Paladin Sucks?

[Dias]

Hey I was just wondering, I created a character before that's supposed to be a fighter(4)paladin(x) It's supposed to be a good tank with a good measure of spells,high saves and spell immunities right? Problem is paladin only get spells (that suck) only at higher levels which just makes him a sword bearing goody two shoe for the most part of the game.

I think building a pure paladin would just plain suck! What do you guys think?

[Soren Vracian]

I've done it before with a drow, it isn't *that* bad... I might even have to say it was pretty awesome.

[Abomination]

Paladins are a great class, even if they are 'pure' paladins. Provided they have a positive charisma modifier they possess good saving throws, immunity to various negative effects and handy abilities. A paladin's healing abilities and eventual spells come in handy for boosting your party. You might think the paladin spells suck but when you check how long they last for and realise that a proper tank is casting them you see they are very handy.

Perhaps you think a paladin is a bad character because you have too high expectations of him? Compared to other warrior classes the paladin possesses very good abilities and can be used as your diplomat.

[Soren Vracian]

And draw upon holy might is ALWAYS a welcome addition, last I checked anyways.

[Bahir the Red]

You only need about 1-2 levels in paladin, to be able to dual wield 2 "avengers" (that pally sword).

My next solo, as I said before, is a bard 11/fighter 4/paladin x or a bard 11/fighter 4/paladin 1/druid (or cleric or diviner) x

[Takara]

A paladin is a good class to use, provided you boost his key stats. I often use one, and have been quite satisfied with his performance as a tank.

[Abomination]

A Paladin will never match a Fighter or a Barbarian for 'tankability' but they will fill the role of tank well enough to see you through and offer both role-playing moments and access to nice abilities. You can rely on them to often make their saves and be able to deal some hefty damage, especially against evil opponents.

[Harbourboy]

The saving throw modifiers rock.

[Paine]

Oh yeah. I rolled up a brand new party again (3rd time's the charm, hopefully!), and my little pure aasimar pally is wiping the floor with stuff. I just make sure she doesn't do the talking, I don't want to be poor.

Lay on hands is no substitute for a cleric, but it sure comes in handy in an emergency.

[Sir Rechet]

In a powergamer's view, *pure class* Paladin isn't really a contender in comparison to a fighter or a barbarian. Even less to a real spell caster of any kind. The only things unique to being a pally is the Holy Avenger sword and save bonuses, and you get to use those with only a single level of Pally if you really want to.

Sure, pally gets some minor clerical spells, but I find it umpteen times easier to use a real cleric to cast them instead. (You just NEED someone that can resurrect. Honestly.) In fact, there's almost nothing (besides few extra HP and slightly faster access to more attacks per round) that a cleric of similar level doesn't do better when you include all the buffs, making the Paladin class rather.. obsolete.

[Alphidius]

A Paladin can never match a Fighter or Ranger in melee nor be as good a caster as a Cleric, however they do have good saving throws and bonus to AC, that is if your character has high Charisma. Also with their Lay On Hands, Pally are handy in the front line. Though if you've a Cleric, the Pally will always be second as a buff tank.

[Shrikant]

Once you get to Paladin[3] the only reason to gain additional paladin levels in for RP purposes only.
All the bonuses thet people have spoken of are available to you right at the begining.

In a straight comparision with either a Barbarian or a Cleric the paladin definately comes off weaker.
As a mix-in class however, the paladin is very useful.

[Vassago]

@Alphidius

A Paladin can never match a Fighter or Ranger in melee...

A fighter I can agree with, but a ranger?? IMO, they flat out suck in IWD2. I loved the ranger in IWD and never had a party without one, but I was hugely dissappointed in them in IWD2. I would rather take a Fighter and use the extra feats to pick up Amberdexterity and Two-Weapon Fighting then to waste a level on Ranger.