+- Hydaelyn Role-Players (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18)
+-- Forum: Final Fantasy 14 (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=41)
+--- Forum: FFXIV Discussion (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: Paladin vs. Warrior (/showthread.php?tid=3244)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Paladin vs. Warrior - Merri - 08-03-2013
(08-03-2013, 01:35 PM)Sounsyy Wrote:(08-03-2013, 12:47 PM)Merri Wrote: I honestly felt completely underwhelmed with Paladin. It just felt like it completely lacked the ability to do things, even at 50.
Warrior, on the other hand, felt like it had so much more depth to it's gameplay. I absolutely adore the wrath system. It's incredibly fun and kept me totally engaged in what I was doing. There were also so many possible chains and combos between abilities to just feel like you were an absolute powerhouse, albeit briefly.
I think the loss of Succor was a huge blow. I feel really helpless without it. Sure I can mitigate nearly all damage done against me, but I can't really do anything about it. I just have to sit there and take it like a wall. I feel like I don't really have a use for my MP pool. I have a moderately high MP pool and no spells worth casting. Also not a huge fan of Sword and Shield Oath. Maybe if they took out Sword Oath and replaced it with Succor and kept just Shield Oath this problem would be alleviated. The Shield Oath toggle spell doesn't need a counterpart. Defiance is a toggle and it works just fine solo on WAR.Â
I agree 100%. It isn't that Paladin is bad, it's just.. ..lackluster right now. I had actually been contemplating mentioning the whole shield/sword oath thing, but didn't. I totally agree with sword oath being a complete waste of a job skill spot. I mean, we only get five, and two are taken up by buffs that can't even be up at the same time. Shield oath has it's merits, but I feel like sword oath needs to just go. Succor would be a great fit there, I agree. Felt like Paladin lost some of it's "paladin"-ness without it. Sure, you can slot cure, but it doesn't really do much for you in the end.
I also think they need to just get rid of Awareness, put Cover in it's place, and give Paladin something else in it's place for it's lv.35 skill.
RE: Paladin vs. Warrior - Sounsyy - 08-03-2013
(08-03-2013, 02:03 PM)Merri Wrote: I also think they need to just get rid of Awareness, put Cover in it's place, and give Paladin something else in it's place for it's lv.35 skill.
Seriously, what is up with Awareness? The paragon of a useless ability if I've ever seen one. And what's worse is that we waste a trait on the ability extending its duration for 5 whole seconds. I can't think of any of the other classes having an ability that really has no purpose.
For those who don't know Awareness reduces the chance of suffering critical damage by 25% for 20s with a 2 minute cooldown. So basically you have a 25% chance to not get hit by an attack that only has a 5% chance of happening in the first place. But really I can't think of any situation where suffering a critical hit would be detrimental to a GLA/PLD in the grand scheme of things. Especially when we have abilities which would negate a large percentage of that critical hit's damage anyways.Â
I agree. Give Cover to Gladiator as the Lv34 ability, ditch Awareness and Sword Oath, and give us Succor and a DD weaponskill that combos off of either Shield Swipe or Riot Blade(another pretty useless GLA ability).
RE: Paladin vs. Warrior - Gar - 08-03-2013
(08-03-2013, 01:05 PM)Sounsyy Wrote: Paladins are those select few individuals sworn to protect the Sultana and those members of the royal family of Ul'dah. The only canon way to be a Paladin is to be or have been a Sultansworn. With thy shield protect; with they sword defend. The Sultansworn usually chose their own and only the best and most dedicated swordsmen have a chance at being selected. If chosen, the wanna-be Paladin must swear on oath to always protect the royal family with their life.Â
You know... I've read that before, but it never sunk in until now. Paladins are something very specific in this game.
You guys make excellent points. At first I saw all those Paladin defensive CDs and got all excited. I never really connected that just meant "Click. Okay now I don't die as fast."
I think Warrior is going to be my focus. I like that there is another resource to manage and like was mentioned, you live a bit on the edge. If something goes wrong, I like the little bit of panic it takes to get out of it. Not just "Its cool, I've got a shield right here on my arm."
So thank you very much guys for your input. As sad as this sounds, this is actually giving me great roads to take my character down. And now I can have a big ass axe! Nothin' wrong with that.
RE: Paladin vs. Warrior - Isilme - 08-04-2013
I know you've already gotten what you need, but as a longtime Paladin (From FFXI before 1.0 was even a twinkle, baby!) I thought I'd chime in.
Paladins are a tricky class for SE. In FFXI, they were perhaps the only class that SE really got right out of the gate. Just look at the original gear from 1-60, or the AF in FFXI. Some of the stat bonuses you got would just make you scratch your head and say 'What?'. Dark Knights needed accuracy, strength, etc, and they got buffs to their painfully useless (At the time) dark magic and... defense? Warriors got tons of enmity boosts, which they DIDN'T need, and none of the damage mitigation they DID need, etc.
Paladins were simple. Defense, healing, damage mitigation.
The problem is this makes them very much a one-trick pony. Warriors traditionally can tank or DD, but if Paladins aren't taking hits, one half of their arsenal (Their shields) are useless. Between FFXI and FFXIV, one common thread with most Gladiator and Paladin abilities was the need to get HIT for them to be useful.
In 1.0, for a while, marauders/warriors ended up broken. HUGELY broken. They could do bigtime damage, do bigtime AoE damage, had most of the best enmity-grabbing abilities (And could steal the rest from Gladiator) and could damage mitigate like pros. Eventually it evened out a bit, but SE has traditionally been very unwilling to give their 'Sword and Board' tanks any real damage-dealing potential. This means that not only did we NEED to tank to be useful to a party, there was someone out there who could do it vastly better than us.
Remember the Natalan parties? Remember all the Paladins? No of course you don't, stop lying!
ARR is better, and having done level capped missions as Gladiator/Paladin and Marauder/Warrior, I can say that Paladin does feel like it has the survivability edge, and definitely is more self-sufficient (Though in-combat self healing seems to be almost totally counterproductive now). and with Sword Oath and Survival Instinct, maybe we can pack a bit more punch. But I never in a million years see things being 'PLD Onry'. We've had far too much of that nonsense in the past, and with the obvious pains they went to to balance the two tank classes, I suspect keeping that balance will be a priority, and your tank choice will come down to personal preference.
RE: Paladin vs. Warrior - Kismet - 08-06-2013
Mau/War always seemed kind of boring to me in concept, so I never bothered to try it. But after reading through what was said in this thread (specifically Sounsyy and Merri's posts), I'm very willing to give it a go now!
RE: Paladin vs. Warrior - Merri - 08-06-2013
Assuming they lift video NDA for open beta (I reeeeeally don't see why they wouldn't since it's open, but you never know with SE.), I'd be more than willing to stream 50 Warrior and 50 Paladin gameplay for people on the fence. Just to put that out there.
Hell, I'd be willing to stream all jobs at 50 (sans summoner and scholar for obvious reasons) if there's enough want.