Kit Revisions (Paladins)

[Lawlight]

I was so desperate that for a moment I dreamed of throwing away my own rules and change the UH into a Divine Hunter (name stolen from this Pathfinder archetype), turning it into a paladin focused on hunting down both demons and undead (as many of you has suggested before), and perhaps slightly more proficient with ranged weapons than standard paladins (e.g. getting a ranged version of Smite Evil). I fear that will remain a dream though, it's really a too heavy change, and I have to draw a line on how much I can change of the original material.

You don't need throw away your own rules for such a change. Imo the name Undead Hunter strongly indicates a Person skilled in ranged weapons.

Furthermore, all warrior classes seem to have a kit that favor ranged weapons in some way or another: On one hand the Wizardslayer whose playstyle strongly favors fast ranged weapons like dart & daggers and on the other hand the heavy specialized Archer. There is no need for heavy specialisation for this kit, but I think something like Mastery (+++) in Crossbows would fit (even a heavy armored person can use them) well. As long as (++) in any other weapon stays, nobody should have a problem with it. A ranged version of Smite Evil is not out of class too...

 

Don't want to rub more salt, but yes, this kit is basically True Paladin with changed immunities if you keep it that way. I'm still in favour of expanding the whole concept (i.e. Demons as well).

Agree.

[Ardanis]

My considerations about spellcasting for paladins (and rangers):

1) Their spells are generally too weak and too late to contribute - thus no point in keeping them.

2) Those few spells that paladins do use, e.g. Armor of Faith and DUHM, are not much different from feats like Divine Shield and Divine Might - so we can indeed make them into special innates.

 

However:

3) As you can see, most of the players would probably not even notice they don't have a spellbook, so it is not a serious disadvantage.

4) Does it really matter where you access those abilities from, spellbook or the innate bar?

5) Spellbook provides slightly better user interface.

6) What about those who may want to use on occasion some other spell? See 1, paladin spells are generally way behind cleric's, they aren't going to upset the balance.

[kreso]

My considerations about spellcasting for paladins (and rangers):

1) Their spells are generally too weak and too late to contribute - thus no point in keeping them.

I don't agree with this. Remove Fear, for example, is always useful. NPP is a great spell at level 4, ditto ProEvil 10'radius.

2) Those few spells that paladins do use, e.g. Armor of Faith and DUHM, are not much different from feats like Divine Shield and Divine Might - so we can indeed make them into special innates.

I think they benefit from more than these 2, moreover with SR.

 

However:

3) As you can see, most of the players would probably not even notice they don't have a spellbook, so it is not a serious disadvantage.

.......

4) Does it really matter where you access those abilities from, spellbook or the innate bar?

No, not really.

5) Spellbook provides slightly better user interface.

And can be changed.

6) What about those who may want to use on occasion some other spell? See 1, paladin spells are generally way behind cleric's, they aren't going to upset the balance.

Not everyone wants a cleric. Besides, having more than one caster of divine spells is generally a good thing.

[Galsic]

Now that I think about it, the kits that excite me the most here are, in fact, Inquisitor and Cavalier, and, as of the current build, they lack spellcasting. In the past, I've always tried to have two priests in my party, so the fact that the Inquisitor didn't have access to spells was never a factor, especially since paladin spell progression was rather slow anyway. So, considering my own experiences, I'm (mostly) in agreement with Ardanis's last post.

[Grammarsalad]

Undead Hunter

 

OK. Lets just throw out some ideas and see what sticks

 

Name and Concept

 

Divine Hunter: (ie a ranged paladin) I actually really like it.

 

Perhaps you could change the name to Hunter making it compatible with a range build, without making it a range-only kit(?) He could be fluffed something like, "The Hunter is a bane to all unnatural creatures and those mortals who would dare summon or create them. Unlike a traditional paladin, he prefers medium armor and ranged weapons; while he is a perfectly capable hand-to-hand fighter, the nature of his quarry demands that he diversify..." bleh, I can't write this stuff. But something like that might keep the general concept of a 'hunter of the unnatural' while letting him diversify a little bit (both in his build and the creatures he's effective against).

 

Smite Evil: Perhaps this ability could be retooled just a bit...(italics for alterations)

 

SMITE EVIL: During the round when this ability is activated the Paladin gains +2 bonus to attack rolls, and any melee hit against an evil creature causes 1d6 additional points of magic damage.For every 4 levels, the additional damage increases by 1d6, up to 6d6 at 20th level. Against undead, outsiders, and spell casters, the damage bonus at first level is +2d4 and instead increases by 2d4 for every 4 levels, up to 12d4 at 20th level.

 

At 10th level, any undead creature struck must make a save. spell or be disrupted. Any evil outsider struck must make a save vs. spell or be expelled back to its home plane.

 

Might be an ok exchange for lighter armor(?)

 

While (I suspect) these extra bonuses won't stack with bane weapons, they act as a bane to a few extra creatures making the ability stack laterally. Also, the bonus isn't particularly significant against casters without help. He won't be replacing a wizard slayer or inquisitor with such an ability. He's going to need someone else to get rid of those protections. (or preventing them from casting them in the first place)

 

 

Aura: Perhaps instead of the 'standard' aura, they could have something like:

 

AURA OF PROTECTION: Evil creatures within 15 feet of the paladin suffer -1 penalty to attack rolls.

 

At 14th level, undead caught in the aura must save vs. spell with a +4 bonus every round or flee from his sight. (say a 1 round undead specific fear effect.)

 

At 17th level, demons and undead within 15 feet must save vs. spell without a bonus every round or flee from his sight.

 

Notice it's still effective enough against all evil opponents but 14th level it could really come into its own as that is the point where Bodhi and friends start to become a real nuisance (though what do their saves look like? Obviously, the specifics could be tweaked)

 

While they're running away, you can pin cushion them!

 

Some general ideas:

 

Spells

 

You might give the paladin some unique spells which might be useful on their own but also effective against their chosen enemies.

 

Know Evil: See special below. This might be a good replacement for the paladin's detect evil spell which he doesn't need anyway. I think it would be fine as a 1st level spell (so, limited) or a high level unlimited innate.

 

Challenge: Opponent saves vs. spell or goes (is pulled via wing buffet) toward the paladin to answer his magically augmented challenge to single combat.

 

Grave's Beckoning: A command spell that also works against undead. Heh, actually command seems better for the pally and this better for the cleric. I see this spell (command) is not available, but I think it fits such a charismatic 'in change' individual. Still, it might be appropriate for an undead hunter type at least (as a command to go back to the grave).

 

Specials

 

Know Evil: When your detect evil special ability, you gain insight into the weaknesses of your enemy making all attacks against them gain a +1 to their attack role.

 

Should only affect evil opponents detected by the spell. Perhaps should allow a save. An upgrade; a very high level upgrade. Not accumulative. Inspired by Know Opponent.

[kreso]

Undead Hunter

.....bleh, I can't write this stuff.

:D

Yeah, it's really hard when you try, I agree.

 

Smite Evil: Perhaps this ability could be retooled just a bit...(italics for alterations)

Like the idea.

 

SMITE EVIL: During the round when this ability is activated the Paladin gains +2 bonus to attack rolls, and any melee hit against an evil creature causes 1d6 additional points of magic damage.For every 4 levels, the additional damage increases by 1d6, up to 6d6 at 20th level. Against undead, outsiders, and spell casters, the damage bonus at first level is +2d4 and instead increases by 2d4 for every 4 levels, up to 12d4 at 20th level.

I'd actually keep these enhanced numbers, leave any humanoid out of it, only vs. Undead and Outsiders would he get a bonus, but I like these numbers.

Perhaps renaming the ability into Smite ummmmm..... something!? I can't write this stuff either.

 

At 10th level, any undead creature struck must make a save. spell or be disrupted. Any evil outsider struck must make a save vs. spell or be expelled back to its home plane.

This might be too powerful, moreover for Undead. But then again, Turning blasts them on sight...

Checked myself (SCS Liches, aTweaks Undead)

Saving throw vs spells for Vampires is inconsistent a bit, but generally in between 8 and 13. More of 13, so the Vampires would have 60% or so chance to be disrupted. Mummy has 16 vs spell. Greater Mummy has 8 (and 2 vs.Death) and would be killed easier than with MoD.

The big cahunas, Liches, have save vs spells 1, therefore being almost immune to effect.

 

Might be an ok exchange for lighter armor(?)

That would be a nice trade-off, but how to explain it?

 

While (I suspect) these extra bonuses won't stack with bane weapons

I think they would, if the extra damage is magical.

 

 

Aura:

At 14th level, undead caught in the aura must save vs. spell with a +4 bonus every round or flee from his sight. (say a 1 round undead specific fear effect.)

I'd prefer killing them, instead letting them run.

 

At 17th level, demons and undead within 15 feet must save vs. spell without a bonus every round or flee from his sight.

This might be tricky. I think, am not sure, they might be immune to Fear. With aTweaks, and as per PnP, they are.

 

While they're running away, you can pin cushion them!

So, the idea is to make them run and than kill them with arrows? Mmmm....not bad I think.

 

Spells

Challenge: Opponent saves vs. spell or goes (is pulled via wing buffet) toward the paladin to answer his magically augmented challenge to single combat.

This would be a pain to code, if at all possible, I believe.

[Jarno Mikkola]

At 10th level, any undead creature struck must make a save. spell or be disrupted. Any evil outsider struck must make a save vs. spell or be expelled back to its home plane.

And what happens if it's already in it's home plane ? Yes, there's mods that place quests into them.

 

Erhm, and I won't ever see the paladin as a ranged attacker ...

 

Undead Hunter ..

Perhaps you could change the name to Hunter making it compatible with a range build, without making it a range-only kit(?) ...

jeah and lets put a "bounty" in front of that and the kit gets a booty ... As there's already a Bounty Hunter in the games kits.

[kreso]

Feedback on Paladins, BG1

 

True Paladin

This kit has the potential to be the best tank in game, easilly matching up Barbarian's resistances + combining it with the heaviest of armors. Unlike others, I find low-level cleric spells very useful (Free Action is level 4, and it's great even in ToB, same for Break Enchantement, NPP etc). A few castings of Cure Light Wounds and similar don't help much in BG1 but Remove Fear is great, moreover since Paladin himself is immune to it.

Very powerful class, with a steroid ability to boot. The damage done isn't big, nor does it last long, but it helps, even more due to THAC0 bonus which helps with their limited weapon specialization. I was surprised how many enemies in BG1 aren't coded as "evil" but that's another matter.

Saving throws are just icing on the cake.

Overall, a very viable pick.

 

Cavalier

Mmm...I'm divided here. His ability to get +++ in certain weapons is great, no doubt about it. Easilly matches up with fighters in terms of damage, even surpasses them with Smite Evil. If he could get +++ in 2-handed sword, I'd say he's OP without second tought.

As he is, and given his free ++ in Sword and Shield, he's an extremely versatile fighter. Need to tank - np, he excells at that.

Want more damage - switch to dual-wielding and activate Heroism + Smite Evil.

Immunities are ok, being vulnerable to poision doesn't matter much, neither arrows nor spiders tend to hit him often, if ever apart criticals. His saving throws further reduce the chance for poisoning anyway.

Heroism - it's nice and I love the icon used.

This kit may be a bit too much over fighters in BG1. Grandmastery in BG2 would probably equal that, but in BG1 Cavalier>Fighter imo.

For a bit of "balancing", maybe removing the ability to put pips into dual-wield wouldn't be bad, if it's possible.

Another option would be to loose out on +2 to saves.

 

Inquisitor I still need to try out.

 

EDIT:

For Cavalier - I may be fine with him excelling in combat and buffing. However, a rather nice nerf would be removing Lay on Hands from him.

[Demivrgvs]

Divine Spellcasting

My considerations about spellcasting for paladins (and rangers):

1) Their spells are generally too weak and too late to contribute - thus no point in keeping them.

2) Those few spells that paladins do use, e.g. Armor of Faith and DUHM, are not much different from feats like Divine Shield and Divine Might - so we can indeed make them into special innates.

 

However:

3) As you can see, most of the players would probably not even notice they don't have a spellbook, so it is not a serious disadvantage.

4) Does it really matter where you access those abilities from, spellbook or the innate bar?

5) Spellbook provides slightly better user interface.

6) What about those who may want to use on occasion some other spell? See 1, paladin spells are generally way behind cleric's, they aren't going to upset the balance.

1) I only partially agree, especially with SR and KR's earlier access to them (from level 9 to 4). Certain spells are indeed very weak by the time you get them, but many are not imo.

3) Well, that's probably because vanilla's Paladin had no spells at all in BG1, and without SR the # of useful spells was indeed lower.

4) Not directly, but indirectly yes. Innates generally don't have casting time, bypass magic resistance, etc. Furthermore, different "rules" are applied (if we want to remain as close as possible to PnP). For example Disrupting Weapon is a 4th level spell, and I cannot make it available sooner, whereas granting a similar self only innate ability earlier is more likely (e.g. like this).

5) I obviously agree.

6) Those who like paladins with a divine spellbook can still play the True Paladin which will be the most versatile divine warrior, no?

 

Don't get me wrong, I've not given up to try keeping spellcasting, but I do think there was a reason behind AD&D paladin kits losing it. Quoting myself: "This way Paladin's divine spellcasting can allow them to do almost everything the other kits can do (Resist Fear, Dispel Magic, Lesser Restoration, etc.) but kits get more powerful versions of those abilities, can use them sooner and/or more often, and get them as permanent/passive abilities or insta-casting innates."

 

 

Undead Hunter

I was so desperate that for a moment I dreamed of throwing away my own rules and change the UH into a Divine Hunter (name stolen from this Pathfinder archetype), turning it into a paladin focused on hunting down both demons and undead (as many of you has suggested before), and perhaps slightly more proficient with ranged weapons than standard paladins (e.g. getting a ranged version of Smite Evil). I fear that will remain a dream though, it's really a too heavy change, and I have to draw a line on how much I can change of the original material.

You don't need throw away your own rules for such a change. Imo the name Undead Hunter strongly indicates a Person skilled in ranged weapons.

Furthermore, all warrior classes seem to have a kit that favor ranged weapons in some way or another: On one hand the Wizardslayer whose playstyle strongly favors fast ranged weapons like dart & daggers and on the other hand the heavy specialized Archer. There is no need for heavy specialisation for this kit, but I think something like Mastery (+++) in Crossbows would fit (even a heavy armored person can use them) well. As long as (++) in any other weapon stays, nobody should have a problem with it. A ranged version of Smite Evil is not out of class too...

Mmm...you have a point, at least about ranged Smite Evil.

 

I do like the idea but I'm not convinced about Mastery on xbows for a single reason: it pretty much forces this class to use that weapon type, with no alternatives (at least the Cavalier have a bunch of options). Otoh, no one complains about the Archer being "forced" to pick bows, and the UH would still be able to specialize in other weapons. I don't know...though in case of a ranged specialist I'd surely prefer the UH to take xbows rather than bows, because they fit more the class and his heavy armor (btw good point about this Lawlight), and we already have an Archer kit. I don't know...I need more time to think.

 

On a side note, PnP Hunter of the Dead actually isn't a paladin-only kit, but rather a sort of paladin/ranger imo. It combines things like Detect Undead and Smite Undead (a cross between Smite Evil and Racial/Favored Enemy) with Hide from Undead (and hiding does not belong to paladin's vocabulary). That being said, our UH should remain more close to an actual paladin, no?

 

Edit: just a fun note, IR's Blessed Bolts seem tailor-made for UH with xbow

 

True Paladin

Thanks kreso, I was indeed waiting for feedback on paladins!

 

This kit has the potential to be the best tank in game, ... Overall, a very viable pick.

Cool, I love it when a plan comes together!

 

 

Cavalier

This kit may be a bit too much over fighters in BG1. Grandmastery in BG2 would probably equal that, but in BG1 Cavalier>Fighter imo.

As I expected.

 

For a bit of "balancing", maybe removing the ability to put pips into dual-wield wouldn't be bad, if it's possible.

 

Another option would be to loose out on +2 to saves.

...

I may be fine with him excelling in combat and buffing. However, a rather nice nerf would be removing Lay on Hands from him.

I do thought about removing Lay on Hands. It even shares the same levels where you can get mastery in various weapons.

 

Even if I don't like a dual wielding heavy armored paladin concept, I don't know if we should actively forbid to put points in that style. I prefer to find ways to give players an incentive at playing the Cavalier with a shield, like using opcode 183 to give the Cavalier a bonus to AC if he wields a shield, and maybe a Shield Other like ability. Pretty much making our Cavalier a mix of AD&D Cavalier and 3E Player Handbook II Knight.

[kreso]

A bit more feedback/suggestions:

 

Smite Evil may easilly be their most powerful skill, especially in ToB. Of course, this needs to be tested further.

This thing cuts trough Stoneskins. The only way to be protected from this is Apsolute Immunity and/or PFME, since it works on non-enchanted weapons as well.

Very, very powerful. Given the damage it does at high levels (up to >20 per hit), killing evil mages seems very easy. With warrior's THAC0, they can freely ignore mage defences like imp.invisibility and various armors and simply whack them till they die, ignoring Stoneskins and applying spell disruption. Cavalier could especially benefit here with his extra bonuses.

THAC0 bonus is nice, but I don't think it's really needed. Moreover since it works regardless of aligment.

Now, what I would suggest, (and I think others have suggested something similar already) - making Smite Evil bit more kit specific.

E.g.

True Paladin - he keeps the bonuses vs everything Evil. Less damage instead, 1d4 instead of 1d6 dice per upgrade, ending at 5d4 at 16th

Inquisitor - bonus of 1d6 up to 5d6, but only vs Evil mages and Clerics

UH - 1d6 vs Undead only, up to 5d6, at level x this could be extended to Demons as well (..... )

Cavalier - I was considering the option that he keeps his current benefits, yet looses on this ability. And I also can not find an appropriate enemy for them apart Dragons.

 

Another option would be to link this somehow to a set number of attacks, not 1 round. This way, a dual-wielding ToB Paladin delivers 100+ magic damage alone with his blows in a round.

As for Opcode 183, would this be possible? I know I wrote about it, but the way it was made was apperantly bad (editing baldur.bsc)

[Lawlight]

Divine Spellcasting

[...]

6) Those who like paladins with a divine spellbook can still play the True Paladin which will be the most versatile divine warrior, no?

I think it's the best compromise.

 

Undead Hunter

[...]

I don't know...I need more time to think.

No problem. I'm happy that you at least consider such a route.

 

Edit: just a fun note, IR's Blessed Bolts seem tailor-made for UH with xbow

Cool.

 

Cavalier

[...]

I do thought about removing Lay on Hands. It even shares the same levels where you can get mastery in various weapons.

Yes it looks like the obvious choice for a disadvantage. At the moment Cavalier's Lay on Hand is also the only version of this ability of all kits, that didn't changed compared to the base class.

 

I prefer to find ways to give players an incentive at playing the Cavalier with a shield, like using opcode 183 to give the Cavalier a bonus to AC if he wields a shield, and maybe a Shield Other like ability.

Pretty bad ass ideas. I like it. He could be the best 'melee-specialized' tank, while True Paladin could fill the spot of the best allrounder tank.

 

Another option would be to loose out on +2 to saves.

It makes sense. He is more 'melee-specialized' anyway.

 

Now, what I would suggest, (and I think others have suggested something similar already) - making Smite Evil bit more kit specific.

E.g.

True Paladin - he keeps the bonuses vs everything Evil. Less damage instead, 1d4 instead of 1d6 dice per upgrade, ending at 5d4 at 16th

Inquisitor - bonus of 1d6 up to 5d6, but only vs Evil mages and Clerics

UH - 1d6 vs Undead only, up to 5d6, at level x this could be extended to Demons as well (..... )

Cavalier - I was considering the option that he keeps his current benefits, yet looses on this ability. And I also can not find an appropriate enemy for them apart Dragons.

I'm not against a bit more kit specific versions in general, but I don't like the idea of restricting the bonus damage to a special creature type. The UH for example is already to much specialized to that type...

 

Smite Evil

The duration feels really short, but at the same time I share kreso's concerns that it could be to strong against evil mages.

Another possible solution could be to split the bonus damage in magic and physical damage.

[kreso]

Smite Evil

The duration feels really short, but at the same time I share kreso's concerns that it could be to strong against evil mages.

Another possible solution could be to split the bonus damage in magic and physical damage.

Paladin with WW (lasts 2 rounds now) can obtain say, 8 apr and activate Smite Evil the following round.

8x6x6=48 minimum and 288 maximum damage.In addition to his melee damage.

[Grammarsalad]

Good points all.

 

...

 

Erhm, and I won't ever see the paladin as a ranged attacker ...

...

 

Erhm, and I won't ever see the paladin as Lawful Good partially because of the incoherence of the lawful concept but mostly because of the classist, ethnocentric barbarism of real paladins.

[Ardanis]

Smite Evil

It appears I have missed it earlier...

Is there a reason why it doesn't work like in 3e, i.e. thaco bonus = CHA mod (+4 in our case) and damage = level, while lasting only until it strikes once?

 

We can safely set the thaco bonus to +4, since BG2 paladins start with CHA=17+ anyway. This bonus is probably much more useful for BG1 games, where you have troubles hitting people, and by the time it becomes irrelevant you already have solid damage addition.

 

Furthermore, I would keep this SE for all kits, and instead provide them with additional bonuses vs their racial class enemies. E.g. UH can daze/stun undead with increasing save penalty, and Inquisitor... well, do something not overlapping with WS

 

 

Undead Hunter

If we're determined to rename the kit, I would suggest something less ambiguous than Divine Hunter. E.g. Holy Hunter.

[kreso]

Smite Evil

It appears I have missed it earlier...

Is there a reason why it doesn't work like in 3e, i.e. thaco bonus = CHA mod (+4 in our case) and damage = level, while lasting only until it strikes once?

This sounds sensible enough. I'd still skip on THAC0 bonus. Don't like Paladins obtaining better scores than fighters so early, even for a round.