Paladin also has more tools to make them a primary target, (part of tanking), compel duel, warding bond. whereas for barbarian, its just if the enemy wants to target them for no particular reason.
Sorry but no. I played a Paladin that could cast Compel Duel for FREE 3 times per day (Theros campaign), and I never got it to do anything useful ever. The way you make yourself a primary target is to run up into the face of the enemy and threaten to deal 15+ damage to them as an AoO. Alternatively: Grapple them and give them the choice of attacking you or using their entire action for a 40% chance to break free of the grapple.
Ranger has a better out of combat spread imo, particularly if the campaign is open to exploration and other environmental interactions as opposed to being some form of straight dungeon crawl.
The problem is a primary caster is going to out-do a Ranger on nearly all OOC stuff, and once your party reaches level 7+ they have so many spellslots it doesn't cost them much to just use magic to solve everything, whereas in levels 1-4 a Rogue's expertise is most likely going to be better that anything the Ranger can do with their 1st level spell slots. For a small party though, where characters need to be able to excel at more than one thing, that's where Ranger shines.
If you had read my second post, I addressed the "primary caster does everything better" point. Spell slots actually aren't the biggest issue, it's spell selection; early on even full casters have a fairly short list of spells at hand; at 5th level a Druid using point buy or standard array will have 9 known spells from levels 1-3; if they're the healer for the party Lesser Restoration and Cure Wounds are almost an absolute must, and stuff like Revivify or Aura of Vitality make a strong case as well. And you'll also want a good number of combat spells; between control, attack, and defense spells it's easy to take up 4 or 5 picks there. So, even tending towards a conservative number of picks there, that's 6 spells of 9, leaving 3 for utility and there's enough utility options that it's easy for a Ranger and Druid to fill different niches.
Ranger has a better out of combat spread imo, particularly if the campaign is open to exploration and other environmental interactions as opposed to being some form of straight dungeon crawl.
The problem is a primary caster is going to out-do a Ranger on nearly all OOC stuff, and once your party reaches level 7+ they have so many spellslots it doesn't cost them much to just use magic to solve everything, whereas in levels 1-4 a Rogue's expertise is most likely going to be better that anything the Ranger can do with their 1st level spell slots. For a small party though, where characters need to be able to excel at more than one thing, that's where Ranger shines.
If you had read my second post, I addressed the "primary caster does everything better" point. Spell slots actually aren't the biggest issue, it's spell selection; early on even full casters have a fairly short list of spells at hand; at 5th level a Druid using point buy or standard array will have 9 known spells from levels 1-3; if they're the healer for the party Lesser Restoration and Cure Wounds are almost an absolute must, and stuff like Revivify or Aura of Vitality make a strong case as well. And you'll also want a good number of combat spells; between control, attack, and defense spells it's easy to take up 4 or 5 picks there. So, even tending towards a conservative number of picks there, that's 6 spells of 9, leaving 3 for utility and there's enough utility options that it's easy for a Ranger and Druid to fill different niches.
Sorry again, but no. I played a healer Druid and I never ever prepared Cure Wounds nor Revivify nor Aura of Vitality, and Lesser Restoration only extremely sparingly as I instead just bought a scroll of Lesser Restoration in case of emergency.
To play a Healer Druid you need: 1) Healing Word 2) Lesser Restoration - as a scroll or from a Magic item 3) Revivify - as a scroll 4) Mass Cure Wounds 5) Greater Restoration - as a scroll or from a Magic item 6) Heal
Optional: 1) Freedom of Movement 2) Death Ward
Nobody should ever be wasting a spell preparation on Revivify, just make / buy some scrolls as you'll almost never need to cast it. Same goes for the Restorations. At 5th level, you are always better off using your 3rd level spells to kill the bad guys than to revivify someone. If you have a kind DM they will give you another way to raise a dead ally - e.g. retreating and taking their body to a cleric for Raise Dead - and if you have a vindictive DM they won't let you have diamonds for Revivify anyway.
You're assuming scrolls or a specific magic item will be readily accessible (I'm not even sure how you get the Restorations from a magic item unless it's a homebrew one), which isn't a given. And how a DM handles dead players is not something you can define as "if they don't do it this way, they're wrong". And, regardless, the point stands that at 5th level there's not enough spell options for a Druid to actually cover their full range of utility unless they want to have little to no other options.
You're assuming scrolls or a specific magic item will be readily accessible (I'm not even sure how you get the Restorations from a magic item unless it's a homebrew one), which isn't a given. And how a DM handles dead players is not something you can define as "if they don't do it this way, they're wrong". And, regardless, the point stands that at 5th level there's not enough spell options for a Druid to actually cover their full range of utility unless they want to have little to no other options.
Both Restorations are available in the Necklace of Prayer Beads, and Lesser Restoration is in the Staff of Healing. RAW anyone can make their own scrolls with like 1 day of downtime.
At 5th level, a druid needs only Healing Word to be a perfectly adequate healer. If they want the "full range" of utility they need Lesser Restoration and Healing Word (all the other spells I listed at far to high a level so aren't available to any 5th level character). 2 spells is not arduous when you have 9 spells prepared, especially since so few Druid spells are actually worth preparing.
Here's my 5th level Druid's prepared spell list. I dare you to try an choose a different set that is better at any particular "utility" than these, or even what spells a 5th level Ranger would take that would still be valuable in a party with this druid :
1st: Healing Word, Faerie Fire, Absorb Elements, Speak to Animals, Detect Magic 2nd: Spike Growth, Moonbeam, Pass without Trace 3rd: Conjure Animals
You're assuming scrolls or a specific magic item will be readily accessible (I'm not even sure how you get the Restorations from a magic item unless it's a homebrew one), which isn't a given. And how a DM handles dead players is not something you can define as "if they don't do it this way, they're wrong". And, regardless, the point stands that at 5th level there's not enough spell options for a Druid to actually cover their full range of utility unless they want to have little to no other options.
Both Restorations are available in the Necklace of Prayer Beads, and Lesser Restoration is in the Staff of Healing. RAW anyone can make their own scrolls with like 1 day of downtime.
At 5th level, a druid needs only Healing Word to be a perfectly adequate healer. If they want the "full range" of utility they need Lesser Restoration and Healing Word (all the other spells I listed at far to high a level so aren't available to any 5th level character). 2 spells is not arduous when you have 9 spells prepared, especially since so few Druid spells are actually worth preparing.
Here's my 5th level Druid's prepared spell list. I dare you to try an choose a different set that is better at any particular "utility" than these, or even what spells a 5th level Ranger would take that would still be valuable in a party with this druid :
1st: Healing Word, Faerie Fire, Absorb Elements, Speak to Animals, Detect Magic 2nd: Spike Growth, Moonbeam, Pass without Trace 3rd: Conjure Animals
Necklace of Prayer Beads is Rare and what beads you get are variable per RAW, so even if you have it by level 5, you can't guarantee you'll have a restoration bead unless the DM is specifically tailoring it, and Staff of Healing is also Rare. Using the XGtE rules for scroll scribing, it takes 3 days per 2nd level scroll. In a white room this arrangement is possible, but none of this is a given for actual basic character design, it's dependent on being in a campaign that will facilitate the acquisition of these materials.
Regarding your spell list, there's things like Beast Sense, Animal Messenger, and Locate Object. Are these absolute top tier 1st picks for a white room dungeon crawl build? No. Do they provide additional utility, particularly in campaigns that have objectives more complex than "proceed to goal, kill anything that tries to stop you"? Yes.
Sorry but no. I played a Paladin that could cast Compel Duel for FREE 3 times per day (Theros campaign), and I never got it to do anything useful ever.
Compelled duel seems to be inspired by divine challenge from 4e (much like sentinel appears inspired by the warrior's combat challenge from 4e), only made completely garbage. The equivalent of the 4e ability would be something like:
You attempt to compel a creature into a duel. One creature that you can see within range must make a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, the creature is drawn to you, compelled by your divine demand. For the duration, it has disadvantage on attack rolls against creatures other than you, and must make a Wisdom saving throw each time it attempts to move to a space that is more than 30 feet away from you; if it succeeds on this saving throw, this spell doesn’t restrict the target’s movement for that turn. The first time each turn an enchanted creature targets a creature other than you with a harmful ability that does not also target you, it takes 1d6+(Casting Ability Modifier) radiant damage.
The spell ends if you attack any other creature, if you cast a spell that targets a hostile creature other than the target, if a creature friendly to you damages the target or casts a harmful spell on it, or if you end your turn more than 30 feet away from the target.
Paladin also has more tools to make them a primary target, (part of tanking), compel duel, warding bond. whereas for barbarian, its just if the enemy wants to target them for no particular reason.
Sorry but no. I played a Paladin that could cast Compel Duel for FREE 3 times per day (Theros campaign), and I never got it to do anything useful ever. The way you make yourself a primary target is to run up into the face of the enemy and threaten to deal 15+ damage to them as an AoO. Alternatively: Grapple them and give them the choice of attacking you or using their entire action for a 40% chance to break free of the grapple.
its basically a taunt, the npc gets disadvantage versus other targets as a BA. grapple requires a free hand, which means you can't attack if you are wearing a shield. Perhaps you weren't interested in a taunt or controlling enemies and preferred to use your BA on other things, but that doesnt mean it not a spell that makes you better at protecting things than a person without it.
I ve DMed, sometimes the npc risks the AoO. Just standing there hitting him is what the player wants to happen, enemies are not always going to oblige.
Paladin also has more tools to make them a primary target, (part of tanking), compel duel, warding bond. whereas for barbarian, its just if the enemy wants to target them for no particular reason.
Sorry but no. I played a Paladin that could cast Compel Duel for FREE 3 times per day (Theros campaign), and I never got it to do anything useful ever. The way you make yourself a primary target is to run up into the face of the enemy and threaten to deal 15+ damage to them as an AoO. Alternatively: Grapple them and give them the choice of attacking you or using their entire action for a 40% chance to break free of the grapple.
its basically a taunt, the npc gets disadvantage versus other targets as a BA. grapple requires a free hand, which means you can't attack if you are wearing a shield. Perhaps you weren't interested in a taunt or controlling enemies and preferred to use your BA on other things, but that doesnt mean it not a spell that makes you better at protecting things than a person without it.
I ve DMed, sometimes the npc risks the AoO. Just standing there hitting him is what the player wants to happen, enemies are not always going to oblige.
I used it all the time b/c I had nothing else to do with my BA. These are all the ways that it was rendered useless:
B/c CHA is a secondary stat, my DC wasn't super high (but still respectable) so more than 50% of the time the enemy succeeded on the save.
It's concentration, so about 25% of the time another enemy hit me and broke my concentration before the target's turn.
If an ally attacks the target of your Compel Duel it breaks, and in many cases our casters were using AoEs to hit multiple enemies at once and would hit the target of my Compel Duel and break it.
The above also meant that in several cases the Barbarian attacked the target of my Compel Duel because they (often correctly) thought they could kill the target, and dead > compel duelled.
About 50% of our combat arenas, my allies were far enough away that the enemy couldn't get to them without using their action to Dash to hit them anyway.
If you attack another creature Compel Duel breaks, in a several cases I ended up breaking my own Compel Duel in order to make an AoO against a different enemy.
The Barbarian generally had higher survivability than my Paladin, so in about 1/3 of combats I'd rather the enemy attack the Barbarian than me.
Paladin also has more tools to make them a primary target, (part of tanking), compel duel, warding bond. whereas for barbarian, its just if the enemy wants to target them for no particular reason.
Sorry but no. I played a Paladin that could cast Compel Duel for FREE 3 times per day (Theros campaign), and I never got it to do anything useful ever. The way you make yourself a primary target is to run up into the face of the enemy and threaten to deal 15+ damage to them as an AoO. Alternatively: Grapple them and give them the choice of attacking you or using their entire action for a 40% chance to break free of the grapple.
its basically a taunt, the npc gets disadvantage versus other targets as a BA. grapple requires a free hand, which means you can't attack if you are wearing a shield. Perhaps you weren't interested in a taunt or controlling enemies and preferred to use your BA on other things, but that doesnt mean it not a spell that makes you better at protecting things than a person without it.
I ve DMed, sometimes the npc risks the AoO. Just standing there hitting him is what the player wants to happen, enemies are not always going to oblige.
I used it all the time b/c I had nothing else to do with my BA. These are all the ways that it was rendered useless:
B/c CHA is a secondary stat, my DC wasn't super high (but still respectable) so more than 50% of the time the enemy succeeded on the save.
It's concentration, so about 25% of the time another enemy hit me and broke my concentration before the target's turn.
If an ally attacks the target of your Compel Duel it breaks, and in many cases our casters were using AoEs to hit multiple enemies at once and would hit the target of my Compel Duel and break it.
The above also meant that in several cases the Barbarian attacked the target of my Compel Duel because they (often correctly) thought they could kill the target, and dead > compel duelled.
About 50% of our combat arenas, my allies were far enough away that the enemy couldn't get to them without using their action to Dash to hit them anyway.
If you attack another creature Compel Duel breaks, in a several cases I ended up breaking my own Compel Duel in order to make an AoO against a different enemy.
The Barbarian generally had higher survivability than my Paladin, so in about 1/3 of combats I'd rather the enemy attack the Barbarian than me.
^^ this. Compelled duel is something that looks nice on the surface, but it falls apart in actual play.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Taking a hybrid class that doesn't do either weapon attacks or spell casting particularly well and forcing them to stick to only one or the other when full classes gets to do their specialized action, is a recipe for making hybrid-classes significantly weaker in comparison.
Yes and that is by design. The point is for different classes / subclasses to offer different things they are good at so that none are ever in direct competition with each other. Classes being in direct competition with each other is terrible for players and the game as a whole because there can only be one winner, so if two classes do the same thing one will objectively be better than the other and thus the loser becomes a "trap" class that nobody plays.
<snip>
Hybrid classes are MEANT to sacrifice specialization for breath of options. Just as the difference between Sorcerer and Wizard was that Sorcerer specializes in a small number of spells that they are super good a using, whereas Wizard has more options but is less good at using any particular one. Pure martial should deal more damage than hybrid classes b/c they don't have the OOC utility or support options that the hybrid has, meanwhile full casters should be be better at casting spells and have more utility than hybrids b/c they don't have the option for tanking or focused DPR than hybrids have.
Either you can be the best at something and suck at everything else or you can be ok at a lot of things.
The difference between your view and mine is that I believe a half caster is meant to interweave spells in their combat. Not be a half-baked martial and a half-baked spell caster in one but only able to do one or the other at any given time. The fantasy I imagine around Paladins (actually both half-casters) is somewhat closer to a Witcher. It's not necessarily big flashy spell casting that sorcerers in that universe can utilize, but rather practical spell casting of lesser nature that complements their martial prowess instead of substituting it. Breadth of options is nice, but the neat part is that parties seldom consists of 1 or 2 people. So there's a very good chance that there is some overlap between the half-caster's options and someone else in the party. Therefore your breadth of options seldom bears fruit as someone else is often better at doing it. And as some have already stated previously in the thread, full spellcasters often end up doing OOC better than or equivalently to skill oriented classes somewhere around late tier 2, start tier 3.
I'm not saying I want Paladins to swing their sword and cast Time Stop (just to be ridiculous). Some restrictions could be made to spellcasting during your attack action, either globally (only cast up to a certain level, be it fixed or based on pala lvl/prof. bonus or something else) or it could be more specific (only allow oath spells). When this hypothetical feature comes online is also up for debate/balance, but not much later than lvl 6-7. This would represent a warrior who uses magic to enhance their combat skills, instead of occasionally being a subpar Martial (past tier 2) and occasionally being a bad Spellcaster. The Haste spell from the Vengeance Oath is one of the better examples of magic being used to improve a Martial's combat prowess. However considering the drawback when losing concentration, this is a very risky spell to use as a Paladin.
The Smite spells working as bonus action spells is somewhat beneficial for this concept although a bit clunky. We do get back to the action economy and using the BA for Smites means you give up other choices. Previously the base Smite was "free" in terms of action economy and it was only when you dabbed into the tech-options that you had to spend your BA. So not only are we taking the BA away from Paladin when using Divine Smite, we're also limiting them to once per turn. The once per turn was always intended to bring down Nova-smiting - which makes sense, however also taking the BA is quite a substantial nerf. Channel Divinities also lay claim to your bonus action (if not your regular action in some cases) - as does Lay on Hands, but that's a major plus compared to a regular action.
Personally I had hoped that Smites would be a separate add-on option like how Divine Smite works in the 2014 PHB. (And if we tie Smites to the Channel Divinity resource and ramp up the number of uses over the Paladin levels, we wont see multiclassing outperform pure Paladins in using Smites)
No more can a Vengeance Paladin use Misty Step to blink behind enemy lines to attempt to take out their rear with a big, meaty Divine Smite. Although TBF as long as Smites functions as spells, that would never be an option with the bonus action spell restrictions - at least as of 2014 PHB.
I would love to see the Paladin spell list expanded a bit with more tech/control options and spells that would lend themselves well to this idea of interweaving spells with their attacks. For instance a short range spell that deals some thunder damage and knocks the target prone - setting up for advantage on the weapon attack. I know Thunderous Smite exists, but it requires that you already make a hit and it does also push the target. Perhaps some of Paladin's existing control spells could be improved to work better as control and not have as many gaps or clauses for dispelling. The new Daze condition (either you move or you attack/cast) seems like a prime candidate for Paladin to play around with.
Paladins are not the highest damage dealing frontliner, and they are likely losing to Cleric for best frontline control/support. But if the Paladin could both deal some weapon damage AND do some spell casting that would grant them some uniqueness. "But their aura -" is good but is often limited by using a secondary stat sitting at +2 or perhaps +3 and the range often makes it self-serving rather than team supporting. As for interweaving spells and weapon attacks; EK and Bladesingers both mostly occupy the space of casting a cantrip while attacking, often being a weapon attack like Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade - in other words a magic-infused weapon attack. And lets not forget that Clerics can cast Spiritual Weapon which grants them a BA spell attack at range, which is not using concentration, uses their WIS modifier for attack and damage, and they can cast other spells on subsequent turns whilst the spirit weapon is whacking at enemies. Technically they are better half-casters than the half-casters. So Half-casters being able to cast any spell (although possibly with some restrictions) would separate them from these subclasses that both can attack and spell cast (I know, EK lvl 18). Half-casters don't naturally have access to cantrips so their limited spell slot pool restricts them. The respective fighting styles that grants them access to pick up cantrips from either Druid or Cleric would be getting a massive boost to its value given this feature, which is not a bad thing as they are often overshadowed. And to the commentary that homogeny between classes serves no one but to find the best of that given metric and nothing else is valuable/viable. A half-caster being able to make a weapon attack and then cast Hold Person (for instance) is not subtracting from neither the martials, who deal more damage, nor from spell casters, who have access to more spells, stronger spells, and more spell slots to sling damage, buff or control spells around.
I played 1 paladin, and don’t remember the UA that well, but I wasn’t worried when it came out. The class is still really flavorful and does a lot. Smiting is only part of their kit. And the smite spells are much more worthwhile now, which is a nice boost. One of the people I play with, who loves tanky martials, doesn’t like paladins because they’re too good and it feels like playing on cheat mode, to him at least. Dialing them back a bit doesn’t seem like too much.
What buffs did the Monk get that they didn't already have?
The fantasy I imagine around Paladins (actually both half-casters) is somewhat closer to a Witcher. It's not necessarily big flashy spell casting that sorcerers in that universe can utilize, but rather practical spell casting of lesser nature that complements their martial prowess instead of substituting it. Breadth of options is nice, but the neat part is that parties seldom consists of 1 or 2 people. So there's a very good chance that there is some overlap between the half-caster's options and someone else in the party. Therefore your breadth of options seldom bears fruit as someone else is often better at doing it
Have you played or read the Witcher? Witchers have half-baked spellcasting that they alternate between with weapon strikes on different turns to make use of tactics like strafe-ing, using terrain to their advantage, triggering monster weaknesses, or momentary battlefield control. In the Witcher universe, witchers are routinely ridiculed by true sorcerers for their limited abilities with magic.
It is probably controversial, but I think if smites stay as bonus actions they can probably get a one die bump in damage across the board and be ok. Because you won't get more than one a turn and it has anti-synergy with other bonus action effects.
I played 1 paladin, and don’t remember the UA that well, but I wasn’t worried when it came out. The class is still really flavorful and does a lot. Smiting is only part of their kit. And the smite spells are much more worthwhile now, which is a nice boost. One of the people I play with, who loves tanky martials, doesn’t like paladins because they’re too good and it feels like playing on cheat mode, to him at least. Dialing them back a bit doesn’t seem like too much.
What buffs did the Monk get that they didn't already have?
Unarmed attacks moved up a step, the dash and disengage bonus actions no longer dip into the Ki/Discipline pool (unless also adding the dodge action to them), once per long rest you can recharge your Ki/Discipline pool for free when rolling initiative, deflect missiles now works against melee attacks, Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, and Step of the Wind all get a boost at level 10, and at level 13 Deflect works v energy attacks. So, better damage, better defense, and effectively more Ki/Discipline points? My issue with the monk wasn't what it could and couldn't do, but that it couldn't do them well enough or long enough. The basics were improved across the board.
I played 1 paladin, and don’t remember the UA that well, but I wasn’t worried when it came out. The class is still really flavorful and does a lot. Smiting is only part of their kit. And the smite spells are much more worthwhile now, which is a nice boost. One of the people I play with, who loves tanky martials, doesn’t like paladins because they’re too good and it feels like playing on cheat mode, to him at least. Dialing them back a bit doesn’t seem like too much.
What buffs did the Monk get that they didn't already have?
Unarmed attacks moved up a step, the dash and disengage bonus actions no longer dip into the Ki/Discipline pool (unless also adding the dodge action to them), once per long rest you can recharge your Ki/Discipline pool for free when rolling initiative, deflect missiles now works against melee attacks, Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, and Step of the Wind all get a boost at level 10, and at level 13 Deflect works v energy attacks. So, better damage, better defense, and effectively more Ki/Discipline points? My issue with the monk wasn't what it could and couldn't do, but that it couldn't do them well enough or long enough. The basics were improved across the board.
You missed a few:
The biggest one is that Martial Arts and Flurry no longer require the Attack action to use; that gives monks a lot of freedom especially at low levels. You can Dodge-Punch all day to tank effectively at early levels while your stats are low, or you can flurry first and then plan your turn around the results (very useful for subclasses that tie additional benefits to flurry like Open Hand and Mercy) etc.
Monks get to grapple with Dex now, and grapple is a saving throw which means stunned opponents automatically fail.
Stunning Fist now does something useful (an extra hit's worth of damage roughly) even if the enemy succeeds, instead of being a total waste of ki.
Stillness of Mind Self-Restoration no longer needs an action, so it can be used when your action would be unavailable (e.g. you're dominated, incapacitated, feared etc.)
The capstone is actually powerful enough to reward you for being a Monk 20 now, for games that go that high.
There are systemic buffs as well. Monks get a 1st-level feat now (because everyone does) and monks can grapple allies to get them out of harm's way (because everyone can.) But I still count those in the monk buff column because they can benefit from these to an outsize degree - for example, a 2024 Monk starting with the Tough feat is a considerably better tank than his 2014 counterpart, and one using the Skilled feat will be a much better scout and spy.
"But their aura -" is good but is often limited by using a secondary stat sitting at +2 or perhaps +3 and the range often makes it self-serving rather than team supporting.
Honestly, applying the nerf-hammer to paladin aura (make it a flat +1 or +2) would open a lot of design space to make the class better elsewhere, and is IMO what they should have done.
"But their aura -" is good but is often limited by using a secondary stat sitting at +2 or perhaps +3 and the range often makes it self-serving rather than team supporting.
Honestly, applying the nerf-hammer to paladin aura (make it a flat +1 or +2) would open a lot of design space to make the class better elsewhere, and is IMO what they should have done.
How does slightly reducing the value of their casting stat open much design space? It doesn't open feature slots for alternative options, there's still enough features that use the DC or stat mod that tanking CHA is more hindrance than help stat-wise, and frankly they've already got a reasonable degree of stat flexibility. Despite the way some people gnash their teeth about MAD classes, the simple fact is that it's really not hard to branch out into a skill stat on one. Paladins can already sword and board in Heavy Armor for solid AC and have Shield of Faith if they think they need a boost, as well as having a now Bonus Action emergency heal button that means investing in CON is not a high priority. Honestly, I think I'd favor CHA over CON for better saves and features as opposed to slightly more HP and generally lower saves, which also leaves points free to invest in places like INT or WIS if you want to round out your skills.
How does slightly reducing the value of their casting stat open much design space?
A +5 to all saves in a 10' radius is crazy-strong and heavily incentivizes figuring out some way to become non-MAD by taking some ability that allows using your casting stat to make attacks, and it's what you have to balance for because it's not that hard to achieve.
How does slightly reducing the value of their casting stat open much design space?
A +5 to all saves in a 10' radius is crazy-strong and heavily incentivizes figuring out some way to become non-MAD by taking some ability that allows using your casting stat to make attacks, and it's what you have to balance for because it's not that hard to achieve.
Currently the only way to do that is by multiclassing, which many people seem to forget is subject to DM's discretion. If you really think Hexlock is such a blight, you just don't allow it at your table and move on. And do you really think the majority of Paladins are all conforming to this single optimized model?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Sorry but no. I played a Paladin that could cast Compel Duel for FREE 3 times per day (Theros campaign), and I never got it to do anything useful ever. The way you make yourself a primary target is to run up into the face of the enemy and threaten to deal 15+ damage to them as an AoO. Alternatively: Grapple them and give them the choice of attacking you or using their entire action for a 40% chance to break free of the grapple.
If you had read my second post, I addressed the "primary caster does everything better" point. Spell slots actually aren't the biggest issue, it's spell selection; early on even full casters have a fairly short list of spells at hand; at 5th level a Druid using point buy or standard array will have 9 known spells from levels 1-3; if they're the healer for the party Lesser Restoration and Cure Wounds are almost an absolute must, and stuff like Revivify or Aura of Vitality make a strong case as well. And you'll also want a good number of combat spells; between control, attack, and defense spells it's easy to take up 4 or 5 picks there. So, even tending towards a conservative number of picks there, that's 6 spells of 9, leaving 3 for utility and there's enough utility options that it's easy for a Ranger and Druid to fill different niches.
Sorry again, but no. I played a healer Druid and I never ever prepared Cure Wounds nor Revivify nor Aura of Vitality, and Lesser Restoration only extremely sparingly as I instead just bought a scroll of Lesser Restoration in case of emergency.
To play a Healer Druid you need:
1) Healing Word
2) Lesser Restoration - as a scroll or from a Magic item
3) Revivify - as a scroll
4) Mass Cure Wounds
5) Greater Restoration - as a scroll or from a Magic item
6) Heal
Optional:
1) Freedom of Movement
2) Death Ward
Nobody should ever be wasting a spell preparation on Revivify, just make / buy some scrolls as you'll almost never need to cast it. Same goes for the Restorations. At 5th level, you are always better off using your 3rd level spells to kill the bad guys than to revivify someone. If you have a kind DM they will give you another way to raise a dead ally - e.g. retreating and taking their body to a cleric for Raise Dead - and if you have a vindictive DM they won't let you have diamonds for Revivify anyway.
You're assuming scrolls or a specific magic item will be readily accessible (I'm not even sure how you get the Restorations from a magic item unless it's a homebrew one), which isn't a given. And how a DM handles dead players is not something you can define as "if they don't do it this way, they're wrong". And, regardless, the point stands that at 5th level there's not enough spell options for a Druid to actually cover their full range of utility unless they want to have little to no other options.
Both Restorations are available in the Necklace of Prayer Beads, and Lesser Restoration is in the Staff of Healing. RAW anyone can make their own scrolls with like 1 day of downtime.
At 5th level, a druid needs only Healing Word to be a perfectly adequate healer. If they want the "full range" of utility they need Lesser Restoration and Healing Word (all the other spells I listed at far to high a level so aren't available to any 5th level character). 2 spells is not arduous when you have 9 spells prepared, especially since so few Druid spells are actually worth preparing.
Here's my 5th level Druid's prepared spell list. I dare you to try an choose a different set that is better at any particular "utility" than these, or even what spells a 5th level Ranger would take that would still be valuable in a party with this druid :
1st: Healing Word, Faerie Fire, Absorb Elements, Speak to Animals, Detect Magic
2nd: Spike Growth, Moonbeam, Pass without Trace
3rd: Conjure Animals
Necklace of Prayer Beads is Rare and what beads you get are variable per RAW, so even if you have it by level 5, you can't guarantee you'll have a restoration bead unless the DM is specifically tailoring it, and Staff of Healing is also Rare. Using the XGtE rules for scroll scribing, it takes 3 days per 2nd level scroll. In a white room this arrangement is possible, but none of this is a given for actual basic character design, it's dependent on being in a campaign that will facilitate the acquisition of these materials.
Regarding your spell list, there's things like Beast Sense, Animal Messenger, and Locate Object. Are these absolute top tier 1st picks for a white room dungeon crawl build? No. Do they provide additional utility, particularly in campaigns that have objectives more complex than "proceed to goal, kill anything that tries to stop you"? Yes.
Compelled duel seems to be inspired by divine challenge from 4e (much like sentinel appears inspired by the warrior's combat challenge from 4e), only made completely garbage. The equivalent of the 4e ability would be something like:
its basically a taunt, the npc gets disadvantage versus other targets as a BA. grapple requires a free hand, which means you can't attack if you are wearing a shield. Perhaps you weren't interested in a taunt or controlling enemies and preferred to use your BA on other things, but that doesnt mean it not a spell that makes you better at protecting things than a person without it.
I ve DMed, sometimes the npc risks the AoO. Just standing there hitting him is what the player wants to happen, enemies are not always going to oblige.
I used it all the time b/c I had nothing else to do with my BA. These are all the ways that it was rendered useless:
^^ this. Compelled duel is something that looks nice on the surface, but it falls apart in actual play.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
The difference between your view and mine is that I believe a half caster is meant to interweave spells in their combat. Not be a half-baked martial and a half-baked spell caster in one but only able to do one or the other at any given time. The fantasy I imagine around Paladins (actually both half-casters) is somewhat closer to a Witcher. It's not necessarily big flashy spell casting that sorcerers in that universe can utilize, but rather practical spell casting of lesser nature that complements their martial prowess instead of substituting it. Breadth of options is nice, but the neat part is that parties seldom consists of 1 or 2 people. So there's a very good chance that there is some overlap between the half-caster's options and someone else in the party. Therefore your breadth of options seldom bears fruit as someone else is often better at doing it. And as some have already stated previously in the thread, full spellcasters often end up doing OOC better than or equivalently to skill oriented classes somewhere around late tier 2, start tier 3.
I'm not saying I want Paladins to swing their sword and cast Time Stop (just to be ridiculous). Some restrictions could be made to spellcasting during your attack action, either globally (only cast up to a certain level, be it fixed or based on pala lvl/prof. bonus or something else) or it could be more specific (only allow oath spells). When this hypothetical feature comes online is also up for debate/balance, but not much later than lvl 6-7. This would represent a warrior who uses magic to enhance their combat skills, instead of occasionally being a subpar Martial (past tier 2) and occasionally being a bad Spellcaster. The Haste spell from the Vengeance Oath is one of the better examples of magic being used to improve a Martial's combat prowess. However considering the drawback when losing concentration, this is a very risky spell to use as a Paladin.
The Smite spells working as bonus action spells is somewhat beneficial for this concept although a bit clunky. We do get back to the action economy and using the BA for Smites means you give up other choices. Previously the base Smite was "free" in terms of action economy and it was only when you dabbed into the tech-options that you had to spend your BA. So not only are we taking the BA away from Paladin when using Divine Smite, we're also limiting them to once per turn. The once per turn was always intended to bring down Nova-smiting - which makes sense, however also taking the BA is quite a substantial nerf. Channel Divinities also lay claim to your bonus action (if not your regular action in some cases) - as does Lay on Hands, but that's a major plus compared to a regular action.
Personally I had hoped that Smites would be a separate add-on option like how Divine Smite works in the 2014 PHB. (And if we tie Smites to the Channel Divinity resource and ramp up the number of uses over the Paladin levels, we wont see multiclassing outperform pure Paladins in using Smites)
No more can a Vengeance Paladin use Misty Step to blink behind enemy lines to attempt to take out their rear with a big, meaty Divine Smite. Although TBF as long as Smites functions as spells, that would never be an option with the bonus action spell restrictions - at least as of 2014 PHB.
I would love to see the Paladin spell list expanded a bit with more tech/control options and spells that would lend themselves well to this idea of interweaving spells with their attacks. For instance a short range spell that deals some thunder damage and knocks the target prone - setting up for advantage on the weapon attack. I know Thunderous Smite exists, but it requires that you already make a hit and it does also push the target. Perhaps some of Paladin's existing control spells could be improved to work better as control and not have as many gaps or clauses for dispelling. The new Daze condition (either you move or you attack/cast) seems like a prime candidate for Paladin to play around with.
Paladins are not the highest damage dealing frontliner, and they are likely losing to Cleric for best frontline control/support. But if the Paladin could both deal some weapon damage AND do some spell casting that would grant them some uniqueness. "But their aura -" is good but is often limited by using a secondary stat sitting at +2 or perhaps +3 and the range often makes it self-serving rather than team supporting. As for interweaving spells and weapon attacks; EK and Bladesingers both mostly occupy the space of casting a cantrip while attacking, often being a weapon attack like Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade - in other words a magic-infused weapon attack. And lets not forget that Clerics can cast Spiritual Weapon which grants them a BA spell attack at range, which is not using concentration, uses their WIS modifier for attack and damage, and they can cast other spells on subsequent turns whilst the spirit weapon is whacking at enemies. Technically they are better half-casters than the half-casters. So Half-casters being able to cast any spell (although possibly with some restrictions) would separate them from these subclasses that both can attack and spell cast (I know, EK lvl 18). Half-casters don't naturally have access to cantrips so their limited spell slot pool restricts them. The respective fighting styles that grants them access to pick up cantrips from either Druid or Cleric would be getting a massive boost to its value given this feature, which is not a bad thing as they are often overshadowed. And to the commentary that homogeny between classes serves no one but to find the best of that given metric and nothing else is valuable/viable. A half-caster being able to make a weapon attack and then cast Hold Person (for instance) is not subtracting from neither the martials, who deal more damage, nor from spell casters, who have access to more spells, stronger spells, and more spell slots to sling damage, buff or control spells around.
What buffs did the Monk get that they didn't already have?
Have you played or read the Witcher? Witchers have half-baked spellcasting that they alternate between with weapon strikes on different turns to make use of tactics like strafe-ing, using terrain to their advantage, triggering monster weaknesses, or momentary battlefield control. In the Witcher universe, witchers are routinely ridiculed by true sorcerers for their limited abilities with magic.
It is probably controversial, but I think if smites stay as bonus actions they can probably get a one die bump in damage across the board and be ok. Because you won't get more than one a turn and it has anti-synergy with other bonus action effects.
Unarmed attacks moved up a step, the dash and disengage bonus actions no longer dip into the Ki/Discipline pool (unless also adding the dodge action to them), once per long rest you can recharge your Ki/Discipline pool for free when rolling initiative, deflect missiles now works against melee attacks, Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, and Step of the Wind all get a boost at level 10, and at level 13 Deflect works v energy attacks. So, better damage, better defense, and effectively more Ki/Discipline points? My issue with the monk wasn't what it could and couldn't do, but that it couldn't do them well enough or long enough. The basics were improved across the board.
You missed a few:
Stillness of MindSelf-Restoration no longer needs an action, so it can be used when your action would be unavailable (e.g. you're dominated, incapacitated, feared etc.)Honestly, applying the nerf-hammer to paladin aura (make it a flat +1 or +2) would open a lot of design space to make the class better elsewhere, and is IMO what they should have done.
How does slightly reducing the value of their casting stat open much design space? It doesn't open feature slots for alternative options, there's still enough features that use the DC or stat mod that tanking CHA is more hindrance than help stat-wise, and frankly they've already got a reasonable degree of stat flexibility. Despite the way some people gnash their teeth about MAD classes, the simple fact is that it's really not hard to branch out into a skill stat on one. Paladins can already sword and board in Heavy Armor for solid AC and have Shield of Faith if they think they need a boost, as well as having a now Bonus Action emergency heal button that means investing in CON is not a high priority. Honestly, I think I'd favor CHA over CON for better saves and features as opposed to slightly more HP and generally lower saves, which also leaves points free to invest in places like INT or WIS if you want to round out your skills.
A +5 to all saves in a 10' radius is crazy-strong and heavily incentivizes figuring out some way to become non-MAD by taking some ability that allows using your casting stat to make attacks, and it's what you have to balance for because it's not that hard to achieve.
Currently the only way to do that is by multiclassing, which many people seem to forget is subject to DM's discretion. If you really think Hexlock is such a blight, you just don't allow it at your table and move on. And do you really think the majority of Paladins are all conforming to this single optimized model?