Alright, lemme preface this by stating that I really want to love the Ancients oath. I'm all for breaking out of the usual paladin clichés, I feel like the concept offers great roleplaying opportunities. But after seeing the opinions of a lot of people, I'm surprised that so many people seem to love its features? They mainly mention the Aura of Warding, and sure, it is a good feature, but what about before?
I actually played an Ancient paladin in a short campaign from level 1 up to level 5-ish, and I hated it. Now, it was my first paladin, sure, and I did allocate my stats to focus on CON then STR then CHA, but I feel like compared to other paladins, the low levels are really, really boring. And getting the subclass at lvl 3 was... disappointing.
For an Oath focused on being a proto-ranger and being in tune with nature, Turn the Faithless is really weird to me : why would you want to turn Feys creatures but not aberrations or undead? Seems to me that it would be the subclass that would actually work the most with the feys. (Caveat : in this campaign we mainly fought constructs, giants, aberrations or zombies.)
On top of that, Nature's Wrath is really weak. A lot of monsters have a decent STR save, and even for those who don't, the ability offer them a choice between DEX and STR. Plus, they can try that save again every turn (although it's true that the DEX save gets disadvantage then). On top of that, it's only one target and up to 10ft? Why would I want to waste a turn trying that to do that when there are so many better feats or spells that would do the same and also do damage? I mean, it's even in the spell list, Ancients paladins get Entanglement, so they basically have two ways to get the same effect but one is clearly inferior. If it was an AoE thing with everyone in 10ft around the paladin could be targeted, this would be amazing, but otherwise, the grind is ROUGH. I don't see myself using that except on maybe an enemy spellcaster I'm trying to capture and even I would be scared of using an action of that when the spellcaster can just charm me or something (sinceWarding Aura does nothing against saves).
So yeah, Ancients seems great at mid-to-high levels, but I feel like it has the worst start of all paladins. I felt completely stuck to the frontlines, with no other thing to do that just hit people with some smiting here and there, no real flavor. Seems to me that it's very dependent of your campaign setting, race and feats, even moreso than other paladin subclasses.
Is there something I missed? Was I just hit with a bad campaign/Character configuration? I didn't exactly had the best luck on my rolls but I just felt slow and limited with this class, I'm genuinely curious.
Being a paladin means you should be fine, no matter what oath you go by. That said, it's more than likely some better choices could have been made.
No matter what, an unused channel divinity can still mean an extra spell slots. Ensnaring strike is pretty good spell since things have to use their action to break free. That's good control.
If you prioritize CON over CHA and STR, that's a mistake, and it's indicative that others might be present right down to gear choice, fighting style, or spell usage.
For turn the faithless keep in mind that not only are you dealing with the selfie court Fey but you are dealing with the unseelie court Fey. Still I tend to agree it under performs compared to the other PHB oaths. Of course even Seelie court Fey can be problematic tricksters if not handled well. Perhaps a homebrew alteration that sends dark Fey running for a minute but bolsters light Fey in some way - maybe Charisma bonus THP - would make it work better for you. If you notice no Paladin has abilities against abberations ( though I could see there being one specifically focused on such) and of fiends or undead fiends are a more active anti light group. It does get better as you level up but campaign specific details could render it subpar. Also, yes going strength, con was probably a mistake. You might see if your DM will allow you to switch Con and Charisma to improve its play style. Generally unless it’s a straight fighter I make con the #3 stat at 13/14 and try to get my strength and Charisma at 15+.
Being a paladin means you should be fine, no matter what oath you go by. That said, it's more than likely some better choices could have been made.
No matter what, an unused channel divinity can still mean an extra spell slots. Ensnaring strike is pretty good spell since things have to use their action to break free. That's good control.
If you prioritize CON over CHA and STR, that's a mistake, and it's indicative that others might be present right down to gear choice, fighting style, or spell usage.
I agree that prioritizing CON was a mistake, but I don't think that would have saved the Oath of the Ancients except giving me a slightly higher DC.
But you're basically agreeing, though. Ensnaring Strike IS good, I have nothing against it, but I'm talking about the Channel Divinity. It doesn't use the target's action to free themselves, it takes you an action to do it, there's no benefit if the target succeed, and you still lost your channel divinity. So yeah, might as well just burn it for a spell slot, what's the point then?
BTW, the fighting style was protection (Tasha wasn't out when I played him). I figured that since I was already slow and tanky, might as well help the others PCs.
For turn the faithless keep in mind that not only are you dealing with the selfie court Fey but you are dealing with the unseelie court Fey. Still I tend to agree it under performs compared to the other PHB oaths. Of course even Seelie court Fey can be problematic tricksters if not handled well. Perhaps a homebrew alteration that sends dark Fey running for a minute but bolsters light Fey in some way - maybe Charisma bonus THP - would make it work better for you. Also, yes going strength, con was probably a mistake. You might see if your DM will allow you to switch Con and Charisma to improve its play style. Generally unless it’s a straight fighter I make con the #3 stat at 13/14 and try to get my strength and Charisma at 15+.
But even if we're thinking about the "evil" feys, that doesn't really make sense, go fully there with the oath then, and give resistance to charm effects later down the line. It's weird because it seems like at low levels, it wants you to fight feys but it doesn't give you more tools to do so? (Also that was an old character from 3 years ago so no need to ask my DM, ain't playing him anymore. :D)
Well if you don’t really need a fix anymore good for you 😁. I suspect, that they weren’t sure exactly what hey we’re going for with this one so it it doesn’t quite do anything really well. Looking over the other oaths the watchers from Tasha seems almost what the ancients should have been. Keep the lore of the ancients and their spell list, drop the celestials from the affected list and give them a way to render good Fey immune or resistant to their divine effects and you would have a darn good oath of the ancients. The problem for the ancients is, as you pointed out, That their channel divinity abilities are really weak. Simply making Nature’s Wrath a wisdom save would strengthen it considerably. Even better would be to drop the entire text and give the ancients paladin Something similar to the sacred weapon of the Devotion Paladin - “for one minute after you activate your channel divinity any weapon you wield does radiant damage instead of its normal damage on a hit” . Keeps with the flavor text about being on the side of light, grants a magical damage other than smites and is usable against any/all creatures of darkness.
I agree that prioritizing CON was a mistake, but I don't think that would have saved the Oath of the Ancients except giving me a slightly higher DC.
But you're basically agreeing, though. Ensnaring Strike IS good, I have nothing against it, but I'm talking about the Channel Divinity. It doesn't use the target's action to free themselves, it takes you an action to do it, there's no benefit if the target succeed, and you still lost your channel divinity. So yeah, might as well just burn it for a spell slot, what's the point then?
BTW, the fighting style was protection (Tasha wasn't out when I played him). I figured that since I was already slow and tanky, might as well help the others PCs.
Listen, I want you to understand that what I'm saying: a paladin is not that defined by their channel divinity. Yes, I agree that ancient's channel divinity kind of sucks. Does that mean the ancients paladin has the roughest start? Well, yes, but not really. It's like saying you got the roughest start because you fly first class, but you don't get a window seat while the other paladin does-- you're still flying first class. You're still a martial half-caster in heavy armor. You still have lay on hands. You can still smite.
I could play a paladin of any oath in that tier, and I'd be pretty satisfied with it. Can I make some kickass builds with other oaths? Yeah, I think we can! v.human with GWM, conquest for guided strike, and a smite on top? Huge damage. Could I do the same with an ancients paladin? More or less, yeah, but I don't get a +10 to my hit once per short rest. How big a deal you consider that to be will depend on a number of factors, from how often you short rest down or how many encounters you face in a day.
A vengeance paladin, for example, might feel a little "useless" if all the DM throws at the party are encounters with a lots of enemies, and none are a clear standout as being the main threat. Using your channel divinity to gain advantage on one target might be alright, but that target dies, and the following turns spent, you're no better than any other paladin. Using hunters mark might feel a bit crappy once you math out that using a spell slot for an average of 3.5 damage per turn means you need to last more than 3 rounds before you beat out a regular smite. Yet, people love the vengeance paladin.
So, ancients paladin. Roughest start? Maaayybe. Still a darn good start cause it's a paladin.
I agree that prioritizing CON was a mistake, but I don't think that would have saved the Oath of the Ancients except giving me a slightly higher DC.
But you're basically agreeing, though. Ensnaring Strike IS good, I have nothing against it, but I'm talking about the Channel Divinity. It doesn't use the target's action to free themselves, it takes you an action to do it, there's no benefit if the target succeed, and you still lost your channel divinity. So yeah, might as well just burn it for a spell slot, what's the point then?
BTW, the fighting style was protection (Tasha wasn't out when I played him). I figured that since I was already slow and tanky, might as well help the others PCs.
Listen, I want you to understand that what I'm saying: a paladin is not that defined by their channel divinity. Yes, I agree that ancient's channel divinity kind of sucks. Does that mean the ancients paladin has the roughest start? Well, yes, but not really. It's like saying you got the roughest start because you fly first class, but you don't get a window seat while the other paladin does-- you're still flying first class. You're still a martial half-caster in heavy armor. You still have lay on hands. You can still smite.
I could play a paladin of any oath in that tier, and I'd be pretty satisfied with it. Can I make some kickass builds with other oaths? Yeah, I think we can! v.human with GWM, conquest for guided strike, and a smite on top? Huge damage. Could I do the same with an ancients paladin? More or less, yeah, but I don't get a +10 to my hit once per short rest. How big a deal you consider that to be will depend on a number of factors, from how often you short rest down or how many encounters you face in a day.
A vengeance paladin, for example, might feel a little "useless" if all the DM throws at the party are encounters with a lots of enemies, and none are a clear standout as being the main threat. Using your channel divinity to gain advantage on one target might be alright, but that target dies, and the following turns spent, you're no better than any other paladin. Using hunters mark might feel a bit crappy once you math out that using a spell slot for an average of 3.5 damage per turn means you need to last more than 3 rounds before you beat out a regular smite. Yet, people love the vengeance paladin.
So, ancients paladin. Roughest start? Maaayybe. Still a darn good start cause it's a paladin.
For the first six levels, a paladin is a paladin is a paladin. Some are minorly better than others, but none are really bad. A lot of the best parts are built into the paladin class.
Guys I think you are missing the OP’s point. They are not arguing that paladins suck - they don’t. They are arguing that at low levels the ancients Paladin is not as strong as the other types of paladins - primarily because the channel divinity abilities are not as strong - primarily the nature’s wrath ability that allows the victim to select their better save from strength and Dex making it fail frequently. For a once per rest ability this is not good.can the ancients Paladin overcome this generally? Sure - But let’s look at nature’s wrath vs the other non turn channel divinity abilities and compare just them.
Devotion: weapon becomes a +1 to +5 (ChB) To hit magic weapon for up to 10 rounds in a single fight. Ancient: 1 creature gets the better of a strength or dexterity save to avoid being restrained, then gets to save again each round until they succeed if they fail. If they succeed first time Paladin has wasted their one channel divinity. Vengeance: (Vow of enmity - the other is the turning equivalent) As a bonus action you grant yourself advantage on all attacks against a single foe in a single fight for up to 10 rounds. Glory: no turn ability but 2 strong abilities with no save - 1) Advantage on athletics and acrobatics checks + extra load carrying for 10 minutes or 2) distribute up to 2D8+ level THP to party members. Watcher: grant 1-5 (ChB) party members advantage on W, I, & Ch saves for 1 minute. Redemption: bonus action grants +5 to persuasion checks for 10 minutes. Conquest: +10 to one attack roll after you roll but before you know if you hit (essentially a guaranteed hit when you want/need it)
compared to the others the ancient’s ability is, by far, the weakest. yes much of the power of a Paladin is in the class abilities and one weak subclass ability won’t ruin a subclass but when compared to other paladins it marks the ancient as slightly substandard. That, to me, was the OP’s point the question then becomes can this be fixed and if so what would a reasonable fix look like?
Reasonable "fixes" are ultimately the realm of homebrew, and that's going to depend on your DM. As for what I have to say, if you don't like it don't play it.
Guys I think you are missing the OP’s point. They are not arguing that paladins suck - they don’t. They are arguing that at low levels the ancients Paladin is not as strong as the other types of paladins - primarily because the channel divinity abilities are not as strong - primarily the nature’s wrath ability that allows the victim to select their better save from strength and Dex making it fail frequently. For a once per rest ability this is not good.can the ancients Paladin overcome this generally? Sure - But let’s look at nature’s wrath vs the other non turn channel divinity abilities and compare just them.
Devotion: weapon becomes a +1 to +5 (ChB) To hit magic weapon for up to 10 rounds in a single fight. Ancient: 1 creature gets the better of a strength or dexterity save to avoid being restrained, then gets to save again each round until they succeed if they fail. If they succeed first time Paladin has wasted their one channel divinity. Vengeance: (Vow of enmity - the other is the turning equivalent) As a bonus action you grant yourself advantage on all attacks against a single foe in a single fight for up to 10 rounds. Glory: no turn ability but 2 strong abilities with no save - 1) Advantage on athletics and acrobatics checks + extra load carrying for 10 minutes or 2) distribute up to 2D8+ level THP to party members. Watcher: grant 1-5 (ChB) party members advantage on W, I, & Ch saves for 1 minute. Redemption: bonus action grants +5 to persuasion checks for 10 minutes. Conquest: +10 to one attack roll after you roll but before you know if you hit (essentially a guaranteed hit when you want/need it)
compared to the others the ancient’s ability is, by far, the weakest. yes much of the power of a Paladin is in the class abilities and one weak subclass ability won’t ruin a subclass but when compared to other paladins it marks the ancient as slightly substandard. That, to me, was the OP’s point the question then becomes can this be fixed and if so what would a reasonable fix look like?
Just ask your DM about the optional rules to regain a spell slot by converting your channel divinity if you haven't used it. I do that fairly regularly, since my channel divinity is weaker than using the Hexblade's Curse imo.
I’ve been playing an ancients paladin. We started at 3 (and since all are the same for 1and 2, I started where there’s a difference.) just hit 12. Yeah, the channel divinity is weak, but that’s a fairly small part of being a paladin. I know it’s campaign dependent, but speak with animals as a domain spell has been really useful. To the point that I have actually used a spell slot to cast a spell instead of smiting. But even better is misty step - and you can bring your mount with you - that’s been incredible.
To me, the weird part is I had to be a nature guy with a celestial mount instead of a fey, because I could end up turning my own mount.
Yes, fixes are the DM’s responsibility (although I would be surprised if WOTC weren’t watching these forums for free ideas for 5.5e) . Personally the 2 fixes for channel divinity I would put in place for this is to make natures wrath a charisma save and to grant the Paladin the ability to select Charisma bonus Fey to be immune from the turning. That way you could have a Fey mount and you could turn unseelie Fey while not turning seelie fey with your party.
I know it’s campaign dependent, but speak with animals as a domain spell has been really useful. To the point that I have actually used a spell slot to cast a spell instead of smiting.
HERETIC!!! I hope there are no children in here to read your blasphemy!
Guys I think you are missing the OP’s point. They are not arguing that paladins suck - they don’t. They are arguing that at low levels the ancients Paladin is not as strong as the other types of paladins - primarily because the channel divinity abilities are not as strong - primarily the nature’s wrath ability that allows the victim to select their better save from strength and Dex making it fail frequently. For a once per rest ability this is not good.
Thank you : yeah, that's the point I'm making. I keep seeing people praising the Ancients Paladin and I feel like they're always
I'll be honest : answering "yeah but you're still a paladin so your base is awesome" is really not what I'm asking for. I'm not saying that the paladin is bad, not at all : I'm just saying that the channel divinity is incredibly bad, and the two bonus spells they get are decent, but do not make up for the bad CD. Saying "yeah but just change your CD in a spell slot" is even worse :it's basically admitting that the CD is terrible and has no use and you should just accept that. I kinda disagree, CD isn't a small part of being a paladin, at least not thematically : Turning evil away is kind of a big paladin cliché, the shining knight raising his sword to the sky, making the demons recoil in fear, etc, that's iconic imagery! You should want to use your CD in big moments.
Also yeah, just adding the option to leave some feys out of your Turn would already be a good improvement : you get Find Steed but you really want it to be a celestial steed unless you don't care about your horse just leaving you behind.
Guys I think you are missing the OP’s point. They are not arguing that paladins suck - they don’t. They are arguing that at low levels the ancients Paladin is not as strong as the other types of paladins - primarily because the channel divinity abilities are not as strong - primarily the nature’s wrath ability that allows the victim to select their better save from strength and Dex making it fail frequently. For a once per rest ability this is not good.
Thank you : yeah, that's the point I'm making. I keep seeing people praising the Ancients Paladin and I feel like they're always
I'll be honest : answering "yeah but you're still a paladin so your base is awesome" is really not what I'm asking for. I'm not saying that the paladin is bad, not at all : I'm just saying that the channel divinity is incredibly bad, and the two bonus spells they get are decent, but do not make up for the bad CD. Saying "yeah but just change your CD in a spell slot" is even worse :it's basically admitting that the CD is terrible and has no use and you should just accept that. I kinda disagree, CD isn't a small part of being a paladin, at least not thematically : Turning evil away is kind of a big paladin cliché, the shining knight raising his sword to the sky, making the demons recoil in fear, etc, that's iconic imagery! You should want to use your CD in big moments.
Also yeah, just adding the option to leave some feys out of your Turn would already be a good improvement : you get Find Steed but you really want it to be a celestial steed unless you don't care about your horse just leaving you behind.
I think most people go Ancients for the flavor of a druidic "nature's champion" paladin and for the 7th level feature. Ancients has two paladin subclasses who are worse imo, in Crown and Redemption. But yes, it's not the best of the paladin subclasses. Watchers, Conquest, Devotion and Vengeance are all better imo. Bad CD? You ever read Glory or Crown's channel divinities? I would take Ancients CD over those other two!
Glory and Crown's aren't great, but I would gladly take them over Ancients.
Let's start with Crown :
I see a lot more uses for Champion Challenge (which feels like a real tanky move, to borrow a videogame term) than nature's Wrath. It affects multiple creatures, in a 30ft range, with a Wisdom save? And it's a BA, not a whole action. It beats nature's wrath in every way, except that it doesn't inflict restrained.
Turn The Tide, i'll admit, is bad. it's basically a crappy Mass Healing Word, and I don't understand the need for the "less than half their HP" condition. At least it's a BA. However, I do appreciate that thematically, it makes sense as a mirror of Champion's Challenge : for one, you bolster the allies around you, while for the others you're keeping your enemies around you, away from your friends. So it could be better but the concept makes sense to me.
And now for Glory :
Peerless Athlete is very situational, sure. I don't know any DM playing with encombrement rules, but for an action scene, a 10 minute advantage during a dangerous fight isn't a bad thing. You could do some really cool stunts with this, like the classic "Keeping the rubble from collapsing completely so innocents can escape" trope. However...
How is Inspiring Smite bad? At high level it's a fantastic way to save a party member while still doing damage, and you could give a lot of temporary HPs to a target you wanna protect. Sure, it's probably not great as a multiclass option, but it's far from bad, it can bring very heroic moments.
Glory and Crown's aren't great, but I would gladly take them over Ancients.
Let's start with Crown :
I see a lot more uses for Champion Challenge (which feels like a real tanky move, to borrow a videogame term) than nature's Wrath. It affects multiple creatures, in a 30ft range, with a Wisdom save? And it's a BA, not a whole action. It beats nature's wrath in every way, except that it doesn't inflict restrained.
Turn The Tide, i'll admit, is bad. it's basically a crappy Mass Healing Word, and I don't understand the need for the "less than half their HP" condition. At least it's a BA. However, I do appreciate that thematically, it makes sense as a mirror of Champion's Challenge : for one, you bolster the allies around you, while for the others you're keeping your enemies around you, away from your friends. So it could be better but the concept makes sense to me.
And now for Glory :
Peerless Athlete is very situational, sure. I don't know any DM playing with encombrement rules, but for an action scene, a 10 minute advantage during a dangerous fight isn't a bad thing. You could do some really cool stunts with this, like the classic "Keeping the rubble from collapsing completely so innocents can escape" trope. However...
How is Inspiring Smite bad? At high level it's a fantastic way to save a party member while still doing damage, and you could give a lot of temporary HPs to a target you wanna protect. Sure, it's probably not great as a multiclass option, but it's far from bad, it can bring very heroic moments.
(The Glory Aura sucks though.)
Glory's aura is pretty good. It's more so a selfish aura, but whatever. The important thing is it extends to your mount, and has intrinsic synergy with the rest of glory paladin's features and spells.
Peerless athlete, for example, is REALLY good. You can lift a crap ton, AND you have advantage on athletic checks. Once, my glory paladin and his party encountered an owl bear along an ice bridge between two huge cliffs. While the team resorted to chucking spells and ranged weapons, my paladin rushed in to meet the owl bear head on. What did he do? Bonus action, peerless athlete, action grapple. From there, it was pretty much over, as the following turn I moved the owl bear and shoved him off the ice bridge to his doom.
Essentially, anytime you can make use of grappling or shoving as a feature (which is frequently), peerless athlete comes through! Paladins have a high STR score, this can come in handy. Skill expert? Oh yeah, now you got expertise on athletics AND advantage on those checks. Now you can move even further thanks to your aura, and this comes in handy for things like spike growth synergy for a cheese grater strategy.
Nature's Wrath is actively bad and should never be used, and their first level oath spells are kinda forgettable. So yeah, mechanically an ancients paladin in a campaign where you don't frequently encounter hostile fae isn't getting anything especially noteworthy from their subclass specifically until level 5 when you pick up Misty Step as an oath spell and level 7 when you get the subclass aura - which is good, but like Turn the Faithless it's pretty situational, as it only comes up against enemy's throwing damaging spells. Enemies that don't use magic, or that use bespoke magical abilities rather than spells, or who use spells but focus on buffs, debuffs, and battlefield control rather than direct damage, ignore the aura entirely.
Honestly, Oath of the Ancients is pretty overrated mechanically, imo. Unless you know in advance of the campaign that you'll either be facing many hostile fae, or that you'll be dealing with a lot of enemy wizards and sorcerers who like to cast direct damage spells, then you're not all that much better than a subclassless paladin + misty step. That said, a subclassless paladin is already a strong class with a diverse ability set, and misty step is an easy answer to one of the classes few problem areas, so if you like the narrative aspect you should be able to make a fully effective character out of it. I ran a duel wielding half elf ancients paladin flavored as a sort of pseudo ranger through like 17 levels early in 5e and had a great time of it. And that was before Xanathar's released with Improved Find Steed, or Tasha's with additional combat styles, Warding Bond, Spirit Shroud, and Harness Divine Power (finally, a CD for Ancients paladins that is neither weak nor super situational).
The first few levels of paladin can be a bit bland, admittedly. Your spell slots are too limited to do much casting or smiting, and apart from that you're basically a melee fighter who trades most of your cool offensive abilities for a strong, but pretty passive healing option in Lay on Hands. Not unplayable, but not super exciting. Unfortunately, OP's campaign ended at exactly the time things are picking up for most paladins. Level 4 ASI, level 5 extra attack, and level 6 aura of protection really build up your 'at will' kit, and at the same levels your picking up second level spells (Find Steed!) and enough first level spell slots that you should reasonably be able to cast a spell (Bless, Shield of Faith, Wrathful Smite, etc) or drop a divine smite once per fight or more on typical adventuring days, all while lay on hands continues to grow as an effective tool for waking up downed allies during combat & patching up the injured afterwards. These are the levels that paladins really come in to their own, and while growth slows down a bit after that (there's a reason paladin/sorcerers generally take 6 levels of paladin before jumping into sorcerer), it's still pretty strong with level 8 ASI, level 9 3rd level spells & slots including Spirit Shroud, level 11 Improved Divine Smite, Level 12 ASI, level 13 4th level spells and slots including Improved Find Steed. That on top of whatever you're picking up from your subclass - mainly a level 7 feature (conquest is build-defining, watchers is amazing, devotion is great) and some additional spells prepared (Vengeance is a big winner with haste and dimension door, crown is savaged by spirit guardians, etc).
So yeah, Paladin IS slow out of the gate, especially Watchers with its weak or overly situational CDs and forgettable level 1 oath spells, but all paladins pick up quickly after that slow start, and stay strong through the mid teens, after which they can comfortably coast to their level 20 capstones, which are all pretty great.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Alright, lemme preface this by stating that I really want to love the Ancients oath. I'm all for breaking out of the usual paladin clichés, I feel like the concept offers great roleplaying opportunities.
But after seeing the opinions of a lot of people, I'm surprised that so many people seem to love its features? They mainly mention the Aura of Warding, and sure, it is a good feature, but what about before?
I actually played an Ancient paladin in a short campaign from level 1 up to level 5-ish, and I hated it. Now, it was my first paladin, sure, and I did allocate my stats to focus on CON then STR then CHA, but I feel like compared to other paladins, the low levels are really, really boring. And getting the subclass at lvl 3 was... disappointing.
For an Oath focused on being a proto-ranger and being in tune with nature, Turn the Faithless is really weird to me : why would you want to turn Feys creatures but not aberrations or undead? Seems to me that it would be the subclass that would actually work the most with the feys.
(Caveat : in this campaign we mainly fought constructs, giants, aberrations or zombies.)
On top of that, Nature's Wrath is really weak. A lot of monsters have a decent STR save, and even for those who don't, the ability offer them a choice between DEX and STR. Plus, they can try that save again every turn (although it's true that the DEX save gets disadvantage then). On top of that, it's only one target and up to 10ft? Why would I want to waste a turn trying that to do that when there are so many better feats or spells that would do the same and also do damage? I mean, it's even in the spell list, Ancients paladins get Entanglement, so they basically have two ways to get the same effect but one is clearly inferior. If it was an AoE thing with everyone in 10ft around the paladin could be targeted, this would be amazing, but otherwise, the grind is ROUGH. I don't see myself using that except on maybe an enemy spellcaster I'm trying to capture and even I would be scared of using an action of that when the spellcaster can just charm me or something (sinceWarding Aura does nothing against saves).
So yeah, Ancients seems great at mid-to-high levels, but I feel like it has the worst start of all paladins. I felt completely stuck to the frontlines, with no other thing to do that just hit people with some smiting here and there, no real flavor. Seems to me that it's very dependent of your campaign setting, race and feats, even moreso than other paladin subclasses.
Is there something I missed? Was I just hit with a bad campaign/Character configuration? I didn't exactly had the best luck on my rolls but I just felt slow and limited with this class, I'm genuinely curious.
Being a paladin means you should be fine, no matter what oath you go by. That said, it's more than likely some better choices could have been made.
No matter what, an unused channel divinity can still mean an extra spell slots. Ensnaring strike is pretty good spell since things have to use their action to break free. That's good control.
If you prioritize CON over CHA and STR, that's a mistake, and it's indicative that others might be present right down to gear choice, fighting style, or spell usage.
For turn the faithless keep in mind that not only are you dealing with the selfie court Fey but you are dealing with the unseelie court Fey. Still I tend to agree it under performs compared to the other PHB oaths. Of course even Seelie court Fey can be problematic tricksters if not handled well. Perhaps a homebrew alteration that sends dark Fey running for a minute but bolsters light Fey in some way - maybe Charisma bonus THP - would make it work better for you. If you notice no Paladin has abilities against abberations ( though I could see there being one specifically focused on such) and of fiends or undead fiends are a more active anti light group. It does get better as you level up but campaign specific details could render it subpar. Also, yes going strength, con was probably a mistake. You might see if your DM will allow you to switch Con and Charisma to improve its play style. Generally unless it’s a straight fighter I make con the #3 stat at 13/14 and try to get my strength and Charisma at 15+.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I agree that prioritizing CON was a mistake, but I don't think that would have saved the Oath of the Ancients except giving me a slightly higher DC.
But you're basically agreeing, though. Ensnaring Strike IS good, I have nothing against it, but I'm talking about the Channel Divinity. It doesn't use the target's action to free themselves, it takes you an action to do it, there's no benefit if the target succeed, and you still lost your channel divinity. So yeah, might as well just burn it for a spell slot, what's the point then?
BTW, the fighting style was protection (Tasha wasn't out when I played him). I figured that since I was already slow and tanky, might as well help the others PCs.
But even if we're thinking about the "evil" feys, that doesn't really make sense, go fully there with the oath then, and give resistance to charm effects later down the line. It's weird because it seems like at low levels, it wants you to fight feys but it doesn't give you more tools to do so?
(Also that was an old character from 3 years ago so no need to ask my DM, ain't playing him anymore. :D)
Well if you don’t really need a fix anymore good for you 😁. I suspect, that they weren’t sure exactly what hey we’re going for with this one so it it doesn’t quite do anything really well. Looking over the other oaths the watchers from Tasha seems almost what the ancients should have been. Keep the lore of the ancients and their spell list, drop the celestials from the affected list and give them a way to render good Fey immune or resistant to their divine effects and you would have a darn good oath of the ancients. The problem for the ancients is, as you pointed out, That their channel divinity abilities are really weak. Simply making Nature’s Wrath a wisdom save would strengthen it considerably. Even better would be to drop the entire text and give the ancients paladin Something similar to the sacred weapon of the Devotion Paladin - “for one minute after you activate your channel divinity any weapon you wield does radiant damage instead of its normal damage on a hit” . Keeps with the flavor text about being on the side of light, grants a magical damage other than smites and is usable against any/all creatures of darkness.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Listen, I want you to understand that what I'm saying: a paladin is not that defined by their channel divinity. Yes, I agree that ancient's channel divinity kind of sucks. Does that mean the ancients paladin has the roughest start? Well, yes, but not really. It's like saying you got the roughest start because you fly first class, but you don't get a window seat while the other paladin does-- you're still flying first class. You're still a martial half-caster in heavy armor. You still have lay on hands. You can still smite.
I could play a paladin of any oath in that tier, and I'd be pretty satisfied with it. Can I make some kickass builds with other oaths? Yeah, I think we can! v.human with GWM, conquest for guided strike, and a smite on top? Huge damage. Could I do the same with an ancients paladin? More or less, yeah, but I don't get a +10 to my hit once per short rest. How big a deal you consider that to be will depend on a number of factors, from how often you short rest down or how many encounters you face in a day.
A vengeance paladin, for example, might feel a little "useless" if all the DM throws at the party are encounters with a lots of enemies, and none are a clear standout as being the main threat. Using your channel divinity to gain advantage on one target might be alright, but that target dies, and the following turns spent, you're no better than any other paladin. Using hunters mark might feel a bit crappy once you math out that using a spell slot for an average of 3.5 damage per turn means you need to last more than 3 rounds before you beat out a regular smite. Yet, people love the vengeance paladin.
So, ancients paladin. Roughest start? Maaayybe. Still a darn good start cause it's a paladin.
For the first six levels, a paladin is a paladin is a paladin. Some are minorly better than others, but none are really bad. A lot of the best parts are built into the paladin class.
Guys I think you are missing the OP’s point. They are not arguing that paladins suck - they don’t. They are arguing that at low levels the ancients Paladin is not as strong as the other types of paladins - primarily because the channel divinity abilities are not as strong - primarily the nature’s wrath ability that allows the victim to select their better save from strength and Dex making it fail frequently. For a once per rest ability this is not good.can the ancients Paladin overcome this generally? Sure - But let’s look at nature’s wrath vs the other non turn channel divinity abilities and compare just them.
Devotion: weapon becomes a +1 to +5 (ChB) To hit magic weapon for up to 10 rounds in a single fight.
Ancient: 1 creature gets the better of a strength or dexterity save to avoid being restrained, then gets to save again each round until they succeed if they fail. If they succeed first time Paladin has wasted their one channel divinity.
Vengeance: (Vow of enmity - the other is the turning equivalent) As a bonus action you grant yourself advantage on all attacks against a single foe in a single fight for up to 10 rounds.
Glory: no turn ability but 2 strong abilities with no save - 1) Advantage on athletics and acrobatics checks + extra load carrying for 10 minutes or 2) distribute up to 2D8+ level THP to party members.
Watcher: grant 1-5 (ChB) party members advantage on W, I, & Ch saves for 1 minute.
Redemption: bonus action grants +5 to persuasion checks for 10 minutes.
Conquest: +10 to one attack roll after you roll but before you know if you hit (essentially a guaranteed hit when you want/need it)
compared to the others the ancient’s ability is, by far, the weakest.
yes much of the power of a Paladin is in the class abilities and one weak subclass ability won’t ruin a subclass but when compared to other paladins it marks the ancient as slightly substandard. That, to me, was the OP’s point the question then becomes can this be fixed and if so what would a reasonable fix look like?
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Reasonable "fixes" are ultimately the realm of homebrew, and that's going to depend on your DM. As for what I have to say, if you don't like it don't play it.
Just ask your DM about the optional rules to regain a spell slot by converting your channel divinity if you haven't used it. I do that fairly regularly, since my channel divinity is weaker than using the Hexblade's Curse imo.
I’ve been playing an ancients paladin. We started at 3 (and since all are the same for 1and 2, I started where there’s a difference.) just hit 12. Yeah, the channel divinity is weak, but that’s a fairly small part of being a paladin.
I know it’s campaign dependent, but speak with animals as a domain spell has been really useful. To the point that I have actually used a spell slot to cast a spell instead of smiting. But even better is misty step - and you can bring your mount with you - that’s been incredible.
To me, the weird part is I had to be a nature guy with a celestial mount instead of a fey, because I could end up turning my own mount.
Yes, fixes are the DM’s responsibility (although I would be surprised if WOTC weren’t watching these forums for free ideas for 5.5e) . Personally the 2 fixes for channel divinity I would put in place for this is to make natures wrath a charisma save and to grant the Paladin the ability to select Charisma bonus Fey to be immune from the turning. That way you could have a Fey mount and you could turn unseelie Fey while not turning seelie fey with your party.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
HERETIC!!! I hope there are no children in here to read your blasphemy!
Thank you : yeah, that's the point I'm making. I keep seeing people praising the Ancients Paladin and I feel like they're always
I'll be honest : answering "yeah but you're still a paladin so your base is awesome" is really not what I'm asking for. I'm not saying that the paladin is bad, not at all : I'm just saying that the channel divinity is incredibly bad, and the two bonus spells they get are decent, but do not make up for the bad CD. Saying "yeah but just change your CD in a spell slot" is even worse :it's basically admitting that the CD is terrible and has no use and you should just accept that. I kinda disagree, CD isn't a small part of being a paladin, at least not thematically : Turning evil away is kind of a big paladin cliché, the shining knight raising his sword to the sky, making the demons recoil in fear, etc, that's iconic imagery! You should want to use your CD in big moments.
Also yeah, just adding the option to leave some feys out of your Turn would already be a good improvement : you get Find Steed but you really want it to be a celestial steed unless you don't care about your horse just leaving you behind.
I think most people go Ancients for the flavor of a druidic "nature's champion" paladin and for the 7th level feature. Ancients has two paladin subclasses who are worse imo, in Crown and Redemption. But yes, it's not the best of the paladin subclasses. Watchers, Conquest, Devotion and Vengeance are all better imo. Bad CD? You ever read Glory or Crown's channel divinities? I would take Ancients CD over those other two!
Glory and Crown's aren't great, but I would gladly take them over Ancients.
Let's start with Crown :
And now for Glory :
(The Glory Aura sucks though.)
Glory's aura is pretty good. It's more so a selfish aura, but whatever. The important thing is it extends to your mount, and has intrinsic synergy with the rest of glory paladin's features and spells.
Peerless athlete, for example, is REALLY good. You can lift a crap ton, AND you have advantage on athletic checks. Once, my glory paladin and his party encountered an owl bear along an ice bridge between two huge cliffs. While the team resorted to chucking spells and ranged weapons, my paladin rushed in to meet the owl bear head on. What did he do? Bonus action, peerless athlete, action grapple. From there, it was pretty much over, as the following turn I moved the owl bear and shoved him off the ice bridge to his doom.
Essentially, anytime you can make use of grappling or shoving as a feature (which is frequently), peerless athlete comes through! Paladins have a high STR score, this can come in handy. Skill expert? Oh yeah, now you got expertise on athletics AND advantage on those checks. Now you can move even further thanks to your aura, and this comes in handy for things like spike growth synergy for a cheese grater strategy.
Glory paladins RULE!!!
Nature's Wrath is actively bad and should never be used, and their first level oath spells are kinda forgettable. So yeah, mechanically an ancients paladin in a campaign where you don't frequently encounter hostile fae isn't getting anything especially noteworthy from their subclass specifically until level 5 when you pick up Misty Step as an oath spell and level 7 when you get the subclass aura - which is good, but like Turn the Faithless it's pretty situational, as it only comes up against enemy's throwing damaging spells. Enemies that don't use magic, or that use bespoke magical abilities rather than spells, or who use spells but focus on buffs, debuffs, and battlefield control rather than direct damage, ignore the aura entirely.
Honestly, Oath of the Ancients is pretty overrated mechanically, imo. Unless you know in advance of the campaign that you'll either be facing many hostile fae, or that you'll be dealing with a lot of enemy wizards and sorcerers who like to cast direct damage spells, then you're not all that much better than a subclassless paladin + misty step. That said, a subclassless paladin is already a strong class with a diverse ability set, and misty step is an easy answer to one of the classes few problem areas, so if you like the narrative aspect you should be able to make a fully effective character out of it. I ran a duel wielding half elf ancients paladin flavored as a sort of pseudo ranger through like 17 levels early in 5e and had a great time of it. And that was before Xanathar's released with Improved Find Steed, or Tasha's with additional combat styles, Warding Bond, Spirit Shroud, and Harness Divine Power (finally, a CD for Ancients paladins that is neither weak nor super situational).
The first few levels of paladin can be a bit bland, admittedly. Your spell slots are too limited to do much casting or smiting, and apart from that you're basically a melee fighter who trades most of your cool offensive abilities for a strong, but pretty passive healing option in Lay on Hands. Not unplayable, but not super exciting. Unfortunately, OP's campaign ended at exactly the time things are picking up for most paladins. Level 4 ASI, level 5 extra attack, and level 6 aura of protection really build up your 'at will' kit, and at the same levels your picking up second level spells (Find Steed!) and enough first level spell slots that you should reasonably be able to cast a spell (Bless, Shield of Faith, Wrathful Smite, etc) or drop a divine smite once per fight or more on typical adventuring days, all while lay on hands continues to grow as an effective tool for waking up downed allies during combat & patching up the injured afterwards. These are the levels that paladins really come in to their own, and while growth slows down a bit after that (there's a reason paladin/sorcerers generally take 6 levels of paladin before jumping into sorcerer), it's still pretty strong with level 8 ASI, level 9 3rd level spells & slots including Spirit Shroud, level 11 Improved Divine Smite, Level 12 ASI, level 13 4th level spells and slots including Improved Find Steed. That on top of whatever you're picking up from your subclass - mainly a level 7 feature (conquest is build-defining, watchers is amazing, devotion is great) and some additional spells prepared (Vengeance is a big winner with haste and dimension door, crown is savaged by spirit guardians, etc).
So yeah, Paladin IS slow out of the gate, especially Watchers with its weak or overly situational CDs and forgettable level 1 oath spells, but all paladins pick up quickly after that slow start, and stay strong through the mid teens, after which they can comfortably coast to their level 20 capstones, which are all pretty great.