I believe you needed to go a little deeper into the champion and point out that it is the best defensive class in the game. It gets the highest armor class other than the monk and it has the best use of shields in the game
Something that’s not immediately obvious looking at the Champion class is how good of out-of-combat healers they make. Lay on Hands is magical healing in the form of a focus spell, and there’s no limit on refocusing. Meaning, if you’re not pressed for time, the Champion can just lay-on-hands someone every 10 minutes by casting the spell and then immediately refocusing to get the focus point back.
Also, I've found anyone who gravitates to defensive or tank characters has an absolute blast with. It rewards proper positioning within a greater party, and players who want to play the role of a protector have had the most fun with them in my tables.
the main thing about the champion is the champion reactions. mechanically speaking. the design goal for the champion is to be the tank i think its the only class that allows you to be trained in heavy armor from the start. the champion reactions can be about retributive strike or reducing damage and these can extend to 15ft. which is nuts.
Btw there is a faith called laws of mortality I think, which is sorta aggressive atheism, and yes, you can make the champion who is all about the people not gods using that.
at 11:15 of the video there is a little bit of mic feedback that sounds like one of you 2 are absolutely destroying your pants! lol. i look forward to your videos every Friday! keep up the good work!
If you want your Champion to have spells, you can either use the Cleric Dedication as your class feats, or play a Cleric with the Warpriest Doctrine. Depends on how many spells you want to cast and whether you want to cast in battle or not.
I really like this series a lot but I think this one misses the mark the most! There was a lot of focus on causes, tenents, and anathema but only mentioned the most important feature, the reaction! I have played in a campaign with a Redeemer and another with a Paladin. They felt very different because of their reaction. In 5E, the Paladin is a crusader that actively kills evil aggressively but the PF2 Champion really plays the role of a defensive class well! They don't lack offense but their defensive protective plays are so unique and fun! Also the 5E Paladin is seen as a "half-caster" but keep in mind that in PF2 the Champion is less than that. Having a few focus spells is fairly different from being a caster. The Champion is very much a martial class. I think there was some bias here because they admitted they don't traditionally like the paladin so I think this one class they should definitely play themselves because while the window dressing looks identical, it actually plays very differently from 5E.
Huh. As a massive Judge Dredd AND Pathfinder fan, the Judge Dredd comment really took me off guard. I've been wanting to build him in Pathfinder and always went with Investigator with the Gunslinger archetype.
You guys should try out Gloomhaven. I find it to be more enjoyable than Pathfinder. Especially, how meaty the Gloomhaven Jaws of the Lion Box is despite only a slightly more expensive price tag, but has 10x more content. It also is a brilliant way to be introduced to Tabletop RPG's........
The Champion is one of the very few ways that P2E is inferior. 5E Paladin subclasses are untethered from alignment, which allows much more freedom in subclass design and in your own character design. For example "Glory" (general heroism) or "Ancients" (nature) can't really be done with the P2E system.
My table homerules that the Champion subclass has to match one of the allowable alignments of the Champion's DIETY. So if your diety is a god of Law, then you can be LN or LE Paladin.
@@Lockfin - Yeah, the same old-fashioned thing D&D 3.5 and earlier did. 5E tried something new: untethering the subclasses from alignment, and it's simply a way better system. It's OK though. Pathfinder can't be better at EVERYTHING.
You don't HAVE to be a certain alignment. Any reasonable GM would let you take any of the subclasses, except maybe the evil ones. I think that's also something they're changing in the new remastered books, changing that rule so that any good champion can take any of the 3 good subclasses.
I believe you needed to go a little deeper into the champion and point out that it is the best defensive class in the game. It gets the highest armor class other than the monk and it has the best use of shields in the game
Something that’s not immediately obvious looking at the Champion class is how good of out-of-combat healers they make. Lay on Hands is magical healing in the form of a focus spell, and there’s no limit on refocusing. Meaning, if you’re not pressed for time, the Champion can just lay-on-hands someone every 10 minutes by casting the spell and then immediately refocusing to get the focus point back.
Also, I've found anyone who gravitates to defensive or tank characters has an absolute blast with. It rewards proper positioning within a greater party, and players who want to play the role of a protector have had the most fun with them in my tables.
1:25 sounds like you'd love the Lawful Evil option and to be a Hellknight lol.
the main thing about the champion is the champion reactions. mechanically speaking. the design goal for the champion is to be the tank i think its the only class that allows you to be trained in heavy armor from the start. the champion reactions can be about retributive strike or reducing damage and these can extend to 15ft. which is nuts.
Fighter is trained in Heavy Armor. However Champion caps at Legendary Proficiency, where Foghter caps at Master (for armor).
Btw there is a faith called laws of mortality I think, which is sorta aggressive atheism, and yes, you can make the champion who is all about the people not gods using that.
I never found the 5e paladin to be that much of a caster in practice. Because folks used all their spell slots for smite :P
They are smite slots!
S M I T E
at 11:15 of the video there is a little bit of mic feedback that sounds like one of you 2 are absolutely destroying your pants! lol. i look forward to your videos every Friday! keep up the good work!
If you want your Champion to have spells, you can either use the Cleric Dedication as your class feats, or play a Cleric with the Warpriest Doctrine. Depends on how many spells you want to cast and whether you want to cast in battle or not.
I really like this series a lot but I think this one misses the mark the most! There was a lot of focus on causes, tenents, and anathema but only mentioned the most important feature, the reaction! I have played in a campaign with a Redeemer and another with a Paladin. They felt very different because of their reaction. In 5E, the Paladin is a crusader that actively kills evil aggressively but the PF2 Champion really plays the role of a defensive class well! They don't lack offense but their defensive protective plays are so unique and fun! Also the 5E Paladin is seen as a "half-caster" but keep in mind that in PF2 the Champion is less than that. Having a few focus spells is fairly different from being a caster. The Champion is very much a martial class.
I think there was some bias here because they admitted they don't traditionally like the paladin so I think this one class they should definitely play themselves because while the window dressing looks identical, it actually plays very differently from 5E.
Huh. As a massive Judge Dredd AND Pathfinder fan, the Judge Dredd comment really took me off guard. I've been wanting to build him in Pathfinder and always went with Investigator with the Gunslinger archetype.
Champion has had an update. There are now evil variants of it. Even baddies have (un)holy warriors.
You guys should try out Gloomhaven. I find it to be more enjoyable than Pathfinder. Especially, how meaty the Gloomhaven Jaws of the Lion Box is despite only a slightly more expensive price tag, but has 10x more content.
It also is a brilliant way to be introduced to Tabletop RPG's........
The Champion is one of the very few ways that P2E is inferior. 5E Paladin subclasses are untethered from alignment, which allows much more freedom in subclass design and in your own character design. For example "Glory" (general heroism) or "Ancients" (nature) can't really be done with the P2E system.
My table homerules that the Champion subclass has to match one of the allowable alignments of the Champion's DIETY. So if your diety is a god of Law, then you can be LN or LE Paladin.
It’s not inferior, it’s trying to do something different.
@@Lockfin - Yeah, the same old-fashioned thing D&D 3.5 and earlier did. 5E tried something new: untethering the subclasses from alignment, and it's simply a way better system.
It's OK though. Pathfinder can't be better at EVERYTHING.
You don't HAVE to be a certain alignment. Any reasonable GM would let you take any of the subclasses, except maybe the evil ones.
I think that's also something they're changing in the new remastered books, changing that rule so that any good champion can take any of the 3 good subclasses.
I also don't really see how this makes pf2e a worse game