View Poll Results: Should Chap 1 be sanctioned?
- Voters
- 26. You may not vote on this poll
Results 11 to 20 of 67
Thread: Sanctioning Vote for Chap 1
-
02-06-2005, 08:54 PM #11
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
The paladin issues were discussed at great detail in the past. They were voted on and have been sanctioned already, as has most of Chap 1 except for the noble, skills, feats and equipment. And even then the skills and feats and noble were discussed a whole lot already.
There weren't a lot of people working on the paladin classes, Rasp and me.
People voted on the alignment restrictions, etc.
I have to disagree that the paladin of Nesire is sorely lacking compared to a cleric of Nesire. The paladin retains most of the normal paladin abilities and gains a few extra, has a larger spell selection than a normal paladin (less than the cleric - but that is the way it should be) and can cast moore spels than a standard paladin and les than a cleric - again as it should be.
The default version allows a paladin of Nesire to freely multiclass with a cleric. It is only when using the variant that things change (basically the characer can't freely multiclass anymore but instead gains the straight class abilities which were chosen to be a decent amalgamation of the what would happen if a character multiclassed.
In 2nd ed IMO the paladin of Nesire was the least often chosen paladin anyway. Pretty much the paladin of Avani ruled as far as which paladin was the most powerful. Things are a whole more balanced than they were in 2nd edDuane Eggert
-
02-06-2005, 11:19 PM #12
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Gothenburg, Sweden
- Posts
- 949
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Well --
Paladins suffer quite a bit from MAD. They need high Charisma for their special abilities, high Wisdom for their spells, and high Strength and Constitution to be decent fighters. They can shirk on their Dex a bit due to their ability to wear heavy armor, and their Int usually comes dead last. Even if paladins have as good a BAB as fighters, they usually tend to have lower Strength scores, due to having to spread their scores differently, and prioritize differently when they level up. Being 1 or 2 points behind on attack values hurts a lot in the long run. Much more than that, and you quickly become next to irrelevant as any kind of warrior.
What that means is that, in order to be balanced in a game with typical ability scores, a paladin's class abilities need to be somewhat more powerful than those of a fighter. In a game of atypically high ability scores, things change, of course, but that's a whole other nest of worms.
Now, what you've done here is weaken the basic paladin class in five different areas:
- Lower BAB
- Lower HD
- Changed Fort save for Will save (this can be seen as a tradeoff, but for various reasons, it'll probably average out to a penalty -- frontline fighters are meant to make those Fort saves)
- No mount
- Removed most of the paladin's combat-related spells
What do they get in return for that?
- More spells per day, higher spell levels, and earlier spells
- (I'm assuming) a full caster level; this isn't as useful as it sounds, as this class doesn't need to beat SR a lot (at all), and most of its spells don't scale well with level
- Some water-related abilities
As the class stands now, there are several examples to compare it with offhand. The bard, the healer from Miniatures Handbook, and the psychic warrior (at least the 3e kind; haven't seen the 3.5 version). If you compare it to a cleric, it is woefully underpowered, as has already been noted. Of course, clerics are a tad too good to begin with, but anyway.
What this class lacks first and foremost is a niche. It won't heal nearly as good as a cleric, it won't fight nearly as good as a paladin does; it won't really fight much better than a cleric, and it won't really cast spells much better than a paladin. And the other abilities it gets won't make up for that difference.
Part of what makes paladins passable at high levels is their spellcasting ability; they can cast some pretty good buffing spells. Those are gone here, and that hurts a lot. It actually probably hurts about as much as the addition of higher-level spells helps, when those spells just aren't very useful straight up.
At lower levels, of course, there are other tradeoffs. At 1st level, you trade +1 BAB and 2 hp for the ability to cast one 0-level spell once per day. That's a pretty poor tradeoff, especially considering the spells available. Cure Minor Wounds once a day? The hit point loss alone is more than equal to that.
Compared to a bard, this paladin gets an inferior spell list, worse base saves, much fewer skill points, and class abilities that may or may not compare. (Note that the utility of an ability like Smite Evil may drop as the paladin's base attack drops.) A bard specializes in boosting the rest of the party, something this class is woefully lacking in -- and it doesn't pack enough of a punch on its own to compensate for that, either. Being able to heal better is largely irrelevant, as the ability to heal usually means you have to win or survive the fight first, which this paladin won't exactly excel at.
Compared to the psychic warrior, this class simply doesn't have the bonus feats or the abilities that makes it worth it. Psychic warriors can get lots of interesting psionic powers that really boosts their combat prowess. And even then, they're somewhat weak most of the time.
Compared to the cleric, this class is just bad. The cleric will fight very nearly as well, and cast much better spells. As the classes reach higher levels, the cleric will simply outpace this paladin. Clerics having better saves, better turn undead (or at all), domain abilities, and more and better spells more than makes up for all the abilities this class gets.
This class is clearly better at fighting than the healer, but the healer is otherwise a much better... healer, especially on the frontlines.
The paladin of Nesirie needs one of the following boosts, IMO (in order of preference):
- Base attack set back to good.
- More spells per day, and a better spell selection, including all the usual paladin buffs, maybe some summoning (water creature) spells
- HD set back to d10, Fort/Will changed back, and some other or better special abilitiesJan E. Juvstad.
-
02-07-2005, 09:08 AM #13
I would have no problem in boosting the paladin of Nesirie back to d10 if I thought it was that unbalanced; however, the paladin is not a variant of the fighter per se... Rather, the class is a cleric/fighter mixup that represents a champion of the order; since Nesirie is less militant, her paladins play more of the crusading healer than the crusading warrior, if you catch my drift. And a mount is not very suitable (dolphin, anyone?)...
An idea would be to have her have both good Fortitude and good Will saves, and one could grant her a deflection bonus to her AC equal to her Charisma bonus... But that's that, and I do not see us granting her more spells per day, but the idea of Summon Monster/Nature's Ally (Aquatic/Water only) seems interesting. Buffing spells is not a given, but an increase in skill points to 4 + Int might work.
I am happy you like the Paladin of Cuiraécen; he is my most prized of all 4!
As for the dodge bonus, I am referring to the dodge bonus dwarves get; in the PHB, they get a +4 dodge bonus vs. giants, but in Chapter 1. it reads they get +2 instead.
-
02-07-2005, 09:39 AM #14
Could someone please explain WHY this pretty big change to paladins is being made?
2E papadins had a few special features, but nothing so grat as this. The paladin is a holy WARRIOR, so anything that derails it from that purpose if way of the mark IMO.
B
-
02-07-2005, 10:45 AM #15
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Posts
- 125
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I'm not sure who found out that Nesirie's paladins was less militant than other paladins. As pointed out by GreenKnight, then Paladins are warriors. If you want the wandering healer, you simply take a Cleric. Then you can heal spontaneously.
Paladin represent the holy warrior, that is a fighter first and a healer first. I don't think that part should really be changed.
-
02-07-2005, 11:22 AM #16
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Gothenburg, Sweden
- Posts
- 949
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I would have no problem in boosting the paladin of Nesirie back to d10 if I thought it was that unbalanced; however, the paladin is not a variant of the fighter per se...
As for the rest of what you say, yes, the paladin is sort of a fighter/cleric mix. They need a distinct and definite role to contribute to a party, however. As it stands now, it falls short of all the chairs it could sit on. If you want to play a healer, wouldn't a cleric be a better choice?
That idea would probably turn this paladin into the ultimate 'piss the other players off' class -- they die because this paladin isn't a good warrior and can't defend them; the paladin lives to see another group of adventurers die because of her powerful innate defensive abilities.
Jan E. Juvstad.
-
02-07-2005, 11:50 AM #17
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Alright here are some thread links for past discussion on Chap 1 (which any one could find if they just took the time to look them up - I did it a page at a time in about 10 minutes). I didn't include all of the threads, there were severalabout elves and spellcasting, but if you want to read them you can check themout on your own. In these threads you will find the discussion (and polls) on paladins. The revised version of Chap 1 was first posted for serious work in March 2004. There have been numerous (some think too many) polls run to quantify issues as we went along and to decide (i.e., sanction) things as we went also.
IMO revisiting issues that have already been decided is totally counter productive. If people didn't wish to participate in the discussion or votes as they came up, well that is a reflection on their commitment to getting this project (product) finished.
The main point I'm trying to make is that we don't invalidate previous votes, unless there is something that casues a drastic change in the way things are done. For example Chap 1 has beensanctiioned. It won't be touched until we finish the remainder of the BRCS. At that time certain issues may casue us to revisit it to revise and mesh the chapters together (Specifically how on the battlefield is handled will cause a serious relooking at some blood abilities). But revisiting (and throwing out previous polls "just because" is just not right. If you don't like things that have already been decided then vote no for sanctioning. If the chap is not sanctioned then it will be time to go back to the writing table and start this process all over again.
Paladins and multiclassing:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2363
Poll: Trying to capture opinions on BR paladins:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2395
Chap 1 (revised) – races, discussion on the races:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2442
Poll Chap 1 revised humans, how to handle:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2457
Poll: paladin alignments:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2515
Chap 1 (revised) (first post March 2004)
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2317
Poll: What is the historical reference for the Khinasi?:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2706
Poll: What is the historical reference for the Brecht?:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2702
Magician class – discussion on how to handle:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2700
Poll: Bard, magicians and magic – determining lesser magic guidelines:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2697
Rev Chap 1 Char classes:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2674
Avani paladins:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2580
Poll: Chap 1 classes sanctioning (except noble and magician): (Note this poll was run based on the results of the poll immediately following)
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2770
Poll: Sanctioning vote for classes art of Chap 1:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2767
Poll: Chap 1 races – sanctioning vote:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2761
Chap 1 revision (7-04) except for magicians:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2749
Chap 1 races:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2699
Magician Spell List:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2815
Rangers as arcane casters:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=1999
Poll: Which is the better BAB for nobles?:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2781
Which way should the noble go?:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2780
Poll: Magician spell list:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2737
Poll: Noble class abilities:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2853
Poll: Noble class deciding how to write it:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2848
Poll: Noble class:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2830
Magician class sanctioned version:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2836
Poll: Magician core class features:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2819
Poll: Magician class sanctioning vote:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=2822Duane Eggert
-
02-07-2005, 11:59 AM #18
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
-
02-07-2005, 12:06 PM #19
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Posts
- 125
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
The main point I'm trying to make is that we don't invalidate previous votes, unless there is something that casues a drastic change in the way things are done. For example Chap 1 has beensanctiioned. It won't be touched until we finish the remainder of the BRCS. At that time certain issues may casue us to revisit it to revise and mesh the chapters together (Specifically how on the battlefield is handled will cause a serious relooking at some blood abilities). But revisiting (and throwing out previous polls "just because" is just not right. If you don't like things that have already been decided then vote no for sanctioning. If the chap is not sanctioned then it will be time to go back to the writing table and start this process all over again.
Personally I'd rather work out a bit like:
Write all stuff
Playtest it. Get input back.
Rewrite stuff that needs to be rewritten
More playtesting
Rewrite
Playtesting.
Gives more consistency IMO. Instead of:
Write one chapter
Playtest
Make errata
Write new chapter
Playtest
Make errata to both chapters
Write new chapter
Playtest
Make errata to all chapters...
Each chapter would then be a work in progress, until it all can be concluded.
-
02-07-2005, 12:32 PM #20
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Wouldn't that end out with a lot of errata during the time that other chapters are revisioned?
Personally I'd rather work out a bit like:
Write all stuff
Playtest it. Get input back.
Rewrite stuff that needs to be rewritten
More playtesting
Rewrite
Playtesting.
While ideally that is the best way to do things, logistically there just isn't enough committed man/women power to accomplish that task.
Here is a link to a thread that sums up the concept and desires of the mailserve/netforce:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...showtopic=1115
There was a poll (that got lost in one of the web' updates that had it clearly decided that people wanted a chapter at a time and basically to do things as they came out.
What is really needed is a group of dedicated people who want to take overall cognizance of a specific chapter. Then things can be done in parallel instead ofme doing it all. What this means is someone who is willing to do an entire chapter and not just portions of it. This is what most people I have had discussions with seem to want to do - insert or work on parts but not the whole chapter.
As a community we have ADD in the fact that we can't focus on any one thing for too long before moving on to something else.
I could/would serve as the overall editor to ensure some sort of continuity/consistency (which is what Doom was doing in the beginning).
The type of people needed are those with extensive knowledge of 2nd ed Birthright and 3.5 core rules. They must be able to check their ego at the door when dealing with the general population (hey I'm working on it OK ). They must not try to insert their own hose-rules. What I mean by this is that while everyone has their own version of the rules they use and will continue touse we are trying to develop a baseline for standardizatin. This baseling allows individual DMs to take what they want and add/change the other parts but there will be an area for commonality that can be used as the basis for discussion and a standard set of rules that people can use when they write adventures, etc. (Something I really would like to see happening in the long run). The person needs to be willing (and capable) of writing in English (US) {not making any claims as to whether or not is the 'proper' English but it is the WotC standard being used}. They must also understand and attempt to follow the core philosophy of the project (posted on the FAQ thread).
Oh and that ego thing - anyone who is soley interested in just getting their name on the project need not apply. There have been a ratio of about 10 to 1 people doing this in the past both on the BRCS and the Atlas project.Duane Eggert
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks