Paladin..... do we realy need that ? why not something more unique

alexgabriel23

so with the new coming Guardian fighter that can heal, is the end of the actual guardian fighter and maybe heal dc?
why not something more unique ?
we need a more unique class not another tank which they are pretty usesless since u got lifesteal and with a bit of hp any class can tank even cw

warpet

i think paladin is good choice 1 more support class is great to have in game i still prefer to have some support classes in teams instead of only dps

alexgabriel23

i totaly agree , hope it wont end the guardian fighter makin him usesless in pve like it was in mod 2/3/4

Unknown

This content has been removed.

ulviel

The problem with d&d classes is, many of them are very similar in practical terms, and the difference is more in roleplaying flavor. Example: wizards and socrerers (and actually warlocks too), or fighter and barbarian.

Which creates a problem if you try to make them MMO classes - it's simply hard to make them unique. Cryptic did it quite well thus far (they make us facepalm on regular basis, but you have to admit current classes feel unique) so I'm going to wait til we can actually play a paladin before making any judgement.

Also remember that it was the most requested class in polls since, like, mod 2.

henry404

We don't *need* any new classes. In fact we don't need half the ones we already have.
Any game of this type only *needs* about 3 or 4 different classes so inevitably the others end up as variations on a theme or as hybrids.
But it keeps it interesting. I'm sure Paladins will slot in just fine and GF will continue to be distinct.

I never really clicked with Paladins in tabletop D&D. Far too good and a bit smug for my liking.
Why not wait and see how they turn out. One of the things Cryptic seem to be very good at is bringing a bit of flavour to the character classes.

teamstephon

the only thing i did not like about the GF is how they had no special ability when they had to remain sitting in the red circle as the mobs hit them cause it makes me feel paladin are going to be the same if im not mistaken but cant wait to see how they turn out

setimoselo

magenubbie wrote: »

there are some differences between GWF/GF and Paladin. Most important being that where GWF and GF rely on aoe (tanking), the paladin is much more of a 1o1 type of fighter that excels at bosses much more than it does at dozens of mobs.

Honestly if I were the group leader I would rather bring a Paladin specifically because it "hypothetically" excels at bosses and also heals the party. I hope the Paladin is not a better option than the GF at tanking. I hope that the Paladin becomes a true off-tank, capable of short ranged healing.

On a side note: I never understood the association with GWF's as a off-tank. They are clearly a DPS class and they don't have plated armor, they are about as much off-tanks as DC's.

dragosani84

I'd rather have an unarmed monk, now that would be cool. Although Paladins are pretty awesome. I just wish they'd make it a support class but instead it will have ungodly armor and defense, self healing to rival a SW and the pvp capabilities of a GWF times a hundred with a gazillion knockdowns that have no cooldown which each instantly healing the paladin to full. Hmm, wait a minute that sounds kinda fun Can't wait to pvp with one at least until they nerf it six months down the road like they've done with every new class hehehe.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

silence1x

magenubbie wrote: »

pointless speculation.

Sometimes that seems to be what we do best magnubbie

samothrace22

OP, this was my reaction as well. We already have a tanky healer, and we already have a tank, we can only bring one of each of those in an dungeon and most of the time they are not even needed. I really want a monk class but Roger said that's his least favorite.

grogthemagnif

and their shield is just a paper prop? That paper prop, used properly, reduces Dragon Breath to about ZERO.

teamstephon wrote: »

the only thing i did not like about the GF is how they had no special ability when they had to remain sitting in the red circle as the mobs hit them cause it makes me feel paladin are going to be the same if im not mistaken but cant wait to see how they turn out

tyrtallow

I find it incredibly ironic that this topic exists at all, and in the cleric section of the forums, no less.

Quite a few DC players have been begging for a mace and shield-type cleric pretty much since launch, since a caster-type cleric is apparently very un-cleric-y. About time they got their wish, us caster-type lovers can finally play our preferred cleric archetype in peace.

Anyway, there IS a fair amount of overlap between several classes in D&D, especially when we start discussing specific builds. The goal here is to pick just the right class types that perfectly captures specific archetypes players enjoy. Dude wielding a massive sword type character -> Great Weapon Fighter, for example. Archer type character with dual blades -> Hunter Ranger.
Instead of adding another cleric class (battle cleric) who excels in melee combat + divine spells, it makes sense that they decided to add Oathbound Paladin instead. That way they add a new class + a new archetype. Whether or not we actually need another leader-striker/defender doesn't matter, we already have all those roles covered anyway.
Personally I think it would have been better if they added Druid or Bard first. The controller and striker roles have pretty much been synonymous with each other especially since artifact weapons were introduced. The addition of another controller class might change this. I suppose they'll have to work on changing the way control works and how mob resistances function first though.
Perhaps this is part of what the whole "elemental" thing is about. I played the original ToEE module and IIRC element-types (resistances, spells, etc) played a significant role in helping with your progress. The way things currently are, it seems specific damage types and resistances (like cold, fire, radiant, necrotic, etc) do exist but most resistances are set to zero, which is why stuff in Hotenow is as vulnerable to fire magic as they are to cold magic, regardless of how ridiculous that sounds. This has to change for the ToEE module to make sense.

plavia

I think they try to find substitute to DC
GF can keep the party alive same as DC
SW can heal enough (but he lack leadership powers...)
and paladin will probably be good replacement for DC

in general high GS party doesn't need anyone, so maybe they will rebalance the all PVE dungeons

I was thinking they will bring vampire after seeing Morgia (and it was nice chapter of baldur's gate... and every 2nd TV series in USA is about vampires)
but as usual I was wrong

dfnce

GF and GWF players asked to separate paragon paths as well as forums.
And now i see this sticky "Paladin belongs here" in Temple.
I guess there will be many share topics to discuss like
- paragon paths for OP - DO and AC?
- same divine mechanics of encounters?

zebular

dfnce wrote: »

And now i see this sticky "Paladin belongs here" in Temple.

Aye, Paladins are a Divine class, regardless of how one chooses to play them. We're not sure yet if we'll give them their own forum or not yet. For now, non-preview related Paladin threads belong here.

Safe travels,
Archmage Zebular of Mystryl
PWE Community Moderator

angrysprite

So... now that we see that *massive* Stat changes (i.e.: Lifesteal becoming a 'chance' and Regeneration mechanical changes) we can now see why and how this new class will NOT be a 'replacement' for the Guardian Fighter (or Cleric, for that matter) and is now a viable (read: actually useful) class to have around in co-op play.

Though slightly off-topic, but still related: I'm happy with the changes in Lifesteal and Regeneration stats and just as the Devs have stated: the reason being the create/allow viability for this new healer/tank class that is the Oathbound Paladin. It also brings Devoted Clerics back into viability for group co-op play, a status that has been diminishing ever since the Scourge Warlock turned Lifesteal into a Cleric Replacement (it wasn't, really - but many felt it did).

I was very much concerned with how the Devs were going to address this issue when introducing a second healer class when healing is something so many players (mostly the elitist crowd of min-maxers) are taking healing/health/HP aspects in such nonchalant stride. And now with the level Cap Increase changes to stats and how some of them work we have the answer.

Since I intend jump on the Paladin as fast as I can (it's always been my main in TableTop) I'm really happy for the new stats changes that bring healers back into vogue again. This is two-thumbs-up for all shiny-new Paladins and icing on the cake for all Clerics: we'll be useful and even wanted again.

There will be debunking of my comment because people don't like change; fair enough. Unfortunately the Preview Server is down right now so people can't actually test and experience these changes. But 'on paper' it all looks awesome to me.

I am curious about your thoughts?

lerdocix

setimoselo wrote: »

On a side note: I never understood the association with GWF's as a off-tank. They are clearly a DPS class and they don't have plated armor, they are about as much off-tanks as DC's.

Might be because they have protection tree geared towards increasing durability, AC and threat generation.
In my book that does sound like an off-tank spec, unless you are afraid that your striker companions will take aggro off your GWF.

Now on the paladin, I really welcome the class, I really do hope it will turn out somewhat like a E2 cleric, mace, shield, some buffs, some heals, both short and long range attacks, pretty much a nice hybrid char that could choose specialization, but never be as good as DC/GF in the given role, yet be still viable enough to be a welcome addition.

Will definitely roll one to have an alternative to my DC main.

tyrtallow

GWFs are a primary striker/secondary defender class. Seriously, the fact that the class actually needs to take damage to do significantly more DPS doesn't strike you as off-tanky? And so what if it can't use plate? The class actually benefits from stacking constitution both offense/defense-wise and GWF sets are just full of +defense/deflection mods. Not to mention the various defensive feats/passives. If you bothered to check your powers you'd also notice that quite a few of them were designed towards drawing aggro to your character.

The Sentinel paragon feat path merely enhances the secondary defender aspect of the GWF. In the end no one really expects your average GWF to step up and play primary defender. Still, all GWFs should be somewhat tanky unless you have a very, VERY good reason for going glass cannon. Like if you can kill mobs faster than a CW/SW. Otherwise, just play SW/CW. That's what those classes are for.

In any case several GWF builds were tougher than most GFs builds for the longest time in NW. GFs only really started to pull ahead around mod 4 or so, what with the HP/Con buff for GFs and the various GWF-related survivability nerfs (especially to regen and Unstoppable). Considering how the GF atm is pretty much a defender/leader class for all intents and purposes anyway (Knight's Valor and Into the Fray are DEFINITELY leader class-type powers) it will be interesting to see how the Oathbound Paladin compares.

query523

1. yeah several topics moved here fromthe barracks so Paladin is not 'another fighter class'.
2. Not sure how they plan on implimenting that. AS I recall Paladins were upgraded figters with the drawback that they had to maintain a LG alignment or revert to a guy in platemail with D10 HP. Since no alignment in NW that won't work.
3. Basically we're getting a new divine and really can't say what it will do until they release it but going off of D&D is probably going to get you nowhere...

zebular

Paladins are a Divine class, just like Rangers are a Primal Class. However, some roles fall into other power sources.

All classes fall into power source categories: Primal, Divine, Arcane, Martial, Shadow, and Psionic.

Fighters = Martial
Rogues = Martial
Rangers = Martial/Primal
Paladins = Divine
Clerics = Divine
Warlocks = Arcane
Wizards = Arcane

thedemien

zebular wrote: »

Paladins are a Divine class, just like Rangers are a Primal Class. However, some roles fall into other power sources.

All classes fall into power source categories: Primal, Divine, Arcane, Martial, Shadow, and Psionic.

Fighters = Martial
Rogues = Martial
Rangers = Martial/Primal
Paladins = Divine
Clerics = Divine
Warlocks = Arcane
Wizards = Arcane

Unfortunately NWO does not sepparate classes by any origin. as well as it does not split damage/defenses by type or have any alignment applications. Main trick to play paladin in other games is an complexity of keeping alignment and limitations to weapon/armor/ ets choices you could have. But none of this is possible in this game. Devs confirmed that there there will never be classes shared armor/weapons.

pretty sure that this implementation of paladin will go around "Lay on Hand" class feature plus auras - defenders/healing/Righteous.

So in general will we have something like GF but with auras for party and some heal/ arcane or fire damage class features.
Feets paths will probably be Cavalier (eg defender) , Blackguard (striker) , and something of mix.

This is all my guesses of course based on lore I know of.

In general - close combat DC will less healing, more defense, auras ( they added auras in mod 4/5 gear already and continue moving into them).
Do we need it ? well in good games pals are great. Here - we will see. They pretty much killed regen and ls as they are now. Plus nerfed SW temptation heal for constant minor heal. So player will need some "minor" permanent heal in party. While DC will be for spike damages.

zebular

thedemien wrote: »

Unfortunately NWO does not sepparate classes by any origin.

Actually, it does. This is translated by their class skill. The only difference is the distinction between Thievery and Dungeoneering, which is an understandable difference to be made for iteration into workable mechanics.

Dungeoneering = Martial
Thievery = Martial
Arcana = Arcane
Nature = Primal
Religion = Divine

thedemien

zebular wrote: »

Actually, it does. This is translated by their class skill. The only difference is the distinction between Thievery and Dungeoneering, which is an understandable difference to be made for iteration into workable mechanics.

Dungeoneering = Martial
Thievery = Martial
Arcana = Arcane
Nature = Primal
Religion = Divine

Yes. you are correct in this. I missed that part since it is pretty much useless. We all have stacks of kits this good chance to open everything. It is not like you need to have CW or SW in party to open portals or remove shields, or brake walls for warriors, open doors as thief.