[3.5?]Pathfinder Pally changes?

[Starbuck_II]

I was bored and did'nt want to do my lab report for Chem class so I checked out Pathfinder message boards.

They want to maker Paladin better. I can agree with that. But they don't want to make him too muchbetter than the Fighter (they actually said that even to the extent of killing evil).

Their idea was:

Spoiler

Show

Smite Evil: A Paladin may add his Charisma Bonus to attack rolls and +1/2 his Paladin level to damage rolls against evil opponents. To activate this ability, the Paladin must be aware that his opponent is evil. To do so, he must use a Standard Action to Detect Evil on his opponent. If the Paladin is unable to ascertain his opponent's alignment, or if his opponent is not evil, the Smite Evil ability can not be used against the opponent. If paladin attempts to use Smite Evil on an opponent without first using Detect Evil, the Paladin violates his code of honor and can't use Smite Evil for 24 hours.

Benefits: Always on...kinda, you activate ability have to detect evil first every time...as a standard action.

If you try anyways you lose ability for a day...

Is that not a good enough fix or rather is the punishment for trying to smite without using detect evil fair?

Personally, I don't get this need to punish/restrict class like Paladin/Monk for Flavor reasons anymore than 3.5 PHB did (the multiclass penalty is main beef I had).

So what do you think?

[Kurald Galain]

I think requiring the paladin to do nothing for the first round of combat is not very much fun for the player. Especially when the player already knows the monster is evil (e.g. because of color coding).

[Tengu_temp]

Spend a standard action to get a small bonus on your next attack? Can a paladin use Smite Evil more than once per round? How many times per day? Even if the answers are "yes" and "infinite times" respectively, this still is a perfect example that Pathfinder developers don't know about game balance.

[Morty]

At first I didn't know what you're talking about, because Smite Evil in Pathfinder is exactly identical with the one in SRD. Then I realized that you're talking about what they're planning, and unless they remove SE's times/day limit, that's quite a retarded idea.

[Learnedguy]

Yes, not exactly the smartest course of action. If they want that kind of flavor, they should just let the Paladin active a detect evil for free when smithing. If the enemy isn't evil the Paladin will be able to stop himself from attacking.

Flavor and utility at the same time, handy huh?

[Kaihaku]

Flavor-wise, I see where it's coming from.

It's an honor-thing, the Paladin has to make certain that he is actually smiting an evil creature. There's no room for error in a Paladin code, check first.

Mechanics-wise, it's not a good idea and shouldn't be done.

[Tequila Sunrise]

That's a very roundabout way to fix the paladin. Here's my quick and easy fix:

1. Ignore all alignment restrictions, CoC and multiclassing restrictions because they inhibit role playing.
2. Make Smite Evil an encounter based power rather than a daily based power. If a player role plays a non-good pally, it becomes Smite Chaos or Smite Good or Smite Law, as appropriate to the character. Ditto for Detect Evil.
3. Start the pally's Cha bonus to saves at level 1, but limit the bonus to +1 per pally level so that munchkins aren't tempted to level dip.
4. Replace the special mount and Cure Disease with bonus feats and the addition of Cure Disease to the pally's spell list, if the player wishes.

There, done.

TS

[DrowVampyre]

Spend a standard action to get a small bonus on your next attack? Can a paladin use Smite Evil more than once per round? How many times per day? Even if the answers are "yes" and "infinite times" respectively, this still is a perfect example that Pathfinder developers don't know about game balance.

I think you mean that Pathfinder fans - I doubt this came from the designers.

That said, forcing the paladin to spend a standard action first in every combat for smiting isn't great. It could be workable, however, if there were feats available to reduce it to a move, then a swift action (like the wildshape ones). Definitely remove the "if you guess, even if you're right, you can't use the powers for 24 hours" bit, though I;'m not sure what to replace it with to keep the pally from just smiting evil on everything...

[Aron Times]

I've given up on the Pathfinder forums due to the rabid fanboys drowning out all constructive criticism of the game. These are players who think that game balance is bad, and that any attempt to balance the game at all would make the game unplayable.

Tempest Stormwind and Oberoni would have a field day in the Pathfinder boards.

[AvatarZero]

Speaking of constructive criticism, can anyone think of a way to redo the Paladin that WOULD work in 3.5/Pathfinder?

What about instead of being a Fighter with occasional divine powers per day or just playing a Cleric and doing things with spell preparation, what if a Paladin had a series of Warlock-invocation-style reliable and distinctive abilities usable at will and granted as you level? Detect Evil works under that model. Replace the combat abilities with Essences and Shapes with Smites and Auras. Replace the cool out of combat invocations with more paladin-like abilities, compelling the truth and healing the sick and such.

I know everyone and his dog will say that Warlocks aren't that much more optimised than Paladins, but I think a lot of people find Warlocks fun to play as so maybe this is a good idea.

[Tengu_temp]

Speaking of constructive criticism, can anyone think of a way to redo the Paladin that WOULD work in 3.5/Pathfinder?

There is one very simple way:
1. Buy Tome of Battle.
2. Play a Crusader.
3. ????
4. Profit!

[AvatarZero]

There is one very simple way:
1. Buy Tome of Battle.
2. Play a Crusader.
3. ????
4. Profit!

Actually I was imagining something a bit more conservative, in keeping with Pathfinder.

And then I went off on one.
Nevermind.

Pathfinder: If 4th edition was created from 3rd edition and d20 by addition and removal, then Pathfinder was created to improve 3rd edition while removing naff all. Same skill system, same spell system, same combat system. It's just a book full of houserules. /cynicism

[Crow]

edit: Nevermind.

If you don't like it, don't play it.

[Rei_Jin]

I've actually done a Paladin fix for a convention style game day that I run. it's heavily dependant on the game world that we created to work (in its current form) but could be adapted for general use. The basic premise of our world is that there are only 9 gods (one for each alignment) and you can be a "Holy Champion" of any god except the TN one, for reasons that are very long and I won't be going into here because then I'd need to give you the history of the entire world.

(Please note this is a simplified version of the class)

You detect your opposite alignment (Detect Law, Detect Chaos, Detect Good, Detect Evil) at will, as per the spell. You get CHA bonus to saves, etc. Your smite ability is just Smite now. No alignment restriction required, but you can only use it against someone who is obviously hostile towards you (i.e. is attacking you) and it cannot be used outside of combat (i.e. initiative MUST be rolled).

You also don't get turning, you get the ability to call on your god to give you a spell. What level of spell you get is determined by the relevant check (similar to a turning check for the highest HD you can affect, except halved).

Each god has three different aspects, a greater, intermediate, and lesser. Each of these aspects grants different domains. You pick a domain from the lesser aspect and gain the domain ability, as well as the chance to draw spells from it with the spell calling ability I mentioned in the previous paragraph. As you go up in level, you can grab an intermediate domain, and then a greater one.

Your Holy Champion spell list is pulled entirely from the domains that your deity has. Therefore, all Holy Champions of different deities have different spell lists. You only get the standard spell progression of the current paladin (but it now works off Charisma, NOT Wisdom) however, meaning that the only way to get higher level spells is with the spell calling ability.

You don't get a holy mount, you get a relevant creature from the summon monster list.


Doing it this way has given the players great opportunity for roleplay, and leads to Holy Champions of different gods opposing one another on the battlefield.

[TeeEl]

There is one very simple way:
1. Buy Tome of Battle.
2. Play a Crusader.
3. ????
4. Profit!

This reminds me of a killer lasagna recipe I have:

1. Buy some steaks.
2. Grill the steaks.
3. Eat the steaks instead of lasagna.

[Jayabalard]

A couple of thoughts:

It doesn't say that you must use detect evil immediately before you use smite, just that you have to have ascertained that the smite-ee is, in fact, evil by using detect evil; no time frame is given. This means that if you have a recurring villain who manages to get away, you'll be able to smite immediately on later fights since you've already ascertained their evilness with a detect evil.

It's quite possible that you can get in a detect evil before a fight starts as long as you aren't being ambushed, which would keep you from losing out on actions at the beginning of a fight.

[Tengu_temp]

This reminds me of a killer lasagna recipe I have:

1. Buy some steaks.
2. Grill the steaks.
3. Eat the steaks instead of lasagna.

Lasagna and steaks have different taste. Paladins have the same fluff as LG Crusaders. Thank you, come again.

[Jayabalard]

Lasagna and steaks have different taste. Paladins have the same fluff as LG Crusaders. Thank you, come again.

Personally I think that their taste differs just as much as, if not more than, lasagna and Steak.

[Tengu_temp]

Personally I think that their taste differs just as much as, if not more than, lasagna and Steak.

Tell me then, which Paladin concept cannot be created as a Crusader instead?

[EvilElitest]

Spend a standard action to get a small bonus on your next attack? Can a paladin use Smite Evil more than once per round? How many times per day? Even if the answers are "yes" and "infinite times" respectively, this still is a perfect example that Pathfinder developers don't know about game balance.

true, but i prefer them to 4E designers, as they actually care about their game. That being said, Pathfinder is not much of an improvement on 3E sadly.

and the true paladin concept is different from teh crusader. THe paladin is a being who draws their power from good itself, the crusader is a fighter for a cause.
from
EE

[Draco Dracul]

true, but i prefer them to 4E designers, as they actually care about their game. That being said, Pathfinder is not much of an improvement on 3E sadly.

and the true paladin concept is different from teh crusader. THe paladin is a being who draws their power from good itself, the crusader is a fighter for a cause.
from
EE

How can one fight for an abstract and (to some extent) subjective consept?

[Crow]

Tell me then, which Paladin concept cannot be created as a Crusader instead?

Which Crusader concept cannot be created as a Paladin instead?

[MeklorIlavator]

Which Crusader concept cannot be created as a Paladin instead?

Many. Crusaders can be champions of any faction, while Paladins are restricted to the four corner alignments. Also, Crusaders can easily be gritty and morally questionable, while paladins need special controversial PrC's to do this. Finnally, Crusaders can easily reflect non-divine paths, while Paladins generally need an outside source for their powers.On the flip side, Crusaders can easily fill in any role that a Paladin would really fill.

[Spiryt]

That being said, Pathfinder is not much of an improvement on 3E sadly.

EE

I'm actualy curious who and why was spending so much time, at it... It's in fact copied SRD in most places

But anyway, many changes in it are really fun. I don't like all changes, but there's no need to use all changes. (Particuallry caster changes, it's not like they need anymore improvements )

To OP:

Paladin changes are actually quite fun IMO. If you don't like new smite evil - stick with older one.

[Jayabalard]

Tell me then, which Paladin concept cannot be created as a Crusader instead?

I didn't say anything about concepts... just flavor, which is quite different.

[TheDarkOne]

Have they also changed the way detect evil works? 'Cause usually it would take 3 rounds of concentrating to tell if a specific creature is evil.

[fractic]

I didn't say anything about concepts... just flavor, which is quite different.

But flavor and mechanics can be separated. In the case of the paladin and crusader it's very easy since the flavor is already very similar. Just take a crusader that upholds the paladin's code and the flavor between the two is pretty much identical.

[Jayabalard]

But flavor and mechanics can be separated.

I don't agree with your premise (especially in the case of the paladin), so it's not surprising I don't agree with your conclusion.

[Sinfire Titan]

I was bored and did'nt want to do my lab report for Chem class so I checked out Pathfinder message boards.

They want to maker Paladin better. I can agree with that. But they don't want to make him too muchbetter than the Fighter (they actually said that even to the extent of killing evil).

Their idea was:

Spoiler

Show

Smite Evil: A Paladin may add his Charisma Bonus to attack rolls and +1/2 his Paladin level to damage rolls against evil opponents. To activate this ability, the Paladin must be aware that his opponent is evil. To do so, he must use a Standard Action to Detect Evil on his opponent. If the Paladin is unable to ascertain his opponent's alignment, or if his opponent is not evil, the Smite Evil ability can not be used against the opponent. If paladin attempts to use Smite Evil on an opponent without first using Detect Evil, the Paladin violates his code of honor and can't use Smite Evil for 24 hours.

Benefits: Always on...kinda, you activate ability have to detect evil first every time...as a standard action.

If you try anyways you lose ability for a day...

Is that not a good enough fix or rather is the punishment for trying to smite without using detect evil fair?

Personally, I don't get this need to punish/restrict class like Paladin/Monk for Flavor reasons anymore than 3.5 PHB did (the multiclass penalty is main beef I had).

So what do you think?

Pathfinder does change the system a bit, but they never identified the real problems with the system to begin with. They were focusing more on broken spells and how to make melee damage believeable moreso than on bringing melee up to caster standards. As a result, they nerfed a lot of abilities that made melee even remotely playable. Power Attack has been limited to your Str modifier (not that it isn't easy to boost that stat, they simpley made stat boosters manditory for Charger builds), Smite (as you pointed out) has been nerfed into oblivion (standard action to even tell who you can smite, and accedentially smiting someone who isn't evil shuts it off for the day, not to mention halving the damage bonus), and Barbarian mechanics have been raped into oblivion and back.

What they changed, for the most part, needed it. But how they changed it didn't work.

[AvatarZero]

edit: Nevermind.

If you don't like it, don't play it.

But I do like it. I like the additions to the Sorcerer (I'd be playing a Pathfinder Stalwart Sorcerer with an Arcane Bond to the same weapon as the Weapon Focus if I knew anyone running a game near me). I like the change made to the skill buy system and the removal of the mystifying cross-class skills, the "it'll be easier to learn next level", and other such inconveniences set in place to motivate power players in a different direction to character players.

That said, I think the game designers are far too restrained a lot of areas. Take the Monk as an example; the monk in my 3.5 game kicks more ass than any other party member (take from that what you will about the rest of the group) but the popular opinion is that the class would be better with full BAB. Monks now get a class feature that treats them as having a full BAB for the purpose of combat maneuvres (ie. grappling). However, the Pathfinder team has chosen not to increase the actual BAB of the class on the grounds that it would make it less compatible with 3.5 DnD.

I think when your reason for a piece of game design isn't "people will enjoy it more", then something has gone wrong. Pathfinder isn't a set of bad new rules, but it does seem shackled with it's conservative nature.