

Regarding my Arcane Trickster!

You have spells helping you defend again a larger number of foes (much like uncanny dodge and mirror image can be good against a single baddy chasing you), but to support them you kind of need an AC and a concentration bump as well. Which are not cheap to get unless you are multiclassing (even then they are not exactly cheap, but they are cheaper and dont hallt your feat progression which is what can help you actually cover lots of roles, both in and out of combat).

Thanks Corran, for all the feedback, lots of things to absorb. But for the moment I just wanted to focus on this one point and ask if it would make sense to dip Bladesinger in this group and tier1/tier2 play. I wanted to go straight AT because of my interest in feats and ASIs and because I wanted to focus on ranged combat, but now in this small party would it make sense to take Bladesinger to bump up AC when I have to go melee?! (Assuming the EK stays and EK)

[Corran]

W
Thanks Corran, for all the feedback, lots of things to absorb. But for the moment I just wanted to focus on this one point and ask if it would make sense to dip Bladesinger in this group and tier1/tier2 play. I wanted to go straight AT because of my interest in feats and ASIs and because I wanted to focus on ranged combat, but now in this small party would it make sense to take Bladesinger to bump up AC when I have to go melee?! (Assuming the EK stays and EK)
Hmm, not sure. I've seen some dicussion about a bladesinger dip on a rogue, but I never really thought about it. Bladesong is a discount version of several feats that you might want to get since it boosts all of AC, concentration and mobility, but it's a 2 level dip, and ideally I would want a few more things covered if I dipped 2/3 levels away from rogue (such as an action economy boost like action surge and a way to see through fog cloud/darkness via fighter 2 -possibly followed by maneuvers, or improved darkvision via warlock - possibly followed by a pact; whatever these dips are lacking I could get it via race, eg increased speed via wood elf or improved vision via drow). The main reason to go bladesinger is for the extra utility that a wider spell selection would provide, which despite some overlap from being arcane trickster would still be very useful (find familiar, fog cloud, detect magic, longstrider, protection from evil are all spells I would really like to have -and there's more, but I narrowed them to the very first that come to mind, and getting some from the wizard means that it opens up more non enchantment/illusion options when my AT is leveled up more, eg misty step, detect thoughts, etc). But with the wizard in the group this is looking less attractive (not bad though, and more cantrips are certainly very nice). It's a two level dip though, and you cannot really delay the second level, as you could for a fighter dip. You need to have both wizard levels on for it to give you the main things you want from it. And rogues are really good at levels 2-4. I really dont know. I guess I could ask what's your INT score and how many encounters you tend to have per adventuring day, cause these factors matter when evaluating bladesong, but I still wouldn't be sure if I would want to take this dip instead of staying singleclass. On one hand it makes you more well rounded a few times per day, on the other hand there is much redundancy between it, your spellcasting and also having a wizard in the group. So, I am not sure, this (ie bladesong) is one of those things that I'd want to see in actual play to get a better idea about it (eh how much does it hurt me having to trigger it with a bonus action, or how much pressure will my 1st slots have on a 1/3 caster with 8 1st wizard spells added on top of what I would already have; I can certainly guess, but no experience with it), cause it's certainly nice, but I am not sure if it's good enough to justify the 2 level investment.

[Wasp]

Thanks, Corran. Yeah, i kinda feel the same way. Maybe I should do some encounter tests with both builds to see what works for me.

[RogueJK]

Longer answer, yes a Paladin would be a great fit into that party. They get healing with spells and lay on hands. They get Lesser Restoration with Lay on of hands (meaning that it doesn't hurt that the Cleric/Wizard doesn't have it). They tank effectively Sword and Board. They boost like crazy once they get their auras. They can be very effective support characters with their casting. Frankly, I don't see a better option for this party than a Paladin.

Agreed.

The only better option for this party would be a Devotion Paladin 6/Divine Soul Sorcerer X. :smallwink:

[KorvinStarmast]

Elven Accuracy Arcane Trickster (me), a Knowledge Cleric 1/ Divination Wizard X and a Dex based Eldritch Knight.
{snip} the player of the EK is considering to maybe go straight Devotion Paladin instead of EK, allowing us some divine magic support, getting STR and CHA into the group and maybe better front liner capabilities while keeping at least some of that armored magical fighter flavor even if it's less spells and more smite maybe... I'd recommend that. Take Devotion to 6, or take Ancients to 7, and then decide on if you want to MC (sorcerer, pick one) or keep going with Paladin. You don't have to decide now.

so conquest, oathbreaker and vengeance just like Warlock multiclass is off the table. Cool.
Play will be from level one up to potentially 12 (or now after the first session from level 2 to level 12ish). I am tempted to recommend Ancients 7 Bard X, but a straight Paladin probably fulfills most of your needs.

A Paladin sounds like it would complement this party just fine, especially since you're lacking a high-Charisma character for social roleplay. A single-classed Paladin is an asset to pretty much any party; the class is probably tied with Rogue in my book for most solid class fundamentals.
Concur.


Basically, Paladin has more magic than EK, not less. The third attack for EK won't show up until level 11, and the forecast is for a campagin that goes to 12...Paladin probably gives more for the level range for this game.

[Wasp]

Tanks a lot for the additional feedback. They have decided *will* go Paladin, probably Glory to have the option to Grapple in some situations.