>>Not-Dark Paladins might accept that the gray exists and show leniency towards others, but are not allowed to indulge themselves in that gray area.

On the other hand, Dark Paladins might be care less about "minor/grey-area" crimes while Light Paladins would be more willing to cut the hands off a person stealing bread for their family. IMO it depends a lot on how the [player of the] Paladin decides to define justice.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>>right, like they may not care about pickpocketing, but they might smite horde holysplosion an area to take out a necromancer.

Changing the argument from "dark Paladins worship dark gods" to "dark Paladins care too little (or too much?) about justice" would be an interesting tilt.

Especially in the context of what you said. Would it be a "dark" Paladin be the one that wipes out a village, or a light Paladin? Keep in mind the angry mob isn't known as Botolf's Goshawks.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

> To me, a Dark Paladin is like a tyrant. They punish others in absolute shades of black and white, rather than recognizing that a gray area exists since they are not allowed to indulge in it. Not-Dark Paladins might accept that the gray exists and show leniency towards others, but are not allowed to indulge themselves in that gray area.

Have you ever seen death-note? It's about someone who is willing to kill at will, sacrifice a few souls, all with the professed claim that they are saving the world. They do save the world, and people fall in line, but they do so through fear and cruelty claiming to be a God of that world. It would be an interesting take to make Dark Paladins this good guy gone wrong. They lean more towards Rutilor rather than chadatru. Their abilities are flashy, bright, about saving the world from itself because it's so backwards. They are rewarded with passive messages about how they are a champion of the Gods, constant positive reinforcement for winning against evil by any means necessary. They are not bound by civil law. They're not bound by rules of war. They're bound by evil vs good, and good will win, no matter what. They are the higher law.

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!

I like the idea of Dark Paladin being handled more subtly. What if holy weapon (or armaments) were more of a seminal ability as it should be? I just finished writing an email on this, but I think it's a good thing to toss out here. I know I'm burying the lede but bear with me a sec.

What if at the end of the holy weapon quest, a paladin learned the ritual to holify a weapon rather than creating the weapon outright? The ritual would use a Chadatru favor or offering and a full soul pool, a chunk of spirit, vitality and mana. Recharging the weapon would just require some soul juice and availability (the ability would be on cooldown), rather than an altar. Replacing the weapon would just require waiting out the long cooldown and a repeat of the initial ritual to create the bond. To keep holy icons relevant, they might be used in place of a favor or offering and add some extra charges on recharge.

The new holy weapon would be the same as it is now, but it'd also reduce the cost of soul abilities (glyphs, auras/faiths, etc.) when held.

Now, the traditional holy weapon would be taught by a guildleader, but we'd also have a player-taught "dark" holy weapon (like other player-taught abilities, including voice throw and such), the signature weapon of a dark paladin. The Dark Paladin would be the same as any other paladin insofar as abilities are concerned (no new dark paladin powers). The difference would lie in the weapon and the ritual. Rather than using a Chad orb or offering, the dark ritual would take a Botolf offering.

The dark weapon would sap the paladin's soul pool with each swing, limiting the use of traditional paladin soul abilities. It would also be less potent than a traditional holy weapon in terms of damage bonus, BUT it would apply random minor curses to its target on successful strike, affecting an opponent's balance, spirit, fatigue, mana and concentration.

That improves holy weapon, which should really be our seminal ability, and it opens the door for Dark Paladin RP gameplay and RP without necessitating the creation of dedicated dark paladin abilities.

It's easy to imagine this system could be expanded to include a 100th circle holy shield ability using the same holy weapon ritual. The holy shield might do some interesting stuff like provide a small chance to nullify a random physical attack and boost a shield's offensive stats or improve shield slams in a perceivable way since shield slam is a meh attack on its own (low damage, high fatigue and balance hit).

**Note: I know this is outside the scope of the original discussion, but I think it may be relevant to the ancillary discussion. I emailed the more relevant suggestions re: Faiths before re-subbing to post.

> This raises the question, for example, if the Hounds of Rutilor is staffed by Dark Paladins or Light Paladins

This is kind of what I was getting at. What if the "dark paladin" was actually Rutilor's Paladins. Trying so hard to be good that they embrace the tactics of evil due to their effectiveness, completely unaware of the irony. They are holy only to themselves and the strictest interpretation of the law.

>For instance, let's say the soul had a "3rd eye chakra"; you tap into it, it slowly drains soul pool, you get a passive perception buff of some sort, and maybe your smites cause your opponent to glow, making it harder to hide. Maybe extended use causes eye bleeders or something, kind of a stigmata thing?

Someone's been watching anime, particularly Naruto I think.

I like the mechanical idea as described. Historically ascetic ideals often lead to extremity, such as self-flagellation. I don't know if that exact method fits into the Paladin wheelhouse but it's an idea ripe for exploring IMO.

Asceticism is often linked with orders of monks but applying the fantasy archetype of a monk to the Paladin guild could be tricky. Inner fire is basically chakra by another name, and Barbs already have forms/masteries/meditations, so they have the "martial artist monk" angle covered. The thematic image (staff-wielding religious types) is also present in both the Cleric guild and strongly in one Moon Mage sect (both have the title Monk available).

Paladins do seem to fit the moral aesthetic best if/when asceticism becomes a reality, so don't let the imagery being taken by another guild stop your rp angle though. A well-played Paladin could be a monk even if the title isn't available to him.

So, question for you: When do you use Protect Deflect over Protect Cover? Levels 4-39? Or is there actually a situation where Deflect is preferable?

Javac
That one guy

If you have questions or comments in regard to this post please email me at DR-JAVAC@play.net.

>>DR-Javac: So, question for you: When do you use Protect Deflect over Protect Cover? Levels 4-39? Or is there actually a situation where Deflect is preferable?

I never use Cover. At my levels of skill Deflect is more then enough and I don't have to worry about fiddling with my stances to ensure my own survival.

When I was a lowbie paladin, I'd choose based on threat/need. Cover was handy for a situation I absolutely wanted an attack to not reach (RP events, healer protection, outclassed enemy). Deflect was my go-to for lower risk situations where only taking off part of the attack would be enough to save the person I was covering.

I appreciate having both options though, it's one of my favorite Paladin abilities, and one I use daily.

Samsaren

How about something the beefs up Shield Usage? For instance, if we fail to defend with our shield, rather than rolling against parry or evasion, the attack rolls against shield usage again. Rutilor would be a good match.

Also, something that allows our shields to become great defense against magic. Meraud, maybe?

My only objection to pure defensive abilities is I think we're already pretty strong defensively, and defense can be boring when you've got limited offense to back it up (mostly due to range limitations -- the meleedin problem -- and skill set placement).

FWIW, I sent the following in an email to describe what in my opinion would make the biggest difference:

>• Some viable attack at range;
>• Some sort of engagement mechanic (e.g. reduced advance time a la khri shadowstep, something to pull people to melee, etc.);
>• Some more debilitation options (we only have stun or immobilize due to diminishing returns and a non-replaceable 1.5 minute shatter that's meh outside the ~6 second shield drop) -- I can see glyph debilitations or, even better IMO, smite debilitations because smite is largely useless right now;
>• A way to punish stealthies without completely removing their ability to be effective;
>• More shield attacks/maneuvers than just slam (shield offense stat enhancement would be amazing, too);
>• Solo utility for group abilities (protects and lead are good group-oriented abilities, but the fact that they're group only means they see little use).

>On the last item, I feel we're already the best in the game at protecting people through Protect and other abilities/spells, and we have easily the best large group buff in the game (lead). The problem is those abilities offer no solo utility and an ability that can be used only in groups is an ability that doesn't get used [much] in DR. If Protect or Lead (by another name, like... Faiths) had solo use, they'd be truly amazing. Let's say, for instance, Protect Deflect, when used solo, deflected a portion of damage back at the attacker at the expense of some soul juice. What if Protect Cover could provide DFA protection when solo?

>...

>*Note: I don't mind taking a stealthy attack because that's just par for the course, but when you can't search someone out, their tactic often becomes attack and immediately hide, wait, repeat. That means we spend a lot of time idle just waiting for the next attack, which can be very boring. Paladin TM is not good enough to knock someone out of hiding.

I figured they might serve as talking points posted here.

P.S. After the latest awesome holy weapon changes (seriously excited for the change weapon change to hit live), I'd really love to see it become a bigger part of our repertoire. IMO, it should bonus other abilities when held (e.g. lower soul pool cost of abilities by serving as a conduit or focus for soul energy).

"My only objection to pure defensive abilities is I think we're already pretty strong defensively, and defense can be boring when you've got limited offense to back it up (mostly due to range limitations -- the meleedin problem -- and skill set placement)."


Agreed, but that's why I was thinking of something where our shield could defend against magic. Maybe even it could be a Damaris thing where we steal the spell's magic and turn it into vitality. That way, other guilds would be more inclined to engage us at melee.

With an armor primary, I think we should be a defense-first guild. I just think we need more abilities that force other guilds into melee combat. Buffing shield usage to handle stealth/magic/ranged would be one way at least of making that happen. It would also give us an identity that coincides with our primary skill. Because morality, souls, and armor do not coincide with one another.

>They'll keep slinging spells and/or ranged attacks and try to find clever ways around exceptional ranged defense, including stacking debils and/or exploiting known OP spells/abilities. They might keep missing or doing insignificant damage and keep running because why would anyone play to an opponent's strengths in combat? This isn't hyperbole. I've had to call spars because they were going nowhere after 20 minutes.

Pretty much.

Abilities also exist that heavily mitigate Paladin advantages (i.e. shield and armor). Paladins just need more offensive firepower, plain and simple.

I wouldn't say paladins are any worse off than other magic tert guilds. They just have a few of their abilities oriented around a group, as is their kit, and their abilities aren't "wow" except for the bonus stance points - but that's almost a magic tertiary perk since all but one magic tert has armor at least secondary.

> I guess I just mean that right now most of our useful abilities are via a tertiary skill set (magic). I don't think any other guild has to go through that. I was hoping to convince the devs to create a useful skill set that focused on the thing we primarily train.

- Rangers, except snipe, beseeches, stance points, and dual-load*.

- Thieves, except snipe, ambushes, dual-load* and backstab.

- Paladins, except smite, glyphs, protect, stance points, arm-worn shields, and lead.

- Barbarians, except dual-load*, stance points, basic magic resistance, and whirlwind.

- Traders, currently they don't even get the tert skillset, but they will be restricted when/if they do.

* Still requires a tertiary skill to use.

> I get what you're saying. I don't expect we'll ever have a backstab or even a dual load because that's just not practical for a high defense guild, like you alluded to, but hopefully Asceticism opens the door for more varied abilities powered off or bonused by a primary skill

I completely agree. I think they need more help in that area, and I personally love the idea of a thorns-like effect via the guild skill. A way to turn defending into a damaging maneuver. I think it'll be interesting to see how that turns you. You can turn into debuffs that weaken balance, evasion, position, or any number of other defenses on the target that attacked you without thinking, or you can make it a counter-attack type move that gives you a moment of opportunity.

> FWIW, smite is not significantly better than a slice any guild can do.

Separate problem, and I think it should be. There are lots of options to improve this, but I guess it's not a high priority.

>Allowing Paladins to choose the attack bonused by SMITE, ala SMITE DRAW or SMITE CHOP, would go a long way to bringing this ability back to the fore of my toolbox. As it stands now, I don't use it in serious combat because DRAW and CHOP out perform it.

I honestly can't tell the difference between a smite and a slice. I just tried again now. I kill at roughly the same speed burning through a full smite pool than straight slicing with a pristine soul at 80 base charisma, which is at or near top end smite bonus. Even if I could smite draw, I don't think I'd notice a difference over a normal draw. In 2.0, as you know, you couldn't smite back-to-back, but it was a very noticeable strike relative to a regular old slice. Smite needs more than a draw or chop option to be more than a gimmick for me.

I made a suggestion apart from smite debilitations to give smite the ability to extend a strike to pole or missile with skill and charisma. In other words, at around 35 charisma, a paladin might be able to smite from pole with a melee weapon. At 70, she might be able to smite from missile. The idea is the paladin channels her soul to extend the weapon’s range for that one attack. The weapon is like a focus for her soul power. Uses shield slam if no weapon in hand. Something like that would really spice up smite if it stayed just a [slightly better?] regular slice, draw, chop, etc.

I think there are a lot of options for massively improving the guild while keeping most of our current abilities (if in name only for some), like I've stated for years, if they were just beefed up to live in this era of DR.

Correct me if I'm wrong, the key [abstract] problems we face are:

• We were relegated to melee with the ranged buff removal in a game where it takes 10 seconds to get to melee and 0 seconds to retreat, and CRC doesn't fix this. A glyph that reduces engagement time and fixing CRC could resolve this. The ranged smite I suggested above and/or a ranged buff of any sort would also help.

• Our debilitation suite is very weak. Smite and halt share diminishing returns and shatter is non-replaceable and lasts a minute and a half at cap, so we're pretty idle a lot of times. New debilitating glyphs or smites can fix this.

• We need a way to counter back-to-back-to-back stealth attacks. Fighting stealthies can be very boring because they control the entire fight and they like to stay hidden the whole time, which is not hard with stun-hiders, EM, invis, etc. Not knocking the tactic; I'd do it, too, but we need a counter to the back-to-back-to-back part because lolpaladinaoetm. New smites can fix (like a smite that sweeps at shadows), and/or a glyph that adds stealth hindrance to opponent's armor for ranged opponents

• No reliable primary skill set attack, which can be very bothersome when coupled with the very limited debilitation problem. (Shield slam is meh because shield offensive stats stink.) This might be fixed using glyphs or spells to enhance shield offense stats and glyphs or smites that debilitate.

• Our group abilities are really great but have no solo utility, so they're not used much. This can be fixed by renaming lead and giving lead and protects solo functionality like mentioned in this thread

You might say it's not that simple because then what's the difference between a debilitation spell and a debilitation glyph or smite? It's a good question. In the past I proposed going with the idea that glyphs might only work with mundane tools, which would shift some things around (e.g. DA would become a glyph and glyph of mana would become a spell). The idea is a paladin is more mundane, tool-oriented than a mage. S/he doesn't do much conjuring, so debilitation glyphs might center around weakening armor and weapons or making weapons and armor do extraordinary things. Rather than debilitating evasion with a spell, a paladin might trace a glyph on an opponent's armor to make it more hindering. The paladin might have a CoZ like glyph as well or a glyph that makes weapons less effective. How about adding weight or RT to a weapon without improving its damage stats? What if glyph of ease could be traced on leg armor to assist a paladin in getting to melee and the fatigue buff were rolled into a spell or lead or something? How about rolling bond armaments into glyph of bonding and giving us a ranged buffing spell?

Anyway... The problems are important because I think the best suggestions will touch on solutions to our key problems, so if I missed something, please share.

> On another note, I never realized Paladins didn't have Parry and evasion boosting spells. That definitely seems like an oversight. I feel like those should both be pushed out immediately.

I agree with this. If coding new spells is too time consuming, they could always just add parry to Sentinel's Resolve and Evasion to Veteran's Insight.

>>We had them in 3.0, but they were removed in 3.1 for reasons that are still unclear to me. The reason given IIRC was that we had too many defense skill buffs,

It was because we could buff all 3 via one spell, so Veteran's Insight was changed so that SR is Shield/Defending/Reflex, instead of Shield/Parry/Evasion. It was mentioned that would could see Evasion/parry buffs returned but as separate spells. Sadly, that, like the Anti-DFA spell we're allotted, hasn't had a chance to manifest of yet.

Samsaren

A thorough analysis on defense is very difficult because barriers, stealth and debilitation spells skew the picture. If we just take the practical approach, passive defense alone is boring. Who wants to be the wait-to-get-hit and chase-people-down guild? Raesh touched on that problem a while back, and that's central to the problems I discussed in a previous post regarding our limited range, debilitations and stealth counters.

>>I feel like another thing that holds us down is the way some skills are divided into skillsets.

>>Evasion should not be survival (unless the game had more pitfall reflex style traps)

>>Parry is much more of a defensive skill.

I always felt these placements were intended by design, and that's why the armor skillset wasn't called the defense skillset.

The weapon and armor skillsets are both pretty pigeonholed into what they can contain/accomplish, but armor suffers more because it's a much smaller diversity cluster.

For what it's worth, I don't think Paladins should be the evasive gods of the game. It does make a ton more sense from a thematic standpoint that Rangers and Thieves get that award.

That isn't to say the armor skill set doesn't need something, and that because it needs something Paladins in particular suffer, but I do struggle to think what it could be.

Maybe as a short-term thing, the hindrance of shields should scale down by skillset placement as notably as armor does, and that should include any limitations to using them with some weapons. IIRC, tower shields still aren't appealing for all Paladins because the hindrance ding is still notable, so maybe it should work more like heavy plate.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>>With regard to the stuff we've got now, a RUE-like spell for shields would be awesome (to make shield slam more useful) and bug/QoL fixes for abilities and spells that need them would be amazing, too.

Not to cherry pick from your post (as you and I are largely in agreement), on this note I think DA could easily cover such. If anything, the ratio of conversion for shield stats to shield damage stats could stand a review. As it is there's no difference in damage between a store bought 140 stone Tower and a 500+ Quest reinforced Pavise. The mechanic that decides shield stats is a bit dated, and not up to modern combat.

On a similar vein, a pass on the actual mechanics of SLAM could likely use some moving, OR adding a maneuver with some much needed extra 'umph' could work too.

Samsaren