Dungeons and Dragons Megathread

[The Narrator]

In the same sense that the classes of 4e were controller, defender, leader, and striker, sure.

Click to shrink...

I mean, the NPC classes of 3E were also very simple and broadly defined: commoner, aristocrat, warrior, expert. They didn't have any special abilites, but they did have a clearly defined progression and CR so if a GM was like "I need a generic fighty dude appropriate to fight my players at this level," they knew what that would look like mechanically instead of having to guess.

I got the impression that 4E's NPC roles served a similar purpose, but I only played it briefly so perhaps I'm mistaken.

 

[azoicennead]

I mean, the NPC classes of 3E were also very simple and broadly defined: commoner, aristocrat, warrior, expert. They didn't have any special abilites, but they did have a clearly defined progression and CR so if a GM was like "I need a generic fighty dude appropriate to fight my players at this level," they knew what that would look like mechanically instead of having to guess.

I got the impression that 4E's NPC roles served a similar purpose, but I only played it briefly so perhaps I'm mistaken.

Click to shrink...

Ah, I see you've confused "giving them the right number of hit dice" and "actually useful for creating interesting opponents". If you just wanted to give them a generic "do damage" attack with no mechanical flavor and no other powers, the roles gave you enough to do that. If you want something that's actually useful and does more than just a generic attack (i.e. something that provides a meaningful challenge and not just a damage check), you had to figure that out a different way.
Or, for concrete examples, they would give you the guard but not the spy or acolyte.

 

[The Narrator]

Ah, I see you've confused "giving them the right number of hit dice" and "actually useful for creating interesting opponents". If you just wanted to give them a generic "do damage" attack with no mechanical flavor and no other powers, the roles gave you enough to do that. If you want something that's actually useful and does more than just a generic attack (i.e. something that provides a meaningful challenge and not just a damage check), you had to figure that out a different way.
Or, for concrete examples, they would give you the guard but not the spy or acolyte.

Click to shrink...

You mean the spy that essentially has what are rogue class abilities and the acolyte that essentially has cleric spellcasting? Meaning it would be very easy to make them by statting an NPC with class levels? The thing that we suggested from the start?

 

[PhoenixMercurous]

...yeah, that seems way more OP to me than anything in Path of War.

Click to shrink...

Thinking about this more, I'm guessing the GM's problem with the Path of War classes boils down to his thoughts on "linear fighter vs quadratic wizard," which were something along the lines of, "On paper, yes, wizards get stronger than fighters. But in my experience, this isn't a problem because the fighters keep getting new toys as they level up."

I'm not sure my friend's experience is typical though. I don't know how many fighters try to slowly have spellcasters enchant each finger on a glove until it has a maximum level scorching ray on every finger. When my friend wouldn't let that fly, that player had the glove enchanted to shoot two maximized fireballs instead. That glove has since transcended the campaign it was from to become a meme within his Pathfinder friends.

I'm guessing the Path of War classes are designed to keep up with casters without dumb shit like The Glove of Double Maximized Fireball, so with that sort of stuff they'd probably be horrendously OP.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

Thinking about this more, I'm guessing the GM's problem with the Path of War classes boils down to his thoughts on "linear fighter vs quadratic wizard," which were something along the lines of, "On paper, yes, wizards get stronger than fighters. But in my experience, this isn't a problem because the fighters keep getting new toys as they level up."

I'm not sure my friend's experience is typical though. I don't know how many fighters try to slowly have spellcasters enchant each finger on a glove until it has a maximum level scorching ray on every finger. When my friend wouldn't let that fly, that player had the glove enchanted to shoot two maximized fireballs instead. That glove has since transcended the campaign it was from to become a meme within his Pathfinder friends.

I'm guessing the Path of War classes are designed to keep up with casters without dumb shit like The Glove of Double Maximized Fireball, so with that sort of stuff they'd probably be horrendously OP.

Click to shrink...

I think the "new toys" argument was more appropriate in earlier editions, and yes I realize the just saying "legacy code" annoys some people, but the idea was designed for a time when a 9th level fighter could, in official published works, stumble on a +3 sword that had "Intelligence 15, Ego 15; chaotic neutral; speaks ogre, troll, hill giant, common; detect invisible objects 10 radius, detect gems kind and number 5 radius, strength once per day. The sword heals its wielders wounds, repairing damage equal to half the hit points of damage that it in- flicts on an enemy in any particular round. Imp can also dispel magic at a base 50% chance of success, modified as per the description of the 3rd-level priest spell. However, the manifestation of magic to be dispelled must be some- thing tangible or visible, such as a glyph of warding, wall of force, magic mouth, wall of fire, etc."

 

[The Narrator]

Thinking about this more, I'm guessing the GM's problem with the Path of War classes boils down to his thoughts on "linear fighter vs quadratic wizard," which were something along the lines of, "On paper, yes, wizards get stronger than fighters. But in my experience, this isn't a problem because the fighters keep getting new toys as they level up."

Click to shrink...

Not sure how much that helps when the wizard gets just as much cash for toys and doesn't need to spend any of it on weapons.

I'm not sure my friend's experience is typical though. I don't know how many fighters try to slowly have spellcasters enchant each finger on a glove until it has a maximum level scorching ray on every finger. When my friend wouldn't let that fly, that player had the glove enchanted to shoot two maximized fireballs instead. That glove has since transcended the campaign it was from to become a meme within his Pathfinder friends.

I'm guessing the Path of War classes are designed to keep up with casters without dumb shit like The Glove of Double Maximized Fireball, so with that sort of stuff they'd probably be horrendously OP.

Click to shrink...

So fighters are as good as spellcasters because they can buy magic items to turn themselves into spellcasters?

I suppose a PoW character might get an item like that, but I don't really see them wanting to when they could take some Mithril Current or Elemental Flux maneuvers to attack at range instead.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

Not sure how much that helps when the wizard gets just as much cash for toys and doesn't need to spend any of it on weapons.



So fighters are as good as spellcasters because they can buy magic items to turn themselves into spellcasters?

I suppose a PoW character might get an item like that, but I don't really see them wanting to when they could take some Mithril Current or Elemental Flux maneuvers to attack at range instead.

Click to shrink...

Honestly, I mostly like PoW, because it follows my design thoughts of "don't nerf casters, just make everyone awesome" except that I feel it needs a resource that it depletes rather than being able to go all day. Stamina points or something in the vein of Psionics

 

[PhoenixMercurous]

Not sure how much that helps when the wizard gets just as much cash for toys and doesn't need to spend any of it on weapons.

So fighters are as good as spellcasters because they can buy magic items to turn themselves into spellcasters?

I suppose a PoW character might get an item like that, but I don't really see them wanting to when they could take some Mithril Current or Elemental Flux maneuvers to attack at range instead.

Click to shrink...

Could you keep your tongue in your mouth and discuss this like an adult, not like a teenager trying to be a cheeky PIA?

Casters need to spend money on material components, especially for the high end spells, and on consumable magic items. Also, what caster doesn't carry a backup weapon in case the spells they prepared or know aren't effective against a particular threat? Or they run out of the appropriate spells? Or they don't want to waste a spell on a particular target? Or their weapon is also a magic rod or staff?

The glove was an example of one of the the craziest thing my friend allowed a player to do, not the only cool toy that could make a martial character cool. There are other cool gadgets out there, or player invented ones the GM has allowed. If a Path of War character can match a double maximized fireball (60 damage in a 20ft radius area each) without any uses/day limitations, I can see why they're OP.

Looking into Mithral Current, it's stupid at high levels. For example, you can get this at level 15:

Mithral Wave
Discipline: Mithral Current (Strike); Level: 8
Prerequisites: Three Mithral Current maneuvers
Initiation Action: 1 standard action
Range: Melee attack or close (25′ + 5/2 levels)
Target: One creature
Duration: Instant

DESCRIPTION

A wave of blinding silver energy erupts from your blade to strike a distant foe. Make a melee attack. If it hits, it deals weapon damage as normal plus an additional 14d6 points of damage. If you drew your weapon as part of this strike, you can make your attack against any creature within close range (25 feet + 5 feet per 2 initiator levels), even if that creature isn't within your reach, and the target must succeed at a Fortitude save (DC 18 + your initiation modifier) or become dazed for 1d4 rounds, a Reflex save (DC + your initiation modifier) or be knocked prone, and a Will save (DC 18 + your initiation modifier) or become vulnerable to silver until the end of your next turn. Creatures with vulnerability to silver take 50% more damage from silver weapons. This maneuver is a supernatural ability.

Click to shrink...

Combined with a stance in the same tree that lets you sheath a weapon as a free action once a round, this is some crazy damage and debuffs every round with no uses/day limitations like casters have. On top of that, making your opponent roll 3/saves per attack is really disruptive to the game flow. I don't even see any counterplay to this ability. The Slayer's DC 30 save-or-die require a round of studying the target beforehand and only worked beyond 30 ft against targets that were completely unaware of his presence. Casters have to make concentration checks to avoid AOOs, which can make spells fail, and have limited uses/day. Paladin's can only smite evil creatures. This? This is just a ton of BS every single round.

 

[Sightedjt]

Assuming POW classes share similarities with TOB, any initiator class cannot do that all the time- while I don't touch PF with a 10 foot pole, the 3.5 initiator classes all have a recharge mechanism- they have the maneuvers they know, the ones they prepped, and in combat, once an ability has been used, it cannot be used again until recovered, with the exact mechanism of recovery varying between classes.

So no, assuming this stands, which given POW is BoNS with serial numbers filed off I have no reason to doubt, they cannot just fire off that thing once a turn.
Also, that one needs to roll to hit, unlike spells, damage is static not level scaling, it is single target- consider how the damage of just full power attacking with a build specced for that matches up as well.

And let us not forget that at spell level 8, a caster can break not just the campaign, but the setting over his scrawny knee. With far greater amounts of strategic command and control, the ability to SoD in multiple ways, from far longer than close range, etc.


In short, all that initiator classes do is give an out the box way of giving martials the sort of damage output / combat viability / amount of different and interesting things to do in combat that previously took heavy multiclassing. This is not broken.

Any GM who thinks full casters are fine but initiator classes are broken is a dumbass who doesn't know the game as well as they think they do and are running off "look at the damage numbers this is too high" while ignoring everything casters can do to either get bigger numbers or bypass the need for numbers on top, let alone strategic scale bullshit.

 

[csjorm]

Dealing normal attack damage + 14d6 against a single target isn't very much by level 15 and using blasting spellcasters as a benchmark to see if something is OP is flat out doing it wrong. I'd hate to see what you think of a halfway competent Barbarian or even a Fighter if that's an issue for you.

Stamina points or something in the vein of Psionics

Click to shrink...

ToB/PoW/4E avoided doing that for a reason and that reason looks a lot like what 5E battlemaster does: using their best ability as much as possible with very little regard for all the rest of their maneuvers.

 

[Robert Liguori]

Could you keep your tongue in your mouth and discuss this like an adult, not like a teenager trying to be a cheeky PIA?

Casters need to spend money on material components, especially for the high end spells, and on consumable magic items. Also, what caster doesn't carry a backup weapon in case the spells they prepared or know aren't effective against a particular threat? Or they run out of the appropriate spells? Or they don't want to waste a spell on a particular target? Or their weapon is also a magic rod or staff?

The glove was an example of one of the the craziest thing my friend allowed a player to do, not the only cool toy that could make a martial character cool. There are other cool gadgets out there, or player invented ones the GM has allowed. If a Path of War character can match a double maximized fireball (60 damage in a 20ft radius area each) without any uses/day limitations, I can see why they're OP.

Looking into Mithral Current, it's stupid at high levels. For example, you can get this at level 15:


Combined with a stance in the same tree that lets you sheath a weapon as a free action once a round, this is some crazy damage and debuffs every round with no uses/day limitations like casters have. On top of that, making your opponent roll 3/saves per attack is really disruptive to the game flow. I don't even see any counterplay to this ability. The Slayer's DC 30 save-or-die require a round of studying the target beforehand and only worked beyond 30 ft against targets that were completely unaware of his presence. Casters have to make concentration checks to avoid AOOs, which can make spells fail, and have limited uses/day. Paladin's can only smite evil creatures. This? This is just a ton of BS every single round.

Click to shrink...

First, 14d6 damage is something that the spellcasters are doing to the room if they have nothing better to do their action (which, trust me, they will.)

Second, this is not being done every round; built into PoW maneuver mechanics is that you can't recover a maneuver the same round you use it. So, the flow would be use the attack, do something next round to regain maneuvers, and then use it again the other round, assuming you could manage to keep regaining maneuvers and were happy to more-or-less sacrifice 50% of your actions to do it.

PoW (and ToB) are pretty much a hard counter on the idea of running the party into exhaustion with large numbers of not-quite-trash-mobs, yes. But at the point that the party warblade is being really good with their silvered katana, the party wizard is creating demiplanes of their very own, foreseeing the immediate future, spamming Planar Binding, then spamming Create Greater Undead and sending 100% bullshit kill squads to adventure in their actual place.

 

[PhoenixMercurous]

First, 14d6 damage is something that the spellcasters are doing to the room if they have nothing better to do their action (which, trust me, they will.)

Second, this is not being done every round; built into PoW maneuver mechanics is that you can't recover a maneuver the same round you use it. So, the flow would be use the attack, do something next round to regain maneuvers, and then use it again the other round, assuming you could manage to keep regaining maneuvers and were happy to more-or-less sacrifice 50% of your actions to do it.

PoW (and ToB) are pretty much a hard counter on the idea of running the party into exhaustion with large numbers of not-quite-trash-mobs, yes. But at the point that the party warblade is being really good with their silvered katana, the party wizard is creating demiplanes of their very own, foreseeing the immediate future, spamming Planar Binding, then spamming Create Greater Undead and sending 100% bullshit kill squads to adventure in their actual place.

Click to shrink...

I hadn't dug into the system in detail, just glanced at the tree mentioned, so thank you for explain it more. If I GM some one-shots in the future I'll test the waters with allowing Path of War classes. I still think triple saves on one attack is stupid and don't like how it allows melee attacks at range. That has the potential to break lots of other mechanics. At least treat the attacks as ranged attacks if the target is out of reach. Like, come-on. It's an attack against a target at range, just call it a ranged attack. It can even still use strength, there are feats that let creatures use dex for melee attacks, the reverse wouldn't be a strange concept.

IMO throwing hordes of mobs at the party is just bad GMing, plain and simple. It's trying to beat the party by exploiting a weakness the game mechanics force them to have. It also sounds like something none of the players would enjoy, which solidifies it as bad GMing.

The main GM has a house rule that creating undead from unwilling targets is evil, so non-evil spellcasters have to limit their usage of it or they become evil. The party's cleric won't abide slavery and the paladin's not too keen on it either, so Planar Binding spam would get a wizard put on their shit list very quickly. Sure the shortened spell descriptions says the creature must be "persuaded to aid you," but the full spell description makes it quite clear the caster is trying to hold the creature captive until it agrees to perform a task or breaks free. That's basically slavery.

 

[The Narrator]

Honestly, I mostly like PoW, because it follows my design thoughts of "don't nerf casters, just make everyone awesome" except that I feel it needs a resource that it depletes rather than being able to go all day. Stamina points or something in the vein of Psionics

Click to shrink...

Most of the PoW classes do have some special abilities or resources that are use per day, like Ki points. But personally, one of the things that I like about Path of War is that it doesn't run on per-day mechanics. I think building the game around uses-per-day was a mistake that's bad for both narrative and balance and the game needs to move past. One of the things that's been great about playing in an all-PoW campaign for the last couple years, besides that everyone is getting to do cool stuff and feel effective, is that we don't have to keep stopping to nap while we work our way through the extended dungeon dives that every adventure module seems to include.



(Thank you to @Sightedjt @csjorm and @Robert Liguori for responding on this topic while I was busy at work and couldn't.)

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

I hadn't dug into the system in detail, just glanced at the tree mentioned, so thank you for explain it more. If I GM some one-shots in the future I'll test the waters with allowing Path of War classes. I still think triple saves on one attack is stupid and don't like how it allows melee attacks at range. That has the potential to break lots of other mechanics. At least treat the attacks as ranged attacks if the target is out of reach. Like, come-on. It's an attack against a target at range, just call it a ranged attack. It can even still use strength, there are feats that let creatures use dex for melee attacks, the reverse wouldn't be a strange concept.

IMO throwing hordes of mobs at the party is just bad GMing, plain and simple. It's trying to beat the party by exploiting a weakness the game mechanics force them to have. It also sounds like something none of the players would enjoy, which solidifies it as bad GMing.

The main GM has a house rule that creating undead from unwilling targets is evil, so non-evil spellcasters have to limit their usage of it or they become evil. The party's cleric won't abide slavery and the paladin's not too keen on it either, so Planar Binding spam would get a wizard put on their shit list very quickly. Sure the shortened spell descriptions says the creature must be "persuaded to aid you," but the full spell description makes it quite clear the caster is trying to hold the creature captive until it agrees to perform a task or breaks free. That's basically slavery.

Click to shrink...

That's not a house rule. That's literally how creating undead has been treated since d&d became a thing. The spell even used to have notes explaining that, with advice for good clerics about using Speak with Dead to get permission from fallen warriors on their own side.

And no, using mobs of expendable troops to wear down a powerful enemy isn't just a game mechanics exploit, it's literally existed as long a combat has. It's standard tactics in real life in the medieval era. Even more so in the lore of d&d settings.

 

[PhoenixMercurous]

That's not a house rule. That's literally how creating undead has been treated since d&d became a thing. The spell even used to have notes explaining that, with advice for good clerics about using Speak with Dead to get permission from fallen warriors on their own side.

Click to shrink...

Well excuse me for being new at this and not already knowing the history of every god dammed rule.

And no, using mobs of expendable troops to wear down a powerful enemy isn't just a game mechanics exploit, it's literally existed as long a combat has. It's standard tactics in real life in the medieval era. Even more so in the lore of d&d settings.

Click to shrink...

Real life tactics != fun gameplay.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

Real life tactics != fun gameplay.

Click to shrink...

That's an opinion. The folks I play with don't have a problem with a game that encourages player tactics other than "rush in and kill them in a straightforward fight".

 

[PhoenixMercurous]

That's an opinion. The folks I play with don't have a problem with a game that encourages player tactics other than "rush in and kill them in a straightforward fight".

Click to shrink...

Go read the rest of the fucking conversation. The conversation's had fuck all to do with rushing in blindly.

Edit: This particular line about hordes was started by a comment about how classes without usage/day limitations were a counter to hordes of weak, but somewhat threatening enemies. Tactics or lack-there-of hasn't come up in the slightest. Hell, this whole thing got started because of a conversation about the Tarrasque and how 3 level 20 Path of War characters weren't necessarily a good metric for how challenging the creature would be for a 5 member party of level 15, mythic tier 1 characters.

Honestly, the Alchemist is probably going to curse the Tarrasque within a couple rounds with his favorite "50% chance of not getting a turn" curse. Because he's a tactical thinker, at least in the long term. He's not so got at impromptu if his plan goes awry.

 

[The Narrator]

And no, using mobs of expendable troops to wear down a powerful enemy isn't just a game mechanics exploit, it's literally existed as long a combat has. It's standard tactics in real life in the medieval era. Even more so in the lore of d&d settings.

Click to shrink...

Putting aside any tactical considerations, from a narrative standpoint, I find that players enjoy getting to take out groups of less-powerful enemies. It lets them feel like the hero of an action movie. The main issues with it, IMHO, are that keeping track of lots of NPCs can put a lot of strain on the GM and that it can be really time-consuming IRL since non-casters can usually only attack one person at a time. PoW alleviates the latter somewhat by having some maneuvers that let you attack multiple people at once and being generally designed to encourage mobility.

 

[PhoenixMercurous]

But personally, one of the things that I like about Path of War is that it doesn't run on per-day mechanics. I think building the game around uses-per-day was a mistake that's bad for both narrative and balance and the game needs to move past.

Click to shrink...

That would be just fine if they went off and made their own system. Breaking the meta all the other classes in the system follow isn't a good thing. At the very least it makes it hard to mix POW classes with every other class in PF1E.

Also:

Dealing normal attack damage + 14d6 against a single target isn't very much by level 15 and using blasting spellcasters as a benchmark to see if something is OP is flat out doing it wrong. I'd hate to see what you think of a halfway competent Barbarian or even a Fighter if that's an issue for you.

Click to shrink...

Fuck you asshole. The party's Paladin has a Holy Avenger and does +15 damage per hit with Smite Evil. I know what big damage numbers are and how they make things hard to balance. I spent hours working on the one encounter I've run so far just to make sure the Paladin couldn't turbo-murder everything but the rest of the party could still be meaningful. Paladins only being able to smite evil allows for counter-play, so I mixed in some big dumb neutral creatures to give other characters moments to shine. The rogues also helped, as they gave the other party members opponents to deal with while the Paladin dealt with the big dumb spiders. Shame the Druid was such a flop though.
[Edit]Now that I've calmed down some, I probably should clarify that most of those hours were spent tuning the HDs of the creatures so they had high enough HP, AC, BAB, saves, and DCs but not too high, looking over all the feats to find appropriate ones for each creature, sifting through magical items, and building the Soracle's spell list. Figuring out how to the prevent the Paladin from killing each creature in 2 or less rounds was a constant thing in the back of my mind, but didn't take that much time overall.[\Edit]

...

Wait, 14d6 is only 14*3.5, which is only 49 damage on average. Oops. That's less than the Paladin's +60 from Smite Evil if he lands all 4 attacks (I think one is from haste, but I'd have to go check). I might have freaked out over a mental math mixup... sorry? Sorry about calling the POW stuff OP, at least in terms of damage. I'm not sorry for calling people assholes for insulting me and/or my friends.

Also triple saves on one attack are still stupid. I know from experience, the Slayer I mentioned earlier in the thread has an attack that inflicted sickened, poisoned, and save-or-die on a single attack. It's stupid.

--

Putting aside any tactical considerations, from a narrative standpoint, I find that players enjoy getting to take out groups of less-powerful enemies. It lets them feel like the hero of an action movie. The main issues with it, IMHO, are that keeping track of lots of NPCs can put a lot of strain on the GM and that it can be really time-consuming IRL since non-casters can usually only attack one person at a time. PoW alleviates the latter somewhat by having some maneuvers that let you attack multiple people at once and being generally designed to encourage mobility.

Click to shrink...

Yes, running 6 creatures at once was a challenge for me, though it was the first encounter I'd ever run. I wish I had a second monitor for my desktop to have all the sheets up and have the map up at the same time. I also wish Roll20 actually worked, but you can't always get what you want. We're looking for better alternatives for next campaign, at least.

 

[The Narrator]

Also triple saves on one attack are still stupid.

Click to shrink...

On that much, at least, I agree with you. I've never been a fan of the "Will save or become vulnerable to silver" secondary effect that's tagged onto all of Mithril Current's wave attacks; it slows down play and rarely amounts to much. But that particular maneuver prompting multiple saves is an oddity, not the norm.

 

[Tekomandor]

Fuck you asshole. The party's Paladin has a Holy Avenger and does +15 damage per hit with Smite Evil. I know what big damage numbers are and how they make things hard to balance. I spent hours working on the one encounter I've run so far just to make sure the Paladin couldn't turbo-murder everything but the rest of the party could still be meaningful. Paladins only being able to smite evil allows for counter-play, so I mixed in some big dumb neutral creatures to give other characters moments to shine. The rogues also helped, as they gave the other party members opponents to deal with while the Paladin dealt with the big dumb spiders. Shame the Druid was such a flop though.

Click to shrink...

how to respond to people you disagree with:
Generally not by going 'Fuck you asshole'. This is a violation of Rule Three: Be Civil, and has resulted in a 25 point infraction and a three-day threadban for @PhoenixMercurous .

Remember that we're here to talk about a game we play for fun, everybody.

 

[SinisterPorpoise]

The party's cleric won't abide slavery and the paladin's not too keen on it either, so Planar Binding spam would get a wizard put on their shit list very quickly. Sure the shortened spell descriptions says the creature must be "persuaded to aid you," but the full spell description makes it quite clear the caster is trying to hold the creature captive until it agrees to perform a task or breaks free. That's basically slavery.

Click to shrink...

...It's literally;

Outsider sits there and says "Pay me" until you haggle enough for them to agree, or they break out and gut you.

Click to shrink...

The only real "compelling" part of it is getting the Outsider to be present in the first place and keeping it from killing you while you negotiate it's fee.

 

[Havock]

Re: big numbers.
Put a paladin against any kind of evil thingy and this is what happens.

Case in point: Last week my level 11 paladin pulverized a CR16 Nightwalker. The rest of the party softened it a little but I was doing 33+1d10+2d6 damage per swing.

Granted: Pathfinder 1e paladins are probably among the stronger incarnations of the class.

 

[Chloe Sullivan]

Paladin Rage is very effective against evil, yeah. But it does make the class feel a little one dimensional sometimes.

 

[SinisterPorpoise]

Paladin Rage is very effective against evil, yeah. But it does make the class feel a little one dimensional sometimes.

Click to shrink...

That's called "specialization".
Sometimes it seems like Paladins should be a Cleric or Fighter Archetype instead of a Base Class.