Are paladins overpowered?

[darkblust]

Are paladins overpowered in your opinion?With their uber powerfull pet and what...I play a beguiler,and it seems as if my friends paladin is 10 x more powerful then me,or even the druid..Is this likely,or is it just whats on paper?By the way,he is about the opposite of a min/maxer.He is paladin 6/rogue 1.we are all level 6.Or is it beacause he is a melee person,and we are spellcasters?

[lsfreak]

Uh... no.

It's probably due to the way you play, or how you define "powerful." If you mean do straight damage, than he's going to be more powerful than your beguiler - but your beguiler is more powerful is you actually take into consideration what you can do ("Hey! You! Fight for me!" You did no damage but won the ecnounter.)

Similarly with the druid; if he's not making a lot of his wildshape ability or his animal companion, the paladin will do more damage. The druid can easily outpace the paladin, however, by making use of these two features.

Paladins have problem in that they need all but Intelligence to be a high score, his power will taper off. It's also level 5-ish that a well-played caster starts really outclassing melee in terms of power.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Sounds like something weird is going on. Paladin mounts are very, very weak. They get decent if you get Leadership and combine you cohort and mount (although the special mount quality increases LA, IIRC; it's in the DMG on cohorts).

Paladins suck, overall. It's a 4 or 5 -level class you take, maybe with 1-2 levels of Fighter, before you go into a prestige class (Cavalier, Pious Templar, or something else, according to taste). They can be decent, but will be outperformed by fighters.

I can tell you're new to the forums, so I'll be gentle: spellcasters snap the melee classes in two over their knee without breaking a sweat and laugh about it. Beguilers aren't the most powerful ones, but they're a save-or-suck focused class (enchantments and illusions). How the druid isn't a hundred times better than the paladin, I can't even guess, because the animal companion is about two, three times as effective as the special mount (aren't bears available at 6th level?). Druids are better than any other class even without being optimized.

It sounds to me like there's something weird going on, though. How is the paladin so powerful? What kind of mount does he have, how many HD, etc.? Did the paladin start out as a rogue, or is that his latest level, and did he take paladin levels after taking the rogue level? (You can't continue taking paladin levels after you multiclass, unless it's a prestige class that specifically allows you, or you're playing in Faerûn and multiclassing into something your deity specifically allows for paladins.)


In short, "no, paladins suck," "spellcasters are always better and druids are the best," and "someone's cheating or abusing the rules."

Edit:

Paladins have problem in that they need all but Intelligence to be a high score, his power will taper off. It's also level 5-ish that a well-played caster starts really outclassing melee in terms of power.

Actually, they don't need that much Dex (12 will work until they get mithral full plate, when they need 16; although that's optional, really), but they do need Int to make use of those class skills - they've got a much bigger and better selection than fighters, but the same amount of skill points.

[Korivan]

power is how the character is played, not just the class abilities. heck, i dont even think druids are overpowered. a fighter properly thought out could kick serious patooty, at least in our games they do.

[Waspinator]

What information could you give us on what spells, gear, feats, etc everyone in your party is using? That would help answer your questions. Though, of course a Paladin is doing more damage than a Beguiler. Beguilers don't do damage; they cripple people so that others can do the damage.

[Mando Knight]

power is how the character is played, not just the class abilities. heck, i dont even think druids are overpowered. a fighter properly thought out could kick serious patooty, at least in our games they do.

And a Druid can transform into a bear and go Godless Killing Machine on you. While casting spells.

[Tsotha-lanti]

And a Druid can transform into a bear and go Godless Killing Machine on you. While casting spells.

Yeah. My experience is, without exception, that druids outdo 2-3 other party members in effectiveness, without any real difference in tactics and without actual optimization (just the Natural Spell feat).

[Piedmon_Sama]

Unless he's been harried all day by enemies, in which case he'll be out his best abilities. A fighter or a rogue can chug some healing potions and be good as new, while casters basically get one or two fights to shine a day.

Seriously, I can't be the only DM who will have enemies fight intelligently and attempt to exhaust the players, and pursue them instead of patiently waiting in Dungeon Chamber #1168 to die, right?

[Learnedguy]

And a Druid can transform into a bear and go Godless Killing Machine on you. While casting spells.

I think he meant power in a more philosophical way. Its not about how hard you hit, but where.

The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world, regardless of class.

In contrast to popular belief, lateral thinking is not a wizard class feature.

[EagleWiz]

What is all this stuff about druids being the most powerfull class? Batman kills druidzilla.

[Flickerdart]

What is all this stuff about druids being the most powerfull class? Batman kills druidzilla.

Not at those low levels, when the Druid is three Fighters and a caster, and the Wizard can't stand next to combat without popping an artery.

[Doc Roc]

Paladins have some superb builds, but are not by default a very strong class. In fact, they are fairly poorly rated, though the have a good degree of optimization potential.

[Piedmon_Sama]

Yeah, I'm gonna be gone for the rest of today so I'll post this now while it's still appropos:

I've never bought into the "Casters Rule All" way of thinking. Maybe at higher levels.... but then, it's generally accepted that at high levels the rules and the whole CR system become hopelessly broken anyway. In the level-range I think of as the "meat" of a campaign (e.g where most people will be playing), a Caster can buff himself or shoot out Save-or-Sucks and be hell and Jesus on the battlefield for one or two fights a day. And if he runs into trouble after that, he's no better than a mediocre warrior (Druid, Wizard) or just totally helpless (Wizard/Sorcerer).

OTOH, a Rogue/Fighter or Rogue/Barbarian (or maybe even Rogue/Knight? Never tried that one) has the health to fight lesser enemies all day without getting overwhelmed, and the skills to creep off or MacGuyver a solution when just plowing away isn't the answer. Casters only dominate when the party deigns to move at the pace of its slowest member and stick to 1-2 fights a day. Hell, the DM's Guide tells you to do let them do this, but it's crap. No intelligent monster should sit on its ass and politely wait for the PCs to knock on the door. If they live in a dungeon, then the anterior chambers should have some method--a scroll of message, a bell, carrier lizards, anything--of alerting the interior chambers, whereupon the monsters further in ought to be banging on the PCs' door.

This is difficult to talk about because it involves a number of hypotheticals, and is different depending on the circumstances of every battle. But I've never felt like the casters were in danger of overshadowing the mundane members of any party I've run: quite the reverse, usually they tend to fall behind and rely on the Fighter/Barbarian/Knight to keep them out of trouble once they've Wild Shaped/Fireballed as much as they can.

[Decoy Lockbox]

Paladins in 3e, while cool, are pretty bad. I think the best I ever did as a paladin was a smite evil + two handed lance + power attack + spirited charge guy named "Sir Lancedemere".

Paladin goodness by edition:
1e -- Fantastic (permanent protection from evil for you and all allies within 5')
2e -- Okay (like 1e paladin, but without certain awesome features)
3e -- Crap (as discussed above)
4e -- Alright (marking ability is weak, but class is solid)

[Yora]

Unless he's been harried all day by enemies, in which case he'll be out his best abilities. A fighter or a rogue can chug some healing potions and be good as new, while casters basically get one or two fights to shine a day.

Seriously, I can't be the only DM who will have enemies fight intelligently and attempt to exhaust the players, and pursue them instead of patiently waiting in Dungeon Chamber #1168 to die, right?

No, there are at least two in existance.

[Mordokai]

4e -- Alright (marking ability is weak, but class is solid)

I'm not sure what you mean by that. In my experience, paladins have one of the best marking abilities out there. Granted, I didn't pay much attention to other classes(in the way, I didn't play them), but as far as I saw from what my buddies played, paladins are the best at marking enemies.

As for the rest... mechanically looking, paladins are one of the weakest classes out there. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy playing them. I do. In fact, they are my favourite class. But I really fail to see how a paladin can be the most powerful party member. Either you're playing really wrong(no offense meant), or you're having some heavy house ruling.

[tyckspoon]

OTOH, a Rogue/Fighter or Rogue/Barbarian (or maybe even Rogue/Knight? Never tried that one) has the health to fight lesser enemies all day without getting overwhelmed, and the skills to creep off or MacGuyver a solution when just plowing away isn't the answer.

More accurately, they have the health to fight through one reasonably challenging fight. Maybe two. Then, if they're lucky, the DM allows cheap healing items and they can keep themselves going. If they're not, they have to refer to their local friendly spellcaster to get their HPs back, which puts the whole thing back on relying on the caster's "limited" resources.

And a caster who blows all his best spells on just one or two fights is either alone, doing all the heavy lifting for a severely underpowered party, or just flat out doing it wrong. Most of the four-five spell Certain Win combos people invent are either created as answers to "But can a solo wizard handle THIS?!?" challenge or for PvP scenarios. If the wizard's party is anywhere near functional, he can usually get away with just using one or two spells each fight and letting the rest of the group take over from there (and they don't necessarily have to be his highest levels, either- spells like Web and Glitterdust remain useful pretty much forever.) Doing it wrong is when the caster feels like he has to cast his highest available spell slot in every round of every combat; that's just a blatant waste of power.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Druids, specifically, don't have to blow their spells at all. Many of their buffs last for most of the day, and they mostly fight by ganging up on enemies in melee, throwing a well-chosen spell or two per fight.

[Dagren]

More accurately, they have the health to fight through one reasonably challenging fight. Maybe two. Then, if they're lucky, the DM allows cheap healing items and they can keep themselves going. If they're not, they have to refer to their local friendly spellcaster to get their HPs back, which puts the whole thing back on relying on the caster's "limited" resources.

And a caster who blows all his best spells on just one or two fights is either alone, doing all the heavy lifting for a severely underpowered party, or just flat out doing it wrong. Most of the four-five spell Certain Win combos people invent are either created as answers to "But can a solo wizard handle THIS?!?" challenge or for PvP scenarios. If the wizard's party is anywhere near functional, he can usually get away with just using one or two spells each fight and letting the rest of the group take over from there (and they don't necessarily have to be his highest levels, either- spells like Web and Glitterdust remain useful pretty much forever.) Doing it wrong is when the caster feels like he has to cast his highest available spell slot in every round of every combat; that's just a blatant waste of power.

How about wands? Don't they greatly extend the caster's power? I figure if the fighter is allowed healing potions to help with longevity, the caster should have some items too. Or are wands a lot more expensive? I can't remember.

[T.G. Oskar]

Since the paladin we're speaking of is the 3.5 edition (as it's the only one with a special Pokémount, I should speak a few things.

First, the Paladin is one of the few classes that, much like the Druid, has nifty class features that weren't included in their class (Druids ALWAYS get Natural Spell, while Paladin players whine to DMs to get them Holy Avengers). The Holy Avenger is an awesome weapon, but it's something that roleplaying tends to nuke down. It's one of the very few things that promote at least getting some more Paladin levels (if only for free targeted Greater Dispel Magic).

Second, the mount. Go into a dungeon, and the mount has to stay. That's practically half of the class features of the Paladin out, while the Druid can still hang out with his Dire Bear pal all day. Furthermore, it pretty much forces you to take Mounted Combat and Ride-by Attack to make effective use of the mount's abilities. There's at least one spell in the Player's Handbook and about 10 more spells in between Spell Compendium and Complete Champion that are devoted exclusively to your special mount. That's reduction of possible abilities, not granting you abilities.

Though, you can change your special mount into something else. And that's something I love; you don't have to be tied to your Pokémount. Charging Smite is one of the favored ones (since it is completely effective at the moment you take it), but it's not always the flavor you seek. Funny enough, Complete Champion and Dungeonscape have some of the better alternate class features, but apparently exchanged (Underdark Warrior and Divine Spirit, respectively). The CC class feature is excellent in dungeons, while the DScape class feature is mostly an ability for a divine champion (gee whiz!)

Third, too frontloaded and nothing for later. Your only bonuses for raising Paladin levels are to get new spells (which are mostly self-buffs and some unique abilities, very rarely damage spells), better Lay on Hands (which gets exhausted pretty quickly), and more damage on Smite Evil. Each of the three can be enhanced with the aid of certain prestige classes, but you have to decide which one to enter. It practically begs you to get into a Prestige Class after level 4, some at level 5.

Fourth, the spells. Some of the Cleric spells would benefit the Paladin so greatly, but they were blatantly made Cleric-only. Read just the PHB and realize the truth, read Spell Compendium or any of the post-SpC books and weep as how the developers nerf Paladin spellcasting. Heck, half caster level sucks major pelotas.

Fifth, no matter how much optimization you do (ubercharger, getting Holy Avenger/Valorous Lance/Mithral Full Plate, dipping Cleric, Fist of Raziel, Sword of Arcane Order, etc. etc. etc), the Cleric beats you. No, really. In core only, Divine Power allows the Cleric to step on the Paladin's footsteps and wipe him out. Add Righteous Might, and only the most optimized fighter begins to weep. A Paladin, regardless of optimization, is no better than a smart Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Psion or Artificer.

And finally, the Code. No one gets it. DMs tend to misinterpret it. Pretty much the only reason why the Code exists is for roleplaying terms, and it causes more trouble than it should. It's nice to bind the actions of the character so it doesn't become just another murderous looter adventurer, so that it means something else. But most of the time, a good roleplayer will find it a nuisance.

In a nutshell: Paladins don't necessarily suck, but they can't reach the toes of the big guys no matter how much they try. You have to pretty much PrC your way into the big leagues, and even the Fighters will set you aside. Unless you turn into Ubercharger, somehow get as much AC and saves as possible, turn into a Ret-Paladin or something, you won't be as much of a challenge as a well-trained Fighter, and a laugh at a G-5 Top Tier member.

[woodenbandman]

Absolutely everyone in this thread got trolled, incidentally.

[Flickerdart]

Absolutely everyone in this thread got trolled, incidentally.

We are doing this for the sake of the newbies. Even if the question was insincere, we shall lead all who read it back to the path of light. For such is the duty of a Fighter Without Bonus Feats!

[T.G. Oskar]

We are doing this for the sake of the newbies. Even if the question was insincere, we shall lead all who read it back to the path of light. For such is the duty of a Fighter Without Bonus Feats!

Quoting for Great Justice! ...Erm, you don't mind if I alter a bit what you say to make it more relevant?

Still, any question deserves an answer. It probably fumed a few, but it also provided a calm and logical set of answers. It's not easy to play a Paladin, much less in a campaign where the goal is to acquire power and be the ultimate, god-like being over all. Or at a mostly mechanical campaign.

We are accepting this troll, or apparent troll, or thinly-veiled insult, or even unintended and misinterpreted comment. We don't want new players to have a bad idea of a Paladin, right? Nor do we want to promote the bad ways to play a Paladin, no sir.

That doesn't mean we aren't going to solve it with humor. Like the Giant, for example.

[Flickerdart]

You can take out the square brackets, it's close enough, I don't mind.

I'm honoured, too.

[ZeroNumerous]

And if he runs into trouble after that, he's no better than a mediocre warrior (Druid, Wizard) or just totally helpless (Wizard/Sorcerer).

I assume you meant (Druid, Cleric) instead of mentioning Wizard twice, so I'll address both at the same time.

Druid/Cleric: All Day Buffs.

Done.

To clarify: Clerics can simply DMM: Persist everything they buff with. Bam. Negated that whole "I run out of gas" problem with two feats and an entry feat. Clerics are walking, talking beatdowns when they DMM Persist. Even without DMM Persist clerics can walk around with Greater Magic Weapon, Magic Vestment and buff up with Divine Power to be equal to a fighter.

Druids at level 8 can Wild Shape 8 hours a day, 3 times a day. And unless you never ever allow them to sleep this will be all through the adventuring day. Past level 8, a druid runs out of steam as quickly as a fighter since he just bear-forms and wanders around mauling crap. Further, his wild shape replaces his STR and DEX scores. So the only thing the druid cares about is his CON and WIS, making him just as SAD as the Wizard.

A fighter? Rogue? Knight? Any melee class not from ToB? Cleric/Druid replaces them. Druid does so with his class features alone. You can claim otherwise, but railing against it won't change it. Does it suck? Oh ya. But Wizards gave us ToB to fix that. And it did, sort of.

[Pharaoh's Fist]

Druids at level 8 can Wild Shape 8 hours a day, 3 times a day. And unless you never ever allow them to sleep this will be all through the adventuring day. Past level 8, a druid runs out of steam as quickly as a fighter since he just bear-forms and wanders around mauling crap. Further, his wild shape replaces his STR and DEX scores. So the only thing the druid cares about is his CON and WIS, making him just as SAD as the Wizard.

Technically Dual Attribute Dependant.

[Belobog]

Technically Dual Attribute Dependant.

Theorethically, the Druid doesn't really need Con; instead of engaging enemies as a bear, he could take to the skies as a starling and throw down some lightning bolts or something (although, probably not at level five). So, while it would impact him, it's not as necessarily to him as a fighter; a druid could still work with an high Wisdom and nothing but 8s everywhere else. Just means that you should expect the natural result when a dragon steps on his head.

[Decoy Lockbox]

I'm not sure what you mean by that. In my experience, paladins have one of the best marking abilities out there. Granted, I didn't pay much attention to other classes(in the way, I didn't play them), but as far as I saw from what my buddies played, paladins are the best at marking enemies.

As for the rest... mechanically looking, paladins are one of the weakest classes out there. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy playing them. I do. In fact, they are my favourite class. But I really fail to see how a paladin can be the most powerful party member. Either you're playing really wrong(no offense meant), or you're having some heavy house ruling.

So far the only 4e characters I've played have been a paladin and a fighter. The fighter does more damage, and his mark doesn't have crazy stipulations about who you can put it on. Anybody who he makes an attack roll against gets marked, period. So he can mark multiple people using close bursts (of which the fighter class gets many) or multiclass stuff like thunderwave or swordburst. The paladin can pretty much only mark one guy, ever. Lets compare mark damages as well, using the damage that my fighter and my paladin could deal as level 9 characters (the level of my paladin, fighter got retired at lvl 12 in another campaign):

paladin: 5 radiant damage (15 CHA)
Fighter: 1d8+8 (avg 12.5)

Fighter's chance to hit average monsters was about 75% too. And this fighter's damage was really bad for his level too, since he was doing longsword 'n' shield, and existed before Iron Armbands came out. Imagine a 20 str fighter with a +2 reckless fullblade and lvl 6 armbands, his mark would do 1d12+13 on a hit, avg 19.5 -- compare that to the dinky 5 radiant damage my paladin deals.

Our group did a playtest game at lvl 28 as well -- I made a fullblade fighter whose basic attack did something like 2d12+45 (avg 58). A paladin at that level with maxed out CHA would do something like 16 radiant damage. Can you see how that 16 damage might not be all that scary for the monster on the receiving end?

On the CO boards, the paladin is commonly held to be the worst defender in 4e, and I completely support that opinion. My DM is even houseruling my mark to do 3+cha+str damage (which would be 10) to make my paladin more menacing. So again, not a bad class, just not great.

[ericgrau]

Are paladins overpowered in your opinion?With their uber powerfull pet and what...I play a beguiler,and it seems as if my friends paladin is 10 x more powerful then me,or even the druid..Is this likely,or is it just whats on paper?By the way,he is about the opposite of a min/maxer.He is paladin 6/rogue 1.we are all level 6.Or is it beacause he is a melee person,and we are spellcasters?

It is common in inexperienced groups for all martial classes to outdo casters, even when both the caster and martial guy are inexperienced. Especially at lower levels. Just read through your spell descriptions and do some more planning or take advantage of the tips I'm sure you'll get from people here and things should turn around. Leveling up a couple times or so may help too. Just don't be tempted by the power of the dark side, i.e. builds using 3-4 different books in combinations that don't make sense without metagaming .

[Flickerdart]

It is common in inexperienced groups for all martial classes to outdo casters, even when both the caster and martial guy are inexperienced. Just read through your spell list and do some more planning or take advantage of the tips I'm sure you'll get from people here and things should turn around. Just don't be tempted by the power of the dark side, i.e. builds using 3-4 different books in combinations that don't make sense without metagaming .

Outside PHBII (where the class is, of course), SpC (for Advanced Learning) and Complete Mage (Unsettling Enchantment), Beguilers get little from splats. Complete Adventurer could be nice for Conceal Spellcasting, but that's about it.

Not like they need cheesing either, they're a full casting Rogue.