Forums » The Paladin

Paladin Role Concern based on EQ

    • 13 posts
    July 12, 2016 6:00 PM PDT

    I love the lore behind playing the paladin in every game I play.

    EQ had great looking armor and the Fiery Avenger, however, they were not great DPS or great tanks.  Lenient groups who invited anyone would invite them, but more narrowly defined groups were inclined to take almost anyone but a paladin because of this.

    Since the healing of a palading will not be as good as a druid in this game, I would like to recommend that paladin tanking be closet to FF XI paladin in that they were effective because of the combination of aggro generation and self mitigation/healing.

    • 828 posts
    July 14, 2016 10:37 AM PDT

    Well I have not played the XXFI classes o I can comment there.   I think VR is moving this class into a tank/support role. No real details on what that may be but there is some great speculation out there.


    This post was edited by Kilsin at February 8, 2017 5:21 PM PST
    • 466 posts
    July 14, 2016 1:02 PM PDT

    out of playing UO EQ EQ2 and a little wow.  I feel EQ2 had a great balance I could Offtank with the best of classes.  But I could also switch it up and act as a second healer for a semi hard zone or primary healer for easy zones.  Hell in some zones we didnt even need a healer because I could tank and heal enough to let DPS burn it down.  

    • 92 posts
    July 16, 2016 10:23 AM PDT
    I'd rather avoid alot of healing. Some rescue heals/blocks on reasonable timers, lay hands, and maybe an Eq style burst heal (which had a stifling mana cost and also had a spell lockout).

    Crusader should be a tank first and foremost everything else should be flavor, without being OPAF.
    • 4 posts
    August 28, 2016 10:57 AM PDT

    I think (hope) they'll go the Vanguard route with the tank classes in this game.  The Warrior, Paladin, and Shadowknight type classes could all tank equally but had different styles.  The only thing holing a tank back would be gear. 

    • 255 posts
    September 5, 2016 4:57 AM PDT

    I like the way VG handled the tanks as well.  While my pally was my main, I tinkred with the warrior out of curiosity and had a dreadknight when I felt like spreading dread (we all have a dark side, right?).  While I never tanked in difficult situations with either my war or dk, I never felt they were any less a tank.

    • 1327 posts
    November 4, 2016 9:07 AM PDT

    Maybe with talent trees, the player would be able to choose what kind of Paladin they'd like to play. You can spec for a little less dmg and a little more healing, or vice versa. Personally, I like Paladins that are competent tanks, but have a few self buffs/heals for emergencies. And whose blessed weapon procs can help hold aggro. I think we all agree that Warriors are the kings of tanks. But maybe Paladins would be the ideal off-tank. I think that's how all hybrid classes (paladins, shamans, druids, shadowknights, etc.) should be handled -- they are some of the best classes to solo with. But in a group, they still make good substitutes if a primary role [warrior (tank), cleric (heals), wizard (dps), etc.] can't be found. They should still have lots of flexibility to focus more on one aspect of their build at the cost of another.

    • 158 posts
    February 3, 2017 6:10 AM PST

    I main tanked as a Paladin a ton in EQ2. EQ1 ? Yes, I agree. That was a major struggle and you really had to prove your value to be allowed to main-tank. More often than not that role was relegated to the Warrior class. I don't think the team is going that route this time. THe Paladin's in Vangaurd were much better at handling the MT role. I think you're going to see that here as well.

    • 137 posts
    February 3, 2017 6:43 AM PST

    I mained a Paladin back in EQ1 before I had any notion of class balance or min/maxing of any sort. I did indeed find that some scoffed at the idea of a Paladin tank and I didn't fully understand why. Oh how the times have changed. I have completele faith that VR will be able to get the Paladin on track in terms of balance.

    I would like to note that Paladins in rift actually brought a really interest thing to the table. Their heals would produce aggro like any other class, but was modified by a class multiplier. This would result in their small heals producing somewhat decent threat for the entire threat list. It provided them a little niche of being able to quickly pick up aggro on targets that had just entered combat. Adds and such would enter combat, see a high threat heal, and run straight to the Paladin. I thought this was a really neat take on the off-tank role and the VR devs should consider implementing something like that.

    • 840 posts
    February 3, 2017 7:50 AM PST

    Ainadak said:

    I mained a Paladin back in EQ1 before I had any notion of class balance or min/maxing of any sort. I did indeed find that some scoffed at the idea of a Paladin tank and I didn't fully understand why. Oh how the times have changed. I have completele faith that VR will be able to get the Paladin on track in terms of balance.

    I would like to note that Paladins in rift actually brought a really interest thing to the table. Their heals would produce aggro like any other class, but was modified by a class multiplier. This would result in their small heals producing somewhat decent threat for the entire threat list. It provided them a little niche of being able to quickly pick up aggro on targets that had just entered combat. Adds and such would enter combat, see a high threat heal, and run straight to the Paladin. I thought this was a really neat take on the off-tank role and the VR devs should consider implementing something like that.

    I never played Rift, but I love the idea of getting aggro by healing the character that currently has aggro.  It makes perfect sense for a Paladin's heals to generate more threat in my opinion.  It's basically a fully armored warrior who just healed the person you are trying to kill.  Seems like a problem.

    I thought Paladins did pretty well tanking for groups in early EverQuest.  It was just when you started raiding that you found yourself without a whole lot to do.  Since this game will focus on grouping, a similar Paladin wouldn't be a bad thing.  Maybe they just need a little something to add to their appeal at the end.

    • 158 posts
    February 3, 2017 12:55 PM PST

    I think it will come down to snap's and threat over time and utility against the other tank classes being able to output more damage. If you can hold aggro just as well and be less work for the healers to manage then it might come out as an advantage but you won't be as capable at helping burn the target down as quickly. It's a trade off for sure.

    • 35 posts
    February 5, 2017 10:18 AM PST

    I think the Paladin's role is going to depend greatly on how Warriors perform.  The reason Knights were second class tanks in EQ is because Warriors had no other role besides tank.  They had no support, limited damage, and nothing besides being a meat shield.  Add in the disciplines which improved Warrior tanking even more and there was just no other way to bring balance.  

     

    Since that time it seems game designers have realized every class needs some utility.  Which means you can open up the tanking role to multiple classes becuase they all are able to tank enough to fill the role and bring some support for the times when they are not tanking.

     

    Paladins typically use healing and buffs as their support, Warriors seem to have utility centered around boosting damage or defense for the group, and Shadow Knights have AE/buffs/pets as their utility.  As long as the three classes are equally good at tanking then there are no issues.  Make one of them the better tank though and the others are regulated to being considered a lesser choice and kicked to the side.

    • 106 posts
    February 5, 2017 11:26 AM PST

    It will depend on if we are a tank/cleric hybrid or if have are own stand alone spell lines. Without knowing this , its hard to gauge.

    • 35 posts
    February 5, 2017 11:56 AM PST

    I think we will be both a tank/cleric hybrid and have our own spells.  Ideally we would have the same buffs as a similar level cleric.  No one takes a cleric just because of their totally awesome buffs.  Having the hybrids with the same level of buffs makes sense for convience and fun.  Then having unique spells specifically for the hybrid role add to the immersion.  Clerics have more efficient heals while Paladins have faster casting.  Clerics have direct group heals while Paladins have group HoT.  There are ways to have utility, uniqueness, and fun all at the same time.

    • 21 posts
    February 6, 2017 9:58 PM PST

    The idea of using their heals in a targeted manner to pull agro is great, and having their own distinct line of spells would make sense, no need to share spells with clerics.  Don't forget their line of holy stuns from EQ either. 

     

    • 158 posts
    February 8, 2017 7:18 AM PST

    I think from a development stand point it may be easier for them to make Paladin's share a line and just get some spells later. This is one of the things they did in EQ1. I don't know if it was specifically to save work in that case, but it might have felt like the best way to balance things at the time. They've learned alot since the early days. I'll be interested to see what path they take. My money is on the path that saves them the most work load - if for no other reason that it's far more work to balance unique spells against other spell lines versus just promoting spell use later in life to a hybrid class.

     

    As long as the gap isn't as large as it is in EQ1 - I really won't mind that solution. Unique spells would be cool - but I would be equally happy with either as long as the gap was tighter than what i've seen before.

    • 344 posts
    February 12, 2017 10:43 PM PST

    I see the Paladin as being a tank who has the flexability to specialise in (because of his/her self healing abilities) using 2h weapon for much more auto attack damage output than a sword and board tank without having to worry about taking a bit more damage because one of their primary skills is healing!  It certainly makes sense that a Paladin can aquire extra agro from all mobs around him by using heals on top of agro management skills like taunt etc.  I think that Paladin tanking will probably be a little more involved than a warrior because you would imagine warriors skill sets are mostly based on direct agro generation and dps making them possibly simpler to start off with, but someone who masters the timing of self buffing and healing as a Paladin might find they have excellent agro management as long as they time these types of skills well.

    I'd imagine it like this for a Paladin pulling... right after they pull the mobs buffing themselves with a short term buff of some sort that enrages the mobs to try to gather agro imediately from multiple mobs in the pull, then it probably being important to maintain agro that they play an active role in healing themselves as well as the healer in the group and with each heal is a good chink of agro from every mob in range, but i would guess that a Paladin who is not actively healing themselves regularly will have more trouble holding agro than other tank classes who might have more direct agro skills like damage, dots and a variety of taunt skills  This makes their play style totally unique from the oher (assumed) 2 tank classes.

    Of course i am just guessing but this is how i had imagined it might be for a Pali to tank well.

    • 158 posts
    February 14, 2017 7:06 AM PST

    I'd be ok with that suggestion. Again, I just want to avoid what i've seen in the past with the class being hamstrung early and never really catching up to the other hybrids/tanks. I loved the class but I think it could certainly benefit from some new ideas.

    • 21 posts
    February 14, 2017 10:13 AM PST

    I like those ideas on Pally tanking, great way to make them feel like a unique tanking experience.  Seems like it would be a bit more of a learning curve than a warrior, but a more rewarding experience in the end when mastered.  I don't mind how they handled spells for hybrids in EQ1, majority were drawn from their parent classes and down the way got some unique spells.  A smaller gap, as Verdic mentioned, would go a ways towards making sure we don't fall behind other tanking classes that don't rely on spells as much.  In EQ1 it seemed that the paladin quickly fell behind the Shadowknight and Warrior and never properly caught up.

     

    • 250 posts
    March 16, 2017 2:53 PM PDT

    Ruar said:

    I think we will be both a tank/cleric hybrid and have our own spells.  Ideally we would have the same buffs as a similar level cleric.  No one takes a cleric just because of their totally awesome buffs.  Having the hybrids with the same level of buffs makes sense for convience and fun.  Then having unique spells specifically for the hybrid role add to the immersion.  Clerics have more efficient heals while Paladins have faster casting.  Clerics have direct group heals while Paladins have group HoT.  There are ways to have utility, uniqueness, and fun all at the same time.

     

    Sorry if I have misread what you typed, but I think Paladins should NOT have the same buffs as a cleric. If a cleric can buff your HP by 150 at level 22, then a paladin should be able to do the same at level 32. Same for rezzes. Paladins should not be on par with clerics in regards to buffs/rezzes. Sorry if I misinterpreted your post.

    • 106 posts
    March 17, 2017 2:26 AM PDT

    The exp rez portion I can agree with , buffs I have to disagree.

    I think paladins need there own line of buffs that are stackable, perhaps not as much ac/hps etc but when grouped with a cleric the abilitys are not pointless.

    • 575 posts
    March 19, 2017 4:49 PM PDT

    I liked how paladins had pledge armament in EQ2 (sacrifice a portion of their own armor to provide a bonus to another player).  I also like how each fighter (Guardian/Berserker - Paladin/Shadowknight -Monk/Bruiser) provided a unique "raid buff" to add extra flavor and additonal utility to each class  --  if Pantheon chooses to adopt a similar philosphy, I would like to see Paladins get a raidwide AC buff.

    • 158 posts
    March 20, 2017 6:47 AM PDT

    I always enjoyed "Intercept" but I didn't like having to re-apply it all the time. I would have preferred a duration limit instead so that I could just buff up, get a HoT, and then flip it on for my Healer or Main Tank to keep them from taking a heavy damage phase or something. That would have been cool. It's actually something I enjoyed using in Final Fantasy IV as Cecil - being able to "Cover" weaker allies was cool - even if it wasn't very effecient in a turn based game.

    • 73 posts
    March 20, 2017 1:19 PM PDT

    I never played a paladin in EQ (okay, that's only mostly true, I dabbled with every class at least a little, but I didn't play enough paladin to say, "I played a paladin" it would give the wrong impression if I did) but one of my best good friends from the game was a paladin (Braemon/Gigglesworth, it's Weesh, if you're reading this we should hang out when the game drops :P). From watching him, I tend to agree, grouping was much harder on a paladin, mainly because of automatic assumptions. The warrior was automatically assumed to be a good tank, then had the opportunity to either prove or disprove that assumption. If they disproved that assumption they went on the list of folks to avoid grouping with (we all had that notebook, right?). On the other hand paladins were assumed to be "meh" tanks. Not great, but if there is no one else around, they'll do in a pinch. (My god, I loved EQ, but looking back they really were great at creating classes that were the last ones picked for dodgeball.) However, once a paladin got a group, if they were good, they would get a group over and over and every time they logged on.

    My friend Braemon, he was an exceptional paladin. He'd chain his stuns as much as he could, so the thing he was tanking was staying stunned more, thus attacking less, thus damaging him less, thus costing the healer less healing. When things went sideways (bad pull or what have you) he always had the LoH right at the moment you needed it. He saved the day more times than I could have counted. When there was downtime he always went through the group topping off everyone's hps with his heals, so the healer didn't have to worry about that. He did a lot, more than I could list, and every group that ever had him always wanted him back, to where he'd get picked over a warrior. 

    Now, was he the norm, and was his story the normal story for a paladin? Absolutely not. Part of that was because he was lucky enough to have a group of friends who were constantly introducing him to new people, so there would be a larger pool of people who would want him around, so that he'd have an easier time getting groups. Part of it (most of it) was that he worked really hard to be the kind of paladin you wanted to invite back. 

    I'm not saying things shouldn't be tweaked a little, I think they should be tweaked some to make it slightly easier for more people to be that kind of paladin, but on the other hand, I feel like, maybe, there should be a slight learning curve to some classes. I almost always make my first character in any game a warrior/fighter type (even if it doesn't last long). Why? Because I feel like, in most games, the warrior is the easiest one with which to learn the games basic mechanics, because there is so little to learning most warriors that you can focus on the overall game mechanics instead of having to learn your class. Then, once you have the basics of the game, you can go on to playing a more complicated class, and learn that, since you're not drowning in mechanics. The point there is simple. I think of the Paladin as a slightly advanced class. You have to know everything the warrior knows about threat generation, holding agro, etc, plus know everything there is to know about paladin abilities, spells, etc.

    The balance here, from my point of view, was that a great warrior was only good to have around, while a great paladin was awesome to have around. A mediocre warrior was still good to have around, but a mediocre paladin was kind of a drag to have around.... if that makes any sense. 

    Anyway, just my thoughts, it should be harder to play an amazing paladin, but the rewards for being amazing should be greater than for classes with which it is easier to be a bit amazing.

    • 158 posts
    March 23, 2017 6:00 AM PDT

    I was definitely one of those Paladin's who had to work overtime to get into groups. It taught me a ton about the class - but I also spent plenty of several hour gameplay sessions trying to break down people's misconceptions about Paladin's thanks to the bad ones. I don't think it has to be like that again - at the end of the day it was ineffecient and not very fun for long stretches to get to the good parts of being a Paladin.

     

    I think your post is fantastic @Reafwalk. It definitely sums up my time on Bertoxxulous and while I had some great moments - there were far more boring and frustrating moments that i'd not care to repeat 18 years later.