Topic: Paladin vs Champion

[thrud]

I'm just partial to paladins in full plate wielding 2h-swords. 
Regardless, you are socialy challenged untill level 7 or something.

[Marc R]

You've got around 6/level left to play around with, you can at least touch up climbing/swiming/riding/etc. . . .

Though, with plate on, climbing/swimming are no fun, and you don't much feel like walking everywhere, might be worth piling into riding 1/level.

I'd probably round out from there with Lores. . .religion, demons, undead, etc.

[kevinmccollum]

I'm sort of amazed by this comparison of warrior to paladin. Paladin's (as written in the companions) have a combat bonus equal to the warrior (which is in direct contradiction to section 5.21 concerning why/how a class gets a combat level bonus). The paladin can heal itself and unstun itself and even deliver x2 or x3 damage as well as going into suspended animation upon a death blow with a single list. If you toss in the ability to wear any armor, it is a powerhouse. The entire argument and "evidence" presented has NOT been an apples to apples comparison.

I do think it is amusing that "transcend armor" skill wasn't presented till RMCII so in RMCI, a paladin was wearing leather armor. Not that I allow Transcend armor skill anyway.

[Marc R]

It's "apples to apples" as long as you stick to core. . .we've already established that if you toss the right option or 3 on them, paladins get quite nasty, semis in general get quite nasty. . .but minus said options, they're not nearly all that. . . .they can't quite afford to be, at least not until higher levels.

Paladin can't match a figher in fighting skills if they spend the DP on magic, and if they spend DP on magic they can't afford to keep up with the fighter on skills. . .and the spells don't start to really rock until midtown levels. . . .They do surpass a fighter in fighting ability at higher levels, but then, a semi kind of works that way, slow start, high finish.

I suspect the armor and spellcasting note in the front of RoCo1 was directed toward paladins and rangers mostly, but definitely at paladins.

I did actually play with most of my paladins running around in rigid leather though, the skills you could purchase with the DP saved on MIA and Transcendance usually ended up coming in handy.

[kevinmccollum]

so, the paladin does NOT develop that second weapon, it sticks with one weapon. That frees up some dp for spell lists. And if we stick with core, the fighter can never break a stun. (which is only a 4th level spell). If we stick with core, you are right that the paladin is weakened up quite a bit since it can not wear metal armor, it will be stuck in AT 10 at best. But, with core, no one has any skill level bonuses except for combat so that kind of puts them on a level playing field. the Paladin will not be getting as  many manuevering skill as the fighter but a lot of those skills aren't used often.

[Marc R]

Those skills aren't used often by YOU. It's one of those YMMV things that vary game to game. . .it's ill advised in my group to have zero ranks in swimming for instance, unless the game is in a desert.

Allegation made was "More Powerful to the point of being imbalanced."

There are many situations where it might be handy to have both a sword and a bow. . .a fighter with a bow can make a long ranged attack, which isn't very easy to defend against, repeatedly. . .unstun a nasty puncture critical as you run up to melee range (admitedly not so bad in RM where you can practically cross a football field in a round). . .or even worse a mounted fighter with a spear and a bow (since he can afford to buy up riding enough for mounted combat). . .

The Paladin is likely to have IN as one of their highest stats vs the fighter's default ST/CO. . .

I'm not saying the Fighter is overawingly more powerful than the Paladin either, just that in Core rules the Paladin and Fighter are not out of whack with each other . . . The fighter is a better fighter than the paladin. . .the paladin is a far better paladin than the fighter is. (Admitedly, the paladin can make a better try at being a fighter than vice versa, but the fighter still ends up being a better. . .fighter.)

IMO despite much in the way of complaints, the game itself wasn't broken with RM2, just the options some GMs chose to use, without taking into account how they shifted around power levels. (if as GM you add an option that vastly benefits one PC over another, you should either re-balance it out with something else, or admit that balance is not a big concern in your game.)

[thrud]

As a sidenote...
We play with a bunch of small houserules and one of those are you can pick any ONE backgroud option, GM approval. For the Paladin this is a no-brainer, Transcendance...
If you think Paladins are powerful with core rules or maybe some minor options this should surely break the game, right? Not so, it helps a lot but mostly it helps the Paladin to become a better character. It helps to realise the image of the Paladin in shiny metal armour. Still it doesn'tbreak the game.
This is my own percieved experience from real play.

[kevinmccollum]

Transcendence? wow, your players are slow. for a semi, I would grab enchanted quality (98-99 on special abilities), spell costs halved and you start with one list.

Oh, and FYI, I don't know the definition of core to others but core meant nothing outside of basic rules so there is no stunned maneuvers or transcend armor right? Heck, even the paladin isn't core.

[Marc R]

That the glowing blood one?

If you go back and read from the top, I think I said "No options other than the profession itself.". . .likely reading from the top would answer a lot of your questions. . . .

If you wanted to discuss "Ways you can totally jack the system: Options for powergamers" that would be a decent thread in and of itself.

[thrud]

Archmage abilities (RoCoI, skill at magic 21) would be even better if you play the number game...
I would still argue that at19 or 20 is pretty nice if you can get it.
But now we're getting OT. My point was that even a "boosted" paladin is playable.

[Marc R]

Assuming you have a good GM, really anything is playable.

(Where's the 9th level magician casting 20th level spells fighting a 30th level demon riding a black unicorn?)

[kevinmccollum]

Don't forget that same mage having 1000 pp. (since I play RM2 without using the RMC1 or higher background options, I don't see how this is possible. And casting 20th level spells in one round for an 8th level guy? not possible in RM2.)

[Marc R]

I replied to that over here:

http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?topic=9064.0

But, in the end, IMO the RM2 professions were generally not unbalanced to the point of being problematic, it was the rule options and house rules in play that made games go crazy, not the professions themselves.

[Emaughan]

Assuming you have a good GM, really anything is playable.

My point exactly. 

I find that Rolemaster plays great if your a stingy GM, and one that does not follow formulas.  Market -> bar -> bar fight -> head to dungeon -> clean out dungeon (lots of treasure, may need mules) -> market... repeat add nauseum.  Formula games do tend to attract munchkins, but not much else.  Having too much dungeon crawl also leaves out many classes that have great potential for roleplaying.  Also, being too generous with optional rules, lowers the challange to the players and/or makes it so that the GM has to up the threat level in the game to keep the players interest.  Players need less brain power and creativity in direct correlation to the GM becoming more and more like Santa Claus.

So, Paladins are very well balanced in RM, IF the GM is not lazy and doing nothing more than constant monster bashes combined with a boat load of optional rule power ups.

One other point that may be better in a whole new thread.  I do not base experience points awarded mostly on combat.  No points for killing, E crits, B crits, nothing.  I've found that using the "Sweet Key" system adapted to each player works very well combined with points awarded by the GM for completing a "chapter" in our game or for great ideas in the game.  This allows the Sage, the Dancer, the Alchemist, the Mystic and other "wimpy" classes to come out of the woodwork and become very playable.  Because experience is not so much combat based (unless it is one of the PC's keys) we have no problem with "overpowered" classes.

[Marc R]

(Bowing reverently to the neophyte poster who "Gets it")