Man I am loving these videos. 😁 The four dimensions of damage, control, durability and resistance are excellent and as the ranks are building up its getting even better. Thanks for all your hard work. Good luck with Table Top Trends! Subscribed! 😎
Excited to see your content about the new games. I think it's a great idea for what it's worth. I bet it will be a great way to show the other games off and boost em! I'll be checking those videos out for sure.
The death of the Barbadin is a true tragedy. That being said, Paladins walking away from the revisions with only one notable nerf is a pretty major win all things considered. Depending on how you play they may even be stronger because of Abjure Foes.
Yes, I was very sad about the Barbadin's death too. All in all, Paladins are in a very solid position I think. I think massive Nova damage ends up bad for tables personally, so I'm fine with it being limited
I think your way of looking at smites heavily favors Searing Smite. I agree that it’s better than the others, especially at higher levels, the tertiary damage only triggers if the target fails their save against it AND survives until their next turn. Also by dividing the damage of Divine Smite across four rounds you completely glaze over the value of divine smite: burst damage, and damage in the first round of combat, is quite valuable and somewhat rare in the new rules
Yes, that is true. I mention it in the video that immediately damage is better than spread out over time. The way of calculating the damage definitely favours damage over time. Thanks for pointing it out
@ love the video btw, and I have to say your control rating plus your combat space calculation are brilliant and I wish others in this space (Treantmonk) would look at them
@pederw4900 thanks! I'm glad you like it. I'm always hoping it isn't overwhelming for people. I think there is basically no chance of Treantmonk using Control, but I do think Combat Space is a more palatable thing for people to adopt. Hopefully if I can get good numbers for Combat Space with the new MM and DMG guidelines I can convince people to use it.
Hey, great video! Keep up the good work analyzing those edition changes for our much-loved martials💪 Have a question: had you include the Lay on Hands feature when determining the Durability statistics? It looks like it has to be taken into account for both Durability AND Control(where you added points for buffing the companions with the Aura of Protection) statistics.
Thanks! No I didn't include Lay on hands for durability statistics because I think it would give an inaccurate view of their real durability. Maybe it'll change now that it's a bonus action, but it's pretty common to use lay on hands for other party members. So if I use it to boost our own defense I think it's an "artificial" boost. I did say that we can use it on yourself if we DO need some help being more durable though. Lay on hands for control if a condition is removed? Yes that's a possibility too but not I didn't add that to the control or resistance. I'm assuming we purely use Lay on hands for HP and probably doing it outside of battle. Honestly it's hard, but I skipped Fighter's second wind like this too.
10:35: they remove ALL instance of spell based on HP??? in 2014 we had 5 spells that relied on HP: Sleep, color spray, banishing smite, power word Stun and Power Word Kill. in 2024 we have 3 spells that still relies on HP: banishing smite, power word Stun and Power Word Kill. Saying they removed them all because they remove 2 out of 5 seem wrong lol....
Remember when you were talking about Divine Favor vs Divine Smite for damage efficiency out of a spell slot and mentioned the value of dealing a bunch of damage all at once? This is where the nerf to divine smite (becoming a spell) hurts the most: burst damage. You don’t really see it just looking at one to four spell slots for smites per combat, but this is something the 2014 paladin does way better than the 2024 paladin: damage potential in a single turn. A 2014 paladin with a BA attack can smite three times in a single turn, while a 2024 paladin can only do it once, and are giving up an attack to do so.
I agree that it’s a good change in line with other things they did to reduce burst damage. My best 2 burst damage builds under the 2014 rules use a couple paladin levels for divine smite and can nova for 300ish damage in a single turn.
@zSavageWolves Whoa that's a lot! Yea I think it's best for the table if one person doesn't do their entire day's worth of damage in one turn. It makes everyone else feel useless on that one fight but then you aren't pulling your weight on the other ones
@@DndUnoptimized Those two builds, my Twilight Inquisitor (ua-cam.com/video/IEZZ8TlHaM4/v-deo.htmlsi=dsl2nrPS3PeJMdg4) and my Smite Knight (ua-cam.com/video/IEZZ8TlHaM4/v-deo.htmlsi=9c1ELJN9vHe5skSl) use 2x 4th, 3x 3rd, 1x 2nd and 1x 4th, 3x 3rd, 3x 2nd respectively at level 17. Both builds still have decent support and/or DPR options afterwards, but yeah it is the majority of your slots if you want to do that much damage. One of the things I talk about in both those builds is overkill; even though you CAN deal that much damage doesn't always mean you SHOULD.
Damage for Paladins is very subclass-dependent, which is fine. Devotion and Vengeance are legit top damage dealers. Ancients and Glory, not so much. Ancients at least is strongly steered toward control, with some extra AoE damage capability, in 2024. Glory's kinda pulled all over the place, though, and is easily the weakest subclass for that reason.
I agree that forcing players to use other smite spells is a win. I just find it restricting that smite spells take preparation slots. On the "never being able to smite in a turn" you can use your to hit calculations. The chance of never hitting is (1 -(1 - "to hit chance")^"number of attacks") The chance of missing exactly x attacks is: (1 -(1 - "to hit chance")^"x")*("To hit chance"^"total attacks - x) With this you can calculate the chance of hitting only once and hitting only twice etc. Then you can go add the results. (% = chance) "% no hits"*0 + "% 1 hit"*(paladin 1 hit damage + smite damage) +... So you can attack a smite to an attack essentially and the math takes care of accounting for hitting or not. So I don't think it is necessary to mention that missing all your attacks is something to consider if you are doing damage calculation like this already.
Re: smite landing chance, yes, once you get to the point where you smite every turn you can do something like this, but the order of smites is important too. If you miss with all your attacks on the first smite, you aren't going to NOT do that searing Smite LVL 5, you'll wait till you hit on your next turn.
@@DndUnoptimized Right, regarding Smites I forgot the spell level slot being used. Math does get complicated, but it might balance out a bit. However, if we are going for full damage it is usually better to go searing, right? So you can always scale down from the highest level down and it simplifies the math a bit more.
The smite changes are neat, but I would have gone a different way with them. Instead of spells, have the spell effects be smite options like Battle Master and maneuvers.
I think there was one pillar that is not being considered in these rankings - utility! Ranger has scored pretty low, but it will probably score pretty well in a utility score. Then Barbarian may not have as much control or resistance, but it certainly has more utility with its skills and Primal knowledge than the fighter or monk, and maybe even paladin (paladin's spells don't have a lot of utility built in, and they have no skill boosters).
That is true. I don't measure utility and that is definitely a big part of rogue/ranger. The problem is that I don't have a way to measure utility at the moment and can't think of a good way to do it. There are so many kinds of utility that it ends up being really difficult to measure in any meaningful way. Like skill expertise is utility but fly and spider climb, walk on water, charm person, disguise self, unseen servant, find familiar, then ranger features like ignoring difficult terrain, etc. all end up as utility and they are so broad and unrestrained that it is very difficult to make a system that is actually meaningful. The current ones I'm measuring are all combat focused, so at least we can say that. I did end up splitting control into control and mobility, so that kind of diversifies things a bit as well.
@DndUnoptimized Could you measure utility similarly to control? I'm assuming that you're assigning some sort of point value to each type of feature. It may be a bit arbitrary, but perhaps it could be split into social and exploration rather than a general "utility" category. With additional skill Proficiencies, expertise, boosters, and access to spells that enhance each category earns points
@urbanassassin26 so control is somewhat arbitrary but it is all based off the unconscious which ties it all together. I know how much control removing movement gives you because of that, and every effect that reduces/increases movement will be based on that. Every control effect in the game can be measured based off this. Utility on the other hand is quite different. Maybe one day I'll think of a way to measure it, but for now, I think I do enough weird things I need to explain every time that I'm not dying to add in another haha. I'll just say they are dimensions of combat... I definitely get what you mean though. It's kind of the big missing picture for a holistic view of the class.
A few things of note: 1. Smites now work on melee weapons, rather than melee weapon attacks. This enables Smites to be done via Javelin and other Thrown weapons. 2. Find Steed should definitely be part of your calculations and rankings. It is a core feature, and discounting it just because it doesn't fit some people's fantasy is plain bias. (Especially as it's a supremely good spell, optimization-wise). 3. Divine Sense now being a Channel Divinity makes no damn sense and now break the synergy between it and Detect Evil and Good, with it functioning as a Detect Evil and Good on a Channel Divinity. Only time I'm using this is if I can take a Short Rest right afterwards. I like it better as its own resource that could be used to "fish" for something multiple times a day for a short period. Although it requiring the target to not be behind Total Cover was stupid. 4. Interesting change with Divine Favor but Bless is going to outdo it in most situations. It's only really worth it if you know that you'll be beyond 30 (or more like 60 since you can move) ft from your team at the start of the encounter and need to do damage immediately, which is a real odd position to be in since you definitely want as many people as possible to be within your 10 ft Aura while at lower levels being on your own like that is probably more lethal. It's also better if you are in a situation where you are confident that you will loose concentration or know meet one of the rare monsters that's vulnerable to Radiant Damage, but I'm not sure that is worth one of your limited preparation slots. This spell would be slightly better if Paladin were not stuck with only 1 spell prepared change per day. 5. I absolutely loathe what they did to Divine Smite and the philosophy around it. Yes, the other smites are now comparable, except barely since you can only change 1 prepared spell per long rest and don't have all the smites as always prepared spells unlike the playtest. Divine Smite was already niche due to how powerful other Paladin Spells are for most situations. They did good buffing the other smites, but nerfing Divine Smite at all, let alone requiring it and the other Smites to use BA is just... AAAAAAAAAHHHHHH that was not the problem. Divine Smite was never OP, the other Smites were just really bad on top of not being free to grab.
Fair points. Find Steed is a core feature now so I can definitely see why it should be in the build analysis. It'll add in a bit more control for mobility. I do agree that bless is probably better than divine favor. It's a fantastic spell, but it's concentration and an action cast, so I think lot less likely to be used than divine favor. Smite preps might be an issue though, you are right.
@@DndUnoptimized Good video. The steed should increase cpr not only for mobility but for denying opportunity attacks by disengaging. Also (18:33) being a small sized paladin would not be beneficial inside dungeons because the otherworldly steed is always a large sized celestial, fey or fiend.
@1989MR1 oh shoot! Thanks for pointing out the large size. Disengaging would be put under control (in the mobility category). It could be put under durability, but I don't assume any OAs there, so it doesn't quite fit.
I think the new paladin fits the way I play my paladin more than the old version. Dumping 3 divine smites in one turn to just obliterate a big bad will be missed. However, being a sturdy beacon of light on the battlefield that my allies can gather around to stay alive in the face of overwhelming odds.. pretty damn cool.
mounted combatant... that feat (and find steed in the same occasion) requires a BIG caveat. Sure they are really really good... IF YOU ARE IN A SPACIOUS ENVIRONEMENT. Yes if you are exploring a giant castle or a dragon lair, walking on your large horse (or griffin) or other big environment with huge corridor and high ceiling or even exploring open space area, is fine and easy But many dungeon have 5ft wide corridors and small room where a large mount might cause more problem then it's worth. and sure you can simply dismiss your mount or leave it behind, any feats you took that require that mount, you are stuck with them (unless you have a level 17 wizard willing to risk his Wish stress back lash to change your feat every time you leave your mount behind)
That is true and I talked about that a bit. I know a lot of players just don't use mounts because it's hard to stay on them. You won't bring your horse down that well or up the ladder or sneak them into the castle.
I haven't don't subclasses for any of the classes yet. Devotion is looking great though! I might come back and do subclasses if people are be still interested in this series haha
Paladins in 2014 were the best melee damage class in the game below 11th lvl. Paladins in 2024 are barely keeping up with rogues in damage with more versatility. The fact that they made divine smite a spell, and made it take a BA, means you have to spend 2 resources just to keep up. If you liked paladins for their support features and high defense, rejoice! Everyone else, stick with 2014.
Paladins don't outclass every other martial anymore, no. They didn't get a huge boost to damage, but many of the others did. But pure damage focused Paladins still can match the highest damage dealers, so I don't feel bad for them. I get that the BA smite hurts though. It really changes the Paladin
@DndUnoptimized A paladin built purely for damage (I.E. TWF with divine favor) will still only keep up with current ranger, with worse spell slot efficiency. For reference, a rogue with the same build would keep up as long as they have a source for sneak attack.
Great sword Paladin using searing Smite ended up doing really great damage. Of course vengeance or devotion Paladins will be even better. (Probably don't want graze with either of those ones though)
I think the issue more than anything is how Paladins are saddled with on hit effects that consume a resource and their entire turn (Attack action -> hit -> Bonus action -> consume spell slot -> apply effect) to use, with no additional features to change how a Paladin will interact with these spells (say, at 9th or so level, have them only recquire hitting the target) for more versatility natively to use them over say a Bard or Sorc multiclass. Its just weird design when the 2024 PHB is full of on-hit effects that either apply an effect or deal more damage in-combat (say on a Reaction attack) without eating a resource or a Bonus action, most of them modeled around 2014 Divine Smite, with the Paladin not having that kind of versatility off turn (and the reaction use for Paladin is a deadzone at the moment reserved for the Shield spell it seems). Playing a Paladin feels a little too much like playing a Wizard without the game warping control and aoe, lol.
@@DndUnoptimized and oddly enough, that applies for both the player and from a game design perspective. The bare minimum of "is this subclass good?" for the Paladin now revolves around whether or not the subclass' Channel Divinity option at 3rd level is a free action, if it at all combat oriented, like VoE and SW, or it ends up being on the same boat as Ancients or Glory that exist purely as roleplay options rather than anything mechanically impactful.
Paladin being great at control and resistances and middle of the road at everything else is perfect. This is the first martial that performed as I'd expect the class to work. The Barbarian and Fighter didn't have the durability I expected (Fighter got huge mental resist instead). The Rogue underdamaged consistent with 2014, but if i play a rogue I EXPECT to do more. Ranger is just bad. Monk is much more durable than I expected.
If you are interested in non-D&D games, check out the new Tabletop Trends Channel: www.youtube.com/@TabletopRPGTrends
Man I am loving these videos. 😁 The four dimensions of damage, control, durability and resistance are excellent and as the ranks are building up its getting even better.
Thanks for all your hard work.
Good luck with Table Top Trends! Subscribed! 😎
Thank you!! I'm glad you like the different dimensions. I always feel like only using
DPR to evaluate builds is so lacking
I'm such a spellcasting nerd, I tend to forget about Smite. There are so many incredibly useful spells for those precious few spell slots.
Very true. Lots of great options without even using a smite
Excited to see your content about the new games. I think it's a great idea for what it's worth. I bet it will be a great way to show the other games off and boost em! I'll be checking those videos out for sure.
Thanks! I hope it'll be interesting to watch
The death of the Barbadin is a true tragedy. That being said, Paladins walking away from the revisions with only one notable nerf is a pretty major win all things considered. Depending on how you play they may even be stronger because of Abjure Foes.
Yes, I was very sad about the Barbadin's death too. All in all, Paladins are in a very solid position I think. I think massive Nova damage ends up bad for tables personally, so I'm fine with it being limited
You got an auto-subscribe on the new channel from me.
Paladins still feel pretty good in 2024, nova explosions aside.
Thanks for the sub! Yea I think Paladins are still in a fantastic spot
I think your way of looking at smites heavily favors Searing Smite. I agree that it’s better than the others, especially at higher levels, the tertiary damage only triggers if the target fails their save against it AND survives until their next turn.
Also by dividing the damage of Divine Smite across four rounds you completely glaze over the value of divine smite: burst damage, and damage in the first round of combat, is quite valuable and somewhat rare in the new rules
Yes, that is true. I mention it in the video that immediately damage is better than spread out over time. The way of calculating the damage definitely favours damage over time.
Thanks for pointing it out
@ love the video btw, and I have to say your control rating plus your combat space calculation are brilliant and I wish others in this space (Treantmonk) would look at them
@pederw4900 thanks! I'm glad you like it. I'm always hoping it isn't overwhelming for people.
I think there is basically no chance of Treantmonk using Control, but I do think Combat Space is a more palatable thing for people to adopt. Hopefully if I can get good numbers for Combat Space with the new MM and DMG guidelines I can convince people to use it.
Hey, great video!
Keep up the good work analyzing those edition changes for our much-loved martials💪
Have a question: had you include the Lay on Hands feature when determining the Durability statistics?
It looks like it has to be taken into account for both Durability AND Control(where you added points for buffing the companions with the Aura of Protection) statistics.
Thanks! No I didn't include Lay on hands for durability statistics because I think it would give an inaccurate view of their real durability. Maybe it'll change now that it's a bonus action, but it's pretty common to use lay on hands for other party members. So if I use it to boost our own defense I think it's an "artificial" boost. I did say that we can use it on yourself if we DO need some help being more durable though.
Lay on hands for control if a condition is removed? Yes that's a possibility too but not I didn't add that to the control or resistance. I'm assuming we purely use Lay on hands for HP and probably doing it outside of battle. Honestly it's hard, but I skipped Fighter's second wind like this too.
Paladin Barbarian Divine Smite might be dead... but the Warlock Barbarian Eldritch Smite isn't.
True!
is the barbarian having less optimal multiclass options a good thing?
@@shealupkes That's up to you to decide
10:35: they remove ALL instance of spell based on HP???
in 2014 we had 5 spells that relied on HP: Sleep, color spray, banishing smite, power word Stun and Power Word Kill.
in 2024 we have 3 spells that still relies on HP: banishing smite, power word Stun and Power Word Kill.
Saying they removed them all because they remove 2 out of 5 seem wrong lol....
Haha thanks for that. I really should have fact checked myself before filming that.
Remember when you were talking about Divine Favor vs Divine Smite for damage efficiency out of a spell slot and mentioned the value of dealing a bunch of damage all at once? This is where the nerf to divine smite (becoming a spell) hurts the most: burst damage. You don’t really see it just looking at one to four spell slots for smites per combat, but this is something the 2014 paladin does way better than the 2024 paladin: damage potential in a single turn. A 2014 paladin with a BA attack can smite three times in a single turn, while a 2024 paladin can only do it once, and are giving up an attack to do so.
Yes 100% true. I should have discussed that more but I don't think it's a bad change. 2014 Paladin nova damage was too much in my opinion.
I agree that it’s a good change in line with other things they did to reduce burst damage.
My best 2 burst damage builds under the 2014 rules use a couple paladin levels for divine smite and can nova for 300ish damage in a single turn.
@zSavageWolves Whoa that's a lot! Yea I think it's best for the table if one person doesn't do their entire day's worth of damage in one turn. It makes everyone else feel useless on that one fight but then you aren't pulling your weight on the other ones
@@DndUnoptimized Those two builds, my Twilight Inquisitor (ua-cam.com/video/IEZZ8TlHaM4/v-deo.htmlsi=dsl2nrPS3PeJMdg4) and my Smite Knight (ua-cam.com/video/IEZZ8TlHaM4/v-deo.htmlsi=9c1ELJN9vHe5skSl) use 2x 4th, 3x 3rd, 1x 2nd and 1x 4th, 3x 3rd, 3x 2nd respectively at level 17. Both builds still have decent support and/or DPR options afterwards, but yeah it is the majority of your slots if you want to do that much damage. One of the things I talk about in both those builds is overkill; even though you CAN deal that much damage doesn't always mean you SHOULD.
Damage for Paladins is very subclass-dependent, which is fine. Devotion and Vengeance are legit top damage dealers. Ancients and Glory, not so much. Ancients at least is strongly steered toward control, with some extra AoE damage capability, in 2024. Glory's kinda pulled all over the place, though, and is easily the weakest subclass for that reason.
Whenever I go to say “smite spells” for a video, there’s a small chance I say “smite smells” instead. Has definitely got me more than once.
Lol I'm sure I did that too
I agree that forcing players to use other smite spells is a win. I just find it restricting that smite spells take preparation slots.
On the "never being able to smite in a turn" you can use your to hit calculations.
The chance of never hitting is
(1 -(1 - "to hit chance")^"number of attacks")
The chance of missing exactly x attacks is:
(1 -(1 - "to hit chance")^"x")*("To hit chance"^"total attacks - x)
With this you can calculate the chance of hitting only once and hitting only twice etc.
Then you can go add the results.
(% = chance)
"% no hits"*0 + "% 1 hit"*(paladin 1 hit damage + smite damage) +...
So you can attack a smite to an attack essentially and the math takes care of accounting for hitting or not. So I don't think it is necessary to mention that missing all your attacks is something to consider if you are doing damage calculation like this already.
Agree, in the playtest you got almost all smite spells as free preparations, which actually meant you could switch between them
Yea that's a very fair criticism!
Re: smite landing chance, yes, once you get to the point where you smite every turn you can do something like this, but the order of smites is important too. If you miss with all your attacks on the first smite, you aren't going to NOT do that searing Smite LVL 5, you'll wait till you hit on your next turn.
@@DndUnoptimized
Right, regarding Smites I forgot the spell level slot being used.
Math does get complicated, but it might balance out a bit. However, if we are going for full damage it is usually better to go searing, right? So you can always scale down from the highest level down and it simplifies the math a bit more.
The smite changes are neat, but I would have gone a different way with them. Instead of spells, have the spell effects be smite options like Battle Master and maneuvers.
I could see that being a cool way to do it, but having a separate resource in addition to spells might be too powerful
Rapier is the best for shield.
Properity make it easy to get advantage.
Thats good for smite
Very true. They combo well together
Great video.
I think there was one pillar that is not being considered in these rankings - utility! Ranger has scored pretty low, but it will probably score pretty well in a utility score. Then Barbarian may not have as much control or resistance, but it certainly has more utility with its skills and Primal knowledge than the fighter or monk, and maybe even paladin (paladin's spells don't have a lot of utility built in, and they have no skill boosters).
That is true. I don't measure utility and that is definitely a big part of rogue/ranger. The problem is that I don't have a way to measure utility at the moment and can't think of a good way to do it. There are so many kinds of utility that it ends up being really difficult to measure in any meaningful way. Like skill expertise is utility but fly and spider climb, walk on water, charm person, disguise self, unseen servant, find familiar, then ranger features like ignoring difficult terrain, etc. all end up as utility and they are so broad and unrestrained that it is very difficult to make a system that is actually meaningful.
The current ones I'm measuring are all combat focused, so at least we can say that. I did end up splitting control into control and mobility, so that kind of diversifies things a bit as well.
@DndUnoptimized Could you measure utility similarly to control? I'm assuming that you're assigning some sort of point value to each type of feature. It may be a bit arbitrary, but perhaps it could be split into social and exploration rather than a general "utility" category. With additional skill Proficiencies, expertise, boosters, and access to spells that enhance each category earns points
@urbanassassin26 so control is somewhat arbitrary but it is all based off the unconscious which ties it all together. I know how much control removing movement gives you because of that, and every effect that reduces/increases movement will be based on that. Every control effect in the game can be measured based off this.
Utility on the other hand is quite different. Maybe one day I'll think of a way to measure it, but for now, I think I do enough weird things I need to explain every time that I'm not dying to add in another haha. I'll just say they are dimensions of combat...
I definitely get what you mean though. It's kind of the big missing picture for a holistic view of the class.
Paladins got better in terms of utility because of the new feature to ritual cast detect magic etc.
A few things of note:
1. Smites now work on melee weapons, rather than melee weapon attacks. This enables Smites to be done via Javelin and other Thrown weapons.
2. Find Steed should definitely be part of your calculations and rankings. It is a core feature, and discounting it just because it doesn't fit some people's fantasy is plain bias. (Especially as it's a supremely good spell, optimization-wise).
3. Divine Sense now being a Channel Divinity makes no damn sense and now break the synergy between it and Detect Evil and Good, with it functioning as a Detect Evil and Good on a Channel Divinity. Only time I'm using this is if I can take a Short Rest right afterwards. I like it better as its own resource that could be used to "fish" for something multiple times a day for a short period. Although it requiring the target to not be behind Total Cover was stupid.
4. Interesting change with Divine Favor but Bless is going to outdo it in most situations. It's only really worth it if you know that you'll be beyond 30 (or more like 60 since you can move) ft from your team at the start of the encounter and need to do damage immediately, which is a real odd position to be in since you definitely want as many people as possible to be within your 10 ft Aura while at lower levels being on your own like that is probably more lethal. It's also better if you are in a situation where you are confident that you will loose concentration or know meet one of the rare monsters that's vulnerable to Radiant Damage, but I'm not sure that is worth one of your limited preparation slots. This spell would be slightly better if Paladin were not stuck with only 1 spell prepared change per day.
5. I absolutely loathe what they did to Divine Smite and the philosophy around it. Yes, the other smites are now comparable, except barely since you can only change 1 prepared spell per long rest and don't have all the smites as always prepared spells unlike the playtest. Divine Smite was already niche due to how powerful other Paladin Spells are for most situations. They did good buffing the other smites, but nerfing Divine Smite at all, let alone requiring it and the other Smites to use BA is just... AAAAAAAAAHHHHHH that was not the problem. Divine Smite was never OP, the other Smites were just really bad on top of not being free to grab.
Fair points. Find Steed is a core feature now so I can definitely see why it should be in the build analysis. It'll add in a bit more control for mobility.
I do agree that bless is probably better than divine favor. It's a fantastic spell, but it's concentration and an action cast, so I think lot less likely to be used than divine favor.
Smite preps might be an issue though, you are right.
@@DndUnoptimized Good video. The steed should increase cpr not only for mobility but for denying opportunity attacks by disengaging. Also (18:33) being a small sized paladin would not be beneficial inside dungeons because the otherworldly steed is always a large sized celestial, fey or fiend.
@1989MR1 oh shoot! Thanks for pointing out the large size. Disengaging would be put under control (in the mobility category). It could be put under durability, but I don't assume any OAs there, so it doesn't quite fit.
paladin is overpowered and is still overpowered. they get spells weapon mastery and fighting styles they won't even let monk get fighting styles.
I think the new paladin fits the way I play my paladin more than the old version. Dumping 3 divine smites in one turn to just obliterate a big bad will be missed. However, being a sturdy beacon of light on the battlefield that my allies can gather around to stay alive in the face of overwhelming odds.. pretty damn cool.
mounted combatant... that feat (and find steed in the same occasion) requires a BIG caveat. Sure they are really really good... IF YOU ARE IN A SPACIOUS ENVIRONEMENT.
Yes if you are exploring a giant castle or a dragon lair, walking on your large horse (or griffin) or other big environment with huge corridor and high ceiling or even exploring open space area, is fine and easy
But many dungeon have 5ft wide corridors and small room where a large mount might cause more problem then it's worth. and sure you can simply dismiss your mount or leave it behind, any feats you took that require that mount, you are stuck with them (unless you have a level 17 wizard willing to risk his Wish stress back lash to change your feat every time you leave your mount behind)
That is true and I talked about that a bit. I know a lot of players just don't use mounts because it's hard to stay on them. You won't bring your horse down that well or up the ladder or sneak them into the castle.
What if we all made one together that was the best?
Made a Paladin build together?
@, Ghost style then a whole ttrpg
Nice
I cast Silence! No, not to you, dear sir, to that murderhoboing oathbreaker paldin. One spell to rule all paladins (and clerics).
True, silence could be a deterrent for sure!
no subclass ? i feel like youl never miss with devotion.
I haven't don't subclasses for any of the classes yet. Devotion is looking great though!
I might come back and do subclasses if people are be still interested in this series haha
Here's hoping you guys like DC20... I've got a lot invested in the kickstarter!
Haha me too. The review is out, but spoiler... It rocks.
Paladins in 2014 were the best melee damage class in the game below 11th lvl.
Paladins in 2024 are barely keeping up with rogues in damage with more versatility.
The fact that they made divine smite a spell, and made it take a BA, means you have to spend 2 resources just to keep up.
If you liked paladins for their support features and high defense, rejoice! Everyone else, stick with 2014.
Paladins don't outclass every other martial anymore, no. They didn't get a huge boost to damage, but many of the others did.
But pure damage focused Paladins still can match the highest damage dealers, so I don't feel bad for them.
I get that the BA smite hurts though. It really changes the Paladin
@DndUnoptimized A paladin built purely for damage (I.E. TWF with divine favor) will still only keep up with current ranger, with worse spell slot efficiency.
For reference, a rogue with the same build would keep up as long as they have a source for sneak attack.
Great sword Paladin using searing Smite ended up doing really great damage. Of course vengeance or devotion Paladins will be even better. (Probably don't want graze with either of those ones though)
I think the issue more than anything is how Paladins are saddled with on hit effects that consume a resource and their entire turn (Attack action -> hit -> Bonus action -> consume spell slot -> apply effect) to use, with no additional features to change how a Paladin will interact with these spells (say, at 9th or so level, have them only recquire hitting the target) for more versatility natively to use them over say a Bard or Sorc multiclass.
Its just weird design when the 2024 PHB is full of on-hit effects that either apply an effect or deal more damage in-combat (say on a Reaction attack) without eating a resource or a Bonus action, most of them modeled around 2014 Divine Smite, with the Paladin not having that kind of versatility off turn (and the reaction use for Paladin is a deadzone at the moment reserved for the Shield spell it seems).
Playing a Paladin feels a little too much like playing a Wizard without the game warping control and aoe, lol.
Bonus action use is a lot, and makes Paladin build options much more restrictive unfortunately.
@@DndUnoptimized and oddly enough, that applies for both the player and from a game design perspective.
The bare minimum of "is this subclass good?" for the Paladin now revolves around whether or not the subclass' Channel Divinity option at 3rd level is a free action, if it at all combat oriented, like VoE and SW, or it ends up being on the same boat as Ancients or Glory that exist purely as roleplay options rather than anything mechanically impactful.
Do it right!!! Lol
I'm such a spellcasting nerd, I tend to forget about Smite. There are so many incredibly useful spells for those precious few spell slots.
Paladin being great at control and resistances and middle of the road at everything else is perfect. This is the first martial that performed as I'd expect the class to work.
The Barbarian and Fighter didn't have the durability I expected (Fighter got huge mental resist instead). The Rogue underdamaged consistent with 2014, but if i play a rogue I EXPECT to do more. Ranger is just bad. Monk is much more durable than I expected.
I've read my comment sections, I know people get heated! Lol
Yea, Paladin does end up kind of where you expect it to be, true.