Is the Paladin Good?

[Coconuts]

?

[Kiana]

It makes an excellent door stopper.
Oh, and a good flashlight.

[Deckire]

As a Main for all three tanks, I would say Paladin/Gladiator is a Good Beginnner Tank and is good as a MT in Trials.

The Pros:
-Straight forward Mechanics (1,2,3 for most of the game until you get to Heavensward)
- Easy to control AoE Enmity skill which doesn't effect your Enmity combos resources.
-Has a very high amount of Damage Mitigation from Shield and Cooldowns, and has the most reliable Ultimate Cooldown

The Cons
-Weakest DPS of the three Tanks in my opinion
-Will Struggle from level 30-39 due to no Enmity Buff
-Struggles later on with AoE Enmity Control,
-Struggles in helping clear Large Groups of Enemies
-Also struggles a lot when it comes to Magic based Enemies.

With that said, its a strong Beginner Job for Tanks as they will have a easier time getting mobs for you and for Trials it high Mitigation, it will help show you the ropes. But once you hit around later Content that requires a lot of Enmity Control, Faster Clears and Takedowns it gets outperformed by the Dark Knight which has the best AoE Control (both Enmity and Clearing) of the 3 Tanks, and Warrior who has the highest Damage output of the 3 tanks.

[RopeDrink]

Most of the critique is squarely aimed at either things that are not centric to its role, or micromanagement that doesn't apply to the 99% of gameplay an up-and-coming Eorzean is going to be experiencing -- save that mentality for your favourite raid-groups in savage, folks. Simple fact is that a Paladin is going to eat 20 tonnes of physical damage and laugh while the others are getting chunked, though the reverse can apply in terms of magic damage. Levelling was a breeze and some will enjoy the simplistic playstyle, and given emnity is the calculating factor in Fates, go nuts. If you're looking to ease into the tanking role in FFXIV, Glad/Paladin is pretty much the best way to start.

Speaking of levelling, you don't particularly need sustain when you barely take any damage and can cross-spec into sustain spells & abilities - hell, we won't even mention Chocobo Healing. The rest (group content) is covered by people not in a tank role (see micromanagement). People are right in that PAL damage is absolute pants, but hey, I have damage dealers - I didn't roll a tank to hit things hard (re. micro/content).

Don't be disuaded. If you think you'd like being the only plate-wearing sword & board in town, go for it. Worry about the minor details later when you reach end-game in Stormblood (long way away), the rest is mostly irrelevant unless for some strange reason you're hoping to rock the highest pre-expansion content regularly.

[Oberon]

Originally posted by RopeDrink:

Most of the critique is squarely aimed at either things that are not centric to its role, or micromanagement that doesn't apply to the 99% of gameplay an up-and-coming Eorzean is going to be experiencing -- save that mentality for your favourite raid-groups in savage, folks. Simple fact is that a Paladin is going to eat 20 tonnes of physical damage and laugh while the others are getting chunked, though the reverse can apply in terms of magic damage. Levelling was a breeze and some will enjoy the simplistic playstyle, and given emnity is the calculating factor in Fates, go nuts. If you're looking to ease into the tanking role in FFXIV, Glad/Paladin is pretty much the best way to start.

Speaking of levelling, you don't particularly need sustain when you barely take any damage and can cross-spec into sustain spells & abilities - hell, we won't even mention Chocobo Healing. The rest (group content) is covered by people not in a tank role (see micromanagement). People are right in that PAL damage is absolute pants, but hey, I have damage dealers - I didn't roll a tank to hit things hard (re. micro/content).

Don't be disuaded. If you think you'd like being the only plate-wearing sword & board in town, go for it. Worry about the minor details later when you reach end-game in Stormblood (long way away), the rest is mostly irrelevant unless for some strange reason you're hoping to rock the highest pre-expansion content regularly.

This! Pretty much anyone who says "Play this, don't play that, you play that you're a casual' just ignore 'em. That's what I do. Better to play the game for fun than be a slave to what some nameless, faceless cabal of tryhards on reddit decided what was the best. I mean, there's a limit, obviously, always play the class right, and don't half-ass it. But for the most part, if anyone tries to tell you what class you can or can't play: ♥♥♥♥ 'em!

[Oberon]

Originally posted by Shirayuki474:

Originally posted by The Mayor of Murder Town:

This! Pretty much anyone who says "Play this, don't play that, you play that you're a casual' just ignore 'em. That's what I do. Better to play the game for fun than be a slave to what some nameless, faceless cabal of tryhards on reddit decided what was the best. I mean, there's a limit, obviously, always play the class right, and don't half-ass it. But for the most part, if anyone tries to tell you what class you can or can't play: ♥♥♥♥ 'em!

Author is not asking which job is fun to play, he is not asking which job is easy to learn either, he simply asked is PLD job good. I know it hurts both of you the some people sees bigger picture and do not want play the game the way you do but such is life, answer OP question or get out because it is becoming a spam, you have big issues with answering questions lately, especially questions you do not like.

See, OP, ignore people like this. If they try to claim "fun" is irrelevant in a game, just ignore them, they're not worth listening to.

[Oberon]

Originally posted by Zweihander:

Is the Paladin Good?

It is if you find it fun to play. It takes a bit to get there, though, tanks have a higher learning curve than DPSs and Healers do.

But for the most part, you're the only one who can decide what's good for you or not. Not some prick with a private profile who doesn't probably doesn't even play the game and yet tries to tell everyone how they should play it like he pays for their subs.

[Oberon]

Originally posted by Shirayuki474:

Originally posted by The Mayor of Murder Town:

It is if you find it fun to play. It takes a bit to get there, though, tanks have a higher learning curve than DPSs and Healers do.

But for the most part, you're the only one who can decide what's good for you or not. Not some prick with a private profile who doesn't know anything about the game and yet tries to tell everyone how they should play it like he pays for their subs.

No, job can't be good by being fun to play. Just like goalkeeper can't be good if he keeps missing all balls no matter how much you like him for whatever reason.

Good =/= Fun. Fun can be together with good but it is not a definition which means something fun is not always good.

Again, OP, these are the sorts of people you ignore. If they tell you "fun" is irrelevant in a game, they're just jackoffs and not worth listening to.

[RopeDrink]

Maybe first anwser OP question?

Already did. Feel free to actually read posts (instead of skim over them and pick out mere words) before quoting and spouting incoherent, passive-aggressive gibberish when you yourself fell into the exact same traps. Nothing more amusing than people going into meta or end-game discussions about how X & Y are slightly better than Z in ABC scenario when the OP (or at least the majority of people who asks questions such as 'is this class good') probably won't even see that content before Stormblood comes out and shakes up the meta again.

TLDR: Paladin is good, yes. Are there better? Yes - but that's not going to matter outside of micro-management in a game where you can play every class at your leisure. You can twist it away from the topic as much as you like - fact is, nobody can say the Paladin is bad - they can simply say it isn't on par with the alternatives, which is relevant, but not what was asked.

[Oberon]

Originally posted by RopeDrink:

Already did. Feel free to actually read posts (instead of skim over them and pick out mere words) before quoting and spouting incoherent, passive-aggressive gibberish when you yourself fell into the exact same traps. Nothing more amusing than people going into meta or end-game discussions about how X & Y are slightly better than Z in ABC scenario when the OP (or at least the majority of people who asks questions such as 'is this class good') probably won't even see that content before Stormblood comes out and shakes up the meta again.

TLDR: Paladin is good, yes. Are there better? Yes - but that's not going to matter outside of micro-management in a game where you can play every class at your leisure.

I mean, I can think of one thing more amusing: People trying to argue that "fun" is an irrelevant concept in a game.

[Kiana]

Funny thing, I follow this YouTube channel of an FC that isn't hard core at all (they set aside around four hours a week for progression) and they've fully cleared Alexander Savage with a paladin main tank.

I don't know about you, but I define a class being 'good' as 'is viable at end-game in its role.' Which Paladin most definitely is.

Does it have weak points? Yes, but all the classes have strengths and weaknesses to account for.

[RopeDrink]

I mean, I can think of one thing more amusing: People trying to argue that "fun" is an irrelevant concept in a game.

In fairness, he's not wrong. Fun is its own category - a class can be hella fun but not viable in certain circumstances. I say this as a chap who launched a successful movie-series by playing a class in a game that EVERYONE was calling broken (bad/unviable) during that meta. I had a LOT of fun (both playing it & making videos about it), and some even claimed I proved most of the criticism wrong - but that didn't change the fact that the class itself WAS suffering horribly due to lack of balance.

Fun is never irrelevant, that's for sure - but it's not right to say fun = good. Fun is relative to individuals whereas 'good' is dependant on what you can get out of that class vs the content around it (and most of these types of guys are referring to the end-game, where a class being bad-but-fun is not desirable in a raid environment).

In short, both of you need to step back on that topic - it's not what the OP is asking (ie. is it fun it is/isn't to some, see 'relative').

I don't know about you, but I define a class being 'good' as 'is viable at end-game in its role.' Which Paladin most definitely is.

This. It has no problems in pre-end and can function in end-content. You can list all variables vs other classes all day, that doesn't sum up to whether the Paladin itself is good/bad, it simply highlights the differences between it and everything else, which isn't the question.

[Oberon]

Originally posted by Shirayuki474:

Originally posted by Kiana:

Funny thing, I follow this YouTube channel of an FC that isn't hard core at all (they set aside around four hours a week for progression) and they've fully cleared Alexander Savage with a paladin main tank.

I don't know about you, but I define a class being 'good' as 'is viable at end-game in its role.' Which Paladin most definitely is.

Does it have weak points? Yes, but all the classes have strengths and weaknesses to account for.

I watched video of A12S clear with Marauder. Is Marauder good? Job must be viable for the end game it is absolute priorirty there is no way SE would allow any job to became unplayable. Which means it is standard requirement you are not good by this point, you are just viable

And today I saw someone argue that just because you can clear all of Alexander Savage with a Paladin, doesn't mean Paladin is good. I didn't know the goalposts could be moved that far, that quickly, but there we go.

Originally posted by RopeDrink:

I mean, I can think of one thing more amusing: People trying to argue that "fun" is an irrelevant concept in a game.

In fairness, he's not wrong. Fun is its own category - a class can be hella fun but not viable in certain circumstances. I say this as a chap who launched a successful movie-series by playing a class in a game that EVERYONE was calling broken (bad/unviable) during that meta. I had a LOT of fun (both playing it & making videos about it), and some even claimed I proved most of the criticism wrong - but that didn't change the fact that the class itself WAS suffering horribly due to lack of balance.

Fun is never irrelevant, that's for sure - but it's not right to say fun = good. That is entirely dependant on what you want to get out of that class (and most of these types of guys are referring to the end-game, where a class being bad but fun is not desirable in a raid environment).

In short, both of you need to step back on that topic - it's not what the OP is asking.

I don't know about you, but I define a class being 'good' as 'is viable at end-game in its role.' Which Paladin most definitely is.

This. It has no problems in pre-end and can function in end-content. You can list all variables vs other classes all day, that doesn't sum up to whether the Paladin itself is good/bad, it simply highlights the differences between it and everything else, which isn't the question.

True, but if it's not fun to play, what's the point of playing it? If it's boring and tedious, that sort of defeats the purpose of being a game. It's like homework, or the part of the Oreo that isn't the cream filling.

[RopeDrink]

OP is asking is Paladin good.

Once again, I ask that you re-read my comments before quoting. You're missing the fact that I'm debunking the good vs fun and even said 'fun' isn't what the OP was asking.

if it's not fun to play, what's the point of playing it?

Again, see the word 'relative'. Nobody can wave a paintbrush and say what is or isn't fun to everyone else. Paladin in itself is very simplistic. I enjoy it but others may find it a bit boring. You can't quantify it, and it being 'fun' doesn't entirely mean 'good' - except good 'for you', if it being 'fun' is all you care about.

[Oberon]

Originally posted by Shirayuki474:

Originally posted by RopeDrink:

In short, both of you need to step back on that topic - it's not what the OP is asking.

OP is asking is Paladin good.

A nebulous concept with a million different possible qualifiers and infinite possible definitions based 100% on personal preference. Hence why I said only he can decide what's good for himself; oh wait you missed that because you were too busy cherry-picking my posts.

[Oberon]

Originally posted by RopeDrink:

Once again, I ask that you re-read my comments before quoting. You're missing the fact that I'm debunking the good vs fun and even said 'fun' isn't what the OP was asking.

I don't think I ever said "fun" was the only qualification for being "good." We already know Paladin is perfectly fine in endgame content, so what other qualifications are there for being good?