Pathfinder 1e Paladin Vs. 3.5 Crusader

[quetzalcoatl5]

I realize this has been discussed previously, but I couldn't find a thread that seemed to specifically cover it as opposed to broader class discussions devolving into it.

So, in 1e Pathfinder, the Paladin was vastly improved, even if some of the really broken tricks were removed. They got more Smites per day, Smites were way better, lay on hands was generally improved outside of niche optimization, two good saves instead of just one, and most importantly casting was moved to charisma, making it way less MAD than its 3.5 progenitor.

Meanwhile, the Crusader was seen as 3.5's attempt at rebooting the Paladin while not totally eating its lunch. As far as class features go, the Crusader is frankly pretty sparse. Furious Counterstrike is pretty dope, but it almost seems to get Smites as a formality. But that isn't the real focus of the class, is it? Maneuvers were an interesting and flexible addition that worked VERY differently from the rest of the game.

The big split over the 20 levels, as I see it, is per combat stamina vs per long rest abilities. At low levels, the Crusader comes out very strong, but it levels off if the Paladin isn't holding back at higher levels since the Paladin has such a good spell list, solid abilities that scale with level, and the benefits to full attack rounds becomes huge!

[Eldonauran]

I'v always been biased against TOB because of the maneuver system, so keep that in mind. Its a personal preference, nothing more.

Personally, I think Paizo (PF1) handled the Paladin in a near perfect manner when they upgraded it. Even if they made it less MAD, people still complain about how MAD it is, so you can't please everyone. The introduction of archetypes, and far less emphasis on prestige classes, gave every class far more flexibility and made it unnecessary for alternate classes to be introduced with (nearly) every splatbook. Even the hybrid class Warpriest is something I see as being superior to the 3.5e Crusader.

[Firechanter]

Yeah, I was kind of a fan of the Crusader in 3.5 ("was" bc I haven't played 3.5 in ages), while the Paladin is one of my absolute favourite classes in PF. But I find they are different classes with somewhat different roles. The Crusader is a Tank with an actual Aggro mechanic, while the Paladin is mostly DPS. So, not sure how much sense it really makes to compare them.

Some notes:
- I once tried to play a PF Paladin as a "soft tank", i.e. fulfulling the role of tank by virtue of doing so much damage the enemy couldn't afford to ignore him, while being relatively easy to hit (unoptimized AC) but with huge staying power (from LoH with Fey Foundling). I felt the idea was sound, but the GM foiled it by simply having his creatures ignore my Radiant Angel of Death and go kekeke on our hapless Bard who was as harmless as a kitten.
- in the next game, I played the DSP successor to the Crusader, namely the Warder with Zweihänder Sentinel / Ordained Champion ATs. And boy oh boy that worked. His offensive potential was still okay (though maybe 1/3 of what the Pala could nova out) but he would create a Zone of Death that virtually nothing could get through.
Both games with 25 Point Buy, which both classes kinda need as they are a bit MAD.

Both classes definitely are a 10/10 Would Play Again, but despite having similar visuals ("Heavily armoured knight with big honking two-handed weapon, occasionally growing wings") they felt and played rather differently.

[pabelfly]

Crusaders are a pretty nice class. They're hard to make badly, and their manoeuvre system means its easy for them to keep up with reasonable expectations of damage output and character ability, at least in terms of martials.

3e Paladins can be hard to get right without a decent amount of optimization knowledge and book access. You can find combos to do obscene amounts of damage, and a well-built Paladin can outdamage a Crusader, but I prefer Crusader if we're talking about more than a two-level dip.

[paladinn]

I'm chiming in as someone who is Not a ToB fan. Not everyone wants to play in a wuxia movie. I've been working on some actual class features for 3.5 fighters, instead of them being just collections of feats, and instead of going to the Warblade as the fighter replacement.

Paladins are my favorite class (obviously). While I like a lot of what was done with them in PF1, I find a lot of the "upgrades" to be overkill. I like the smite mods, and I think they could be back-fit into a 3.5 game. But all the mercies and such I think I'd leave.

How can the 3.5 paladin be "upgraded" without going overboard?

[pabelfly]

I'm chiming in as someone who is Not a ToB fan. Not everyone wants to play in a wuxia movie. I've been working on some actual class features for 3.5 fighters, instead of them being just collections of feats, and instead of going to the Warblade as the fighter replacement.

Paladins are my favorite class (obviously). While I like a lot of what was done with them in PF1, I find a lot of the "upgrades" to be overkill. I like the smite mods, and I think they could be back-fit into a 3.5 game. But all the mercies and such I think I'd leave.

How can the 3.5 paladin be "upgraded" without going overboard?

I'd let them pick two Domains like Cleric. Maybe a bonus feat every fourth level, and it can be a Fighter feat, a Divine feat or a Domain feat.

[Firechanter]

With 3.5 material only, I would always go Harmonious Knight and take From Smite to Song. Ofc in 3.5 Inspire Courage can be improved way, way beyond what is possible in PF. Like, +5/+5 at level 8 without any cheese.

The most crucial PF upgrades to the Paladin are:
- Smite (lasts until the target is destroyed)
- multiple Lay on Hands and swift self-healing
- Divine Weapon bond as alternative for a horse you cannot use.
- less MAD by basing casting on CHA, and adding some fantastic spells like Angelic Aspect.

What I don't care too much about is the Channeling - I usually trade it away - and the mercies aren't too crucial either.

[Gnaeus]

I'm chiming in as someone who is Not a ToB fan. Not everyone wants to play in a wuxia movie.

These two sentences are completely unrelated. Perhaps you are thinking of some other game system that has a class called crusader that maybe plays anything vaguely, remotely like something anywhere near a wuxia movie.