Forums » The Paladin

offensive tank

    • 19 posts
    June 9, 2017 10:47 AM PDT

    I wouldnt mind seeing paly veer away from healing.

    more of an offensive tank, smiting enemies. and not just undead. maybe able to enchant their weapons before battle.

    still have some other forms of group support. AC/HP buffs.

    stuns of course.

    rune/bubble spell, with long recast, it should be a oh crap spell, we just need a few more seconds for cleric to get spell off kinda thing

    maybe their rune could be a kinda guard ability. caster takes to much agro, mob hit caster with rune. rune pops but paly gets moved to top spot on mob agro list

    5 min recast, so u couldnt have it on everyone all the time. jsut that wizard trying to show off his might

    and stuns of course.

     

    • 1195 posts
    June 9, 2017 1:45 PM PDT

    I am hoping they will be more offensive than paladins of the past. There is a fair chance they will be since their original name was Crusader and their description sounds much more offense oriented:

     

    "Once a Cleric, the Paladin has a call transcending the customs of the Cleric Order. Led by her convictions, she sets off to carry out her own righteous judgment.

    • 317 posts
    June 11, 2017 11:40 AM PDT

     Led by her convictions, she sets off to carry out her own righteous judgment.

     Rawr! 

    If Clerics are the Shields of the Clerical orders, then Paladins are undoubtedly the Sword!

     

    Not an MMORPG, but my favorite type of Paladin is the 5th Edition D&D Oath of Vengeance Paladin 

     

    Tenets of Vengeance: The tenets of the Oath of Vengeance vary by paladin, but all the tenets revolve around punishing wrongdoers by any means necessary. Paladins who uphold these tenets are willing to sacrifice even their own righteousness to mete out justice upon those who do evil, so the paladins are often neutral or lawful neutral in alignment. The core principles of the tenets are brutally simple.

    -Fight the Greater Evil. Faced with a choice of fighting my sworn foes or combating a lesser evil.

    -I choose the greater evil.

    -No Mercy for the Wicked. Ordinary foes might win my mercy, but my sworn enemies do not.

    -By Any Means Necessary. My qualms can’t get in the way of exterminating my foes.

    -Restitution. If my foes wreak ruin on the world, it is because I failed to stop them. I must help those harmed by their misdeeds.

     

    I am rolling a Paladin no matter what, but would prefer something like that. Depending on how Specializations and Deities work, I am hoping theres a good and proper deity of War or Storms (Rainkeeper was my Patron in EQ) that Paladins can follow. Mainly for Roleplay reasons, Not sure how deities will affect gameplay.

     
     
    • 352 posts
    July 21, 2017 2:21 PM PDT

    As a tank in EQ1, Paladins were, yes, very offensive...

    • 60 posts
    August 4, 2017 9:51 PM PDT

    Anistosoles said:

    As a tank in EQ1, Paladins were, yes, very offensive...

    Not nearly as much DPS as SK's tho, but pallies were the stun kings back in the day.

     

    Iksar said:

    I am hoping they will be more offensive than paladins of the past. There is a fair chance they will be since their original name was Crusader and their description sounds much more offense oriented:

     

    "Once a Cleric, the Paladin has a call transcending the customs of the Cleric Order. Led by her convictions, she sets off to carry out her own righteous judgment.

    But I hope they still make Pallies more focused on stuns to hold that crazy threat they used too, And let the Dire lords do more actual dmg


    This post was edited by Nymphey at August 4, 2017 9:53 PM PDT
    • 352 posts
    August 11, 2017 3:32 PM PDT

    Nymphey said:

    Anistosoles said:

    As a tank in EQ1, Paladins were, yes, very offensive...

    Not nearly as much DPS as SK's tho, but pallies were the stun kings back in the day.

     

     

    I was trying to be funny. Pallies , as tanks in EQ1, were often seen as offensive...as in "causing someone to feel deeply upset or angry." My bad...

    • 114 posts
    August 30, 2017 1:07 PM PDT

    Anistosoles said:

    As a tank in EQ1, Paladins were, yes, very offensive...

    I played a paladin for eight years in EQ1. I got your joke. :)

    I'd love it if the paladin was a defensive tank -- perhaps on par or better than a warrior. In exchange for that, I wouldn't mind not being as strong offensively. However, it would be awesome if paladins had the best DPS against undead.

    • 352 posts
    August 30, 2017 3:57 PM PDT

    Lghtngfan said:

    Anistosoles said:

    As a tank in EQ1, Paladins were, yes, very offensive...

    I played a paladin for eight years in EQ1. I got your joke. :)

    I'd love it if the paladin was a defensive tank -- perhaps on par or better than a warrior. In exchange for that, I wouldn't mind not being as strong offensively. However, it would be awesome if paladins had the best DPS against undead.

     

    Yeah, would be cool if a Paladin was the best defensive tank, through spells and whatnot. Soloing would be harder, but that's the tradeoff.

    • 114 posts
    August 31, 2017 8:54 AM PDT

    Anistosoles said:

    Yeah, would be cool if a Paladin was the best defensive tank, through spells and whatnot. Soloing would be harder, but that's the tradeoff.

    Think about it this way: In EQ, a warrior could solo because they were the best pure offensive and defensive tank combined. The SK could solo because they had the combo with the necro that gave them lifesteal, but also strong offense and defense. The paladin was given neither the best offense nor the best defense along with terrible heals, making it a pretty weak hybrid class. (When the best thing your character can do is stun, it's pretty weak. And how the hell did the SKs get a floating mount? That was so not fair! But I digress ...)

    What if Pantheon made the warriors the best offensive tank and the paladin the best defensive tank? I could imagine the paladin getting bonuses for going sword and board, thus giving him a better defensive rating. On the other hand, warriors could get offensive bonuses for going 2H. That way, there's a clear difference in their styles but both are still desirable.

    For the record, I know what you're talking about with soloing, and Pantheon is gearing the game toward groups. But EQ was made with grouping in mind, and we all know several classes could solo. (It wasn't the point of the game or the classes, but it just happened that way.) So I want to say with a grain of salt that the paladin in Pantheon could possibly solo if they were the best defensive class with sword-and-board bonuses. Now, it wouldn't be spectacular burning down mobs like an EQ wizard could or quad-kiting like an EQ druid could, but it would definitely be victory by attrition for the paladin. It's soloing wouldn't win a beauty contest, and it may take a bit longer, but it would be possible.

    Again, this is all harmless theorycrafting and a fun bit of discussion comparing our favorite EQ pally with what could be the Pantheon pally. It's great to talk shop with someone who remembers the EQ pally. :)

    Now, if I could only convince Brad to port Karana to Patheon, lest Sheyna Rainbringer go without her lord and savior. LOL :)

    • 87 posts
    September 7, 2017 8:13 PM PDT

    I had the best of all 3 worlds with eq I loved the paladin so much I played her every single night for 13 years. Ive played paladins in other games also, she is the only class I've ever been drawn to. I like what you guys are saying its thrilling to see your passions for the class. I solo'd to challenge myself and to show it could be done and welcomed the odds that you have known well that were stacked aginst us. I think we all like to think we can overcome intended game designs and mechanics or role or class to be competitive within our own community as paladins and tank/healer/dps/cc. Ill tank to defend, Ill attack to inflick the greatest amount of damage, Ill heal effectivly with efficiency in any given order at moments notice!

    • 87 posts
    September 7, 2017 8:14 PM PDT

    oh if you get to speak to sir brad whisper elf paladin to his ear for me!

    • 251 posts
    September 7, 2017 9:52 PM PDT

    Actually Paladins were sort of like tax collectors, and mostly made of aristocracy.  So they were sort of the bumbling sons of wealthy and powerful families, riding around and asserting their authority and demanding peasants tell grand tales of their deeds.  They are the kind of person you see at the gym talking about how they work out constantly in their own private gym that has better equipment.  But can't do more than 5 burpees or wall-sit for more than 30 seconds.

    The idea that Paladins are weaker then the others, supported by faith rather than skill, and serve maybe a mercantile sort of secondary role, appeals way more to me than trying to make Paladin into a powerful, anything.  I feel like it should be like a rich kid who did seal training on his parents 10 million dollar estate, compared to actual Navy Seals, only in every respect other than diplomacy, or mercantile skills.  With the exception of Prayer or Faith to boost themselves up, they should really be sort of Meh.  All around.  At least as I understand them.

    • 87 posts
    September 8, 2017 12:14 AM PDT
    Oh
    • 251 posts
    September 8, 2017 1:12 AM PDT

    Or maybe like Joan of Arc if she was born to a wealthy family.  Generic combat training + faith and prayer, and maybe inspiration?  That's probably less jarring than the bumbling children of officials and nobles.  hehe

    • 245 posts
    September 14, 2017 9:07 PM PDT

    Instead of being simply the best undead tanks, I have always wanted to see paladins choose a racial enemy that their smites,defenses,and attacks were improved towards. Instead of having an undead nuke, you would have a racial nuke.  Defensive tanks with stuns, undead nukes. and 0 dps has been done over and over. Lets get offensive!

    • 251 posts
    September 14, 2017 9:11 PM PDT

    What would you pray for the power to overcome besides the undead menace though?

    • 245 posts
    September 14, 2017 9:28 PM PDT

    This notion of all Gods want all undead thing eradicated is antiquated.  Paladins defend the light from the darkness, and undead are not the ONLY think that brings darkness.  Having an army of warriors who are adept at defeating many different entities that bring darkness would be far more beneficial than having an army that can defeat only skeletons.  

    More to the point of answering your question tho... I would pray for the power,courage, and conviction to overcome evil in whatever form it choses to take. 

    If I had a racial enemy to begin  the game, then I would still fight evil in whateverform it takes, but I would more fierce toward the orcs that killed my father, for instance...

    • 251 posts
    September 14, 2017 10:00 PM PDT

    But the ultimate weapon of darkness is the undead vessel of a fallen god...  that is how the Darkness will eventually win this war.  What other threat could match the need to vanquish these vast undead batteries of Dark Purpose?

    It is true enough that a proper Paladin has to have themselves a mortal foe.  A prayer that identifies that foe, and begs their god for the power to overcome that foe.  If one were too ambiguous with the wrong gods, however, they might find your prayers... unfit, and simply ignore them.

    You would need to pray to some unsavory corporeal entities for the strength to seek vengeance.  Are you sure you wish to follow the path of your holy crusade straight into the bowels of the beast.  The same beasts of which you are sworn to defend against, not as a Warrior of Light, but as one of their very number?  Do you not value your soul, or even your pathetic Light?

    You will make a fine Dire Lord when the time comes and the Light no longer shines.


    This post was edited by ZennExile at September 14, 2017 10:03 PM PDT
    • 245 posts
    September 15, 2017 8:27 AM PDT

    The ravaging lord, the revenant, the madjen kii, mos crag warriors, elvonnen giants, red raven assassins, ossari, wos Che, haethus krevgeyjl, sidryth vespers.

    All conduits of evil, not a single one undead. What use is a paladin in this war? 


    This post was edited by Larr at September 15, 2017 8:28 AM PDT
    • 251 posts
    September 15, 2017 5:02 PM PDT

    Indeed, what could come from sustaining the Light a few moments longer?  When the Fae Gods fall for the sake of balance, the Darkness will descend upon you all.  It is just a matter of time.  What use is Paladin indeed.  A flickering candle in a vast Ocean of Darkness.  Like the glint of painted metal fishing lures, begging for the gaping maw of unseen horrors born in its depths.

    Evil is no conduit.  Goodness and Malice are the same shade of meaningless.  There is only the Light, and the Darkness that will consume it.  Pray to your precious Light brave and noble Paladin.  Faith will greatly enhance your powers,  and your corpse will make a fine minion.  Or pray to the Darkness and join us in Victory.


    This post was edited by ZennExile at September 15, 2017 5:22 PM PDT
    • 279 posts
    October 14, 2017 1:09 PM PDT

    I would have to imagine that the paladin would end up being 'more' offensive than the paladin from EQ.  But im sure alot of the spells will center around healing and stunning like most paladins.  Its hard to make it SUPER offensive when the primary skills one looks for are both defensive.

    • 597 posts
    October 16, 2017 9:34 AM PDT

    Paladins need to be more offensive and i would be willing to get rid of the healing aspect of it almost entirely to achieve it, give us small nukes, undead nukes, stuns, tuants, and some knock downs and we will be good to go, make them feel wanted in a party and more importantlywanted to be played.

    • 8 posts
    October 24, 2017 7:38 AM PDT

    I like the idea started in Vanguard. Pallys were not high DPS vs the living, but they were unstoppable vs the undead. I think it would be cool if we were a shield vs the living and a hot blade vs the undead. 

     

    I remmeber doing a VG raid, very hard undead boss and having an abiluity that burned the undead and caused all their hate to come back to me. It work on the living, but it worked 10 times better vs the undead. 

     

    That's how you make this class shine. 

    • 20 posts
    October 24, 2017 7:55 PM PDT

    This is just a 'thinking outside the box' idea which probably doesnt fit much in the flavor of old EQ. But for classes such as Paldain, which seem to get lost with Warriors and DPS'ers outshining them, it could be an idea to work with.

    They could have buffs that can take dual purposes depending on whther a shield is equipped or not.

     

    Example 1: A concentration buff that can be toggled on and off. While on it drains the Paladin's mana but gives a significant buff versus undead.

    With a shield +Defense vs. Undead. Without shield +DMG vs. Undead

     

    Example 2: A toggled chant that drains significant mana while active.

    With a shield gives the Paladin +Block while pulsing a small heal to grouped melee within a few meters but NOT the Paladin.

    Without a shield gives the Paladin +Strength/Parry while pulsing a small endurance regen to grouped melee within a few meters but NOT the Paladin.

     

    Now these examples allow the Paladin to toggle their buffs on and off while still concentrating on taunting and adds but at the expense of draining their mana more quickly if left on.

    The chant example could allow the Paladin to gain threat from the small heals (with shield equipped) to the melee group-members nearby while the Paladin himself doesnt benfit from the regen, still gets a bonus stat.

    Again, perhaps this type of thing is way off the mark but maybe it will spark an idea in someone else. Cheers!


    This post was edited by Pierce at October 24, 2017 7:56 PM PDT