hmm odd... i thought divine might should be sacred bonus?
hmm odd... i thought divine might should be sacred bonus?
Yep, it should. The devs types the Sacred Defender stance bonuses as sacred, though, and there was an outcry from the playerbase that the stance should stack with divine might.
The most logical fix would have been to change the stance type from sacred to morale, since stance prevents rage (morale bonus to strength) anyway. No harm, no foul, everything would work as expected.
Instead, the devs went another way and changed divine might to insight, which means it no longer stacks with items. Another player outcry ensued, to which the devs disingenuously replied "We changed it based on player feedback."
This is a clear nerf to paladins, who now essentially cannot use insightful strength items. The dev response to this was that they're sure paladins will find something else to equip now that they don't need to slot insightful strength items.
I personally found that response offensive and out of touch.
I do not know why this is strength as well because it discourages build variation. A charisma based pally, a dwarven con based character, how about the new iconic which is charisma to damage and if charisma greater then strength charisma modifier to tactics - lol all just feel gimped because divine might to strength. Not to mention a tactics strength build now makes a lot more sense with a 4 pally or cleric spash with a fair amount of charisma to boot. The whole thing does not make much sense.
Norg Fighter12/Paladin6/Monk2, Jacquiej Cleric18/Monk1/Wiz1, Rabiez Bard16/Ranger3/Cleric1, Hangover Bard L20, Boomsticks Fighter12/Monk 6/Druid 2, Grumblegut Ranger8/Paladin6/Monk6, Rabidly Rogue L20, Furiously Rogue10/Monk6/Paladin4, Snowcones Cleric 12/Ranger 6/Monk 2, Norge Barbarian 12/FVS4/Rogue4. Guild:Prophets of The New Republic Khyber.
Unless I'm wrong about them stacking, in which case ignore me.
OTOH, my ftr / pallies can now hit higher STR - and therefore higher DCs - than before. So it's not all bad. What's funny is I think a pally w/CHA 40 (+15 STR) can hit higher STR than a pure barb, if I'm adding right: 8 (Mighty Rage) + 3 (Power Rage) + 3 (Insightful STR item) = +14. Ofc, the pure barb would just splash cleric for Divine Might now...
Last edited by EllisDee37; 09-23-2013 at 05:51 PM.
We seem to be in agreement that the rage spell is a morale bonus, and that sacred defender stance prevents the rage spell, yes?
I don't see how barbarian rage has any relevance since you can never have both barbarian rage and sacred defender stance on the same character due to mutually exclusive alignment restrictions on barbarians and paladins.
Thus typing sacred defender stance as a morale bonus (leaving divine might free to be a sacred bonus, as it should be) has no impact on non-defender pallies.
EDIT: For further clarification, when you're in sacred defender stance, even if you didn't take it high enough to get strength bonus (so you don't need to equip a shield), you can still never get any bonus from the rage spell or the fury of the wild rage effects. The stance itself negates all rage effects.
Last edited by EllisDee37; 09-23-2013 at 05:57 PM.
My main frustration lies in that all my old drow pally blends where dex/chr centric, and now there is just no synergy for dex based paladins. If DM just allowed for an either or str/dex choice I think atleast for some this issue would be less painful to suffer through.
You could get barb PL on a pally SD build and test it; I'm pretty sure you're right about Rage effects & defensive stance (still) not playing kosher, unless the old trick of "fire Rage effects first, then switch on stance" still works.I don't see how barbarian rage has any relevance since you can never have both barbarian rage and sacred defender stance on the same character due to mutually exclusive alignment restrictions on barbarians and paladins.
Oh my God it doesn't stack with the +3 str on my black helm. Just means now, I can get that helm as +3 con. That, and +8 con on the prowess trinket (of course depending on the weapon being used) then wear a +10 str belt or the like and boom. You're fine.
Yes, it's a pain in the rear. Yes it should be a Sacred bonus.
Actually, does this mean the highest strength build possible is a 12 Fighter 6 Barb 2 Cleric build, or 18 Barb 1 Druid (rams might) 1 cleric? My money is on the druid.
The entire redesign of Divine Might was stupid. I normally try to stay away from blatantly calling something idiotic, but this qualifies.
Let's see why:
- Paladins didn't need a reduction in DPS, especially when everyone else was looking at gaining DPS with the enhancement pass.
- Changing it to modify Str while at the same time providing more ways for characters to use non-standard stats for attack and damage (Dex, Con and Cha being the biggies with U19), the change demonstrates absolutely zero communication between designers on this, or a total lack of understanding/foresight.
- It does nothing to help the paladins who don't want to focus on Str, and further emphasizes the MAD nature of paladins in D&D 3.x.
- That it was initially created to not stack with a major paladin enhancement was foolish. That it was then changed to not stack with a rather prevalent and important item bonus was even more ridiculous.
- That this change was attributed to the outcry of the players that it was foolish is asinine.
Devs, change Divine Might to just adding your Cha modifier to damage, or half your Cha modifier to damage and tactics DCs, or to what DM was before: a static bonus to damage (mostly) independent of your Cha score. Right now, it's just a mess.
This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.Reload