Cavalry > Paladin

[IB]

I was thinking, cav currently have 20% cold res [dark magic protection] and use a sword as their main attack, wouldn't it make more sense to have the paladin as a lvl2 alt of cav, just like the lancer. Of course he'd have to be weakened a bit, but it seems to make sense to me.

[Blarumyrran]

yes

[JW]

I was thinking, cav currently have 20% cold res [dark magic protection] and use a sword as their main attack, wouldn't it make more sense to have the paladin as a lvl2 alt of cav, just like the lancer. Of course he'd have to be weakened a bit, but it seems to make sense to me.

Well...it is an interesting idea...with the lance attack it's a lot more similar to the Knight though, plus it makes more sense for a Paladin to come from a fighter branch, rather than a scout branch.

[Maeglin Dubh]

I was thinking, cav currently have 20% cold res [dark magic protection] and use a sword as their main attack, wouldn't it make more sense to have the paladin as a lvl2 alt of cav, just like the lancer. Of course he'd have to be weakened a bit, but it seems to make sense to me.

Well...it is an interesting idea...with the lance attack it's a lot more similar to the Knight though, plus it makes more sense for a Paladin to come from a fighter branch, rather than a scout branch.

A knight uses lance and sword, a paladin uses lance and sword. The name Paladin implies nobility and chivalry, which a horse-scout does not particularly embody. Knights were nobility who adhered (in theory) to chivalry, and are thus the logical predecessors of paladins.

I see nothing wrong with the current arrangement.

[Jew unit]

I dont know if it still says this but I do remember that the unit discription used to talk about how horsemen would from the wild or something which would seem odd that they would become a knight...

[IB]

I dont think the Paladin needs a lance attack, thats what the grand knight/lancer are for.

[IB]

loyalists have white mage anyway, its dwarves&orcs whod need an anti-un-dead boost.

Also orc have the pillager, can you get more antiundead? For lvl1s the archer is pretty sweet. Dwarves are so strong you shouldn't have any trouble killing the undead, poacher for ghosts, footpads and fighters for skeles.

[Maeglin Dubh]

I dont think the Paladin needs a lance attack, thats what the grand knight/lancer are for.

Paladins are knights. Holy knights. Knights are known for lances. If you want to talk about things that aren't needed, no unit in this game needs any of their attacks. But that would suck. So we give them attacks. The Paladin has a lance attack because he is a Knight, and Knights use lances.

Be aware that in the interest of brevity I'm making historical generalities.

[Jew unit]

"Often hailing from the rather untamed regions of Wesnoth...Reckless attack..." for the horseman
Doesnt sounds very Paladin like.

and the cavalryman does have cold resist which does seeem anti undead...

While the paladin is a holy knight that doesnt mean he uses a lance. I see him with a huge sword (blade) and some anti undead aura. hmm I just thought of something. How about the paladin advance from the thing the cavalry man becomes (dragoon?), is branched (the other one is still available Cavaleer?) would have only a blade attack, BUT all undead units within one square would take ten damage (or some amount) at the begining of the paladin player's turn.

sorry if my grammer is poor

[Fiach Dubh]

all undead units within one square would take ten damage (or some amount) at the begining of the paladin player's turn.

Far too powerful. That would mean that four of them together (unlikely, but possible) could destroy most undead units automatically, without even needing to attack - and they're faster than most undead, too.
Each paladin could (potentially) cause a total of 60 damage automatically (more than a Whit Mage, not sure about the Mage of Light), AND be faster than a mage, AND have more hitpoints, AND have a good melee attack.

Illumination is probably about right for a Paladin's 'holy aura' - if you really want the extra damage-causing ability, give it a Lightbeam attack, but it really doesn't need it and shouldn't have it.

[Maeglin Dubh]

To summarize, you want to remove the paladin's lance attack and make it a branch of the Cavalryman.

[Jew unit]

all undead units within one square would take ten damage (or some amount) at the begining of the paladin player's turn.

Far too powerful. That would mean that four of them together (unlikely, but possible) could destroy most undead units automatically, without even needing to attack - and they're faster than most undead, too.
Each paladin could (potentially) cause a total of 60 damage automatically (more than a Whit Mage, not sure about the Mage of Light), AND be faster than a mage, AND have more hitpoints, AND have a good melee attack.

Illumination is probably about right for a Paladin's 'holy aura' - if you really want the extra damage-causing ability, give it a Lightbeam attack, but it really doesn't need it and shouldn't have it.

first off all the ten is adjustable if say 5 or 8 is better thats cool. second I don't think it should stack and third i think giving another unit Illiumnate would ruin its uniqueness
and finally i think that one unit couldnt deal 60 damage because a paladin vs 6 undead units. The 6 undead stand a good chance to kill it in one turn (before they would take any damage)

[IB]

To summarize, you want to remove the paladin's lance attack and make it a branch of the Cavalryman.

Obviously the unit needs some rebalancing if it changes from level 3 to level 2 such as less hps, and probably a weaker attack, but generally yes.

[turin]

It is true that the Horseman's description ("Often hailing from the rather untamed regions of Wesnoth...Reckless attack...", etc) doesn't really seem to advance smoothly into that of a Paladin. But the horseman does advance into the Knight, which clearly would advance into a Paladin.

And in any case, the Cavalryman advancing into a Paladin makes even less sense. The Cavalryman is part of an organized army. After all, it advances into the Dragoon. These are unit concepts taken not from medieval times, but from much later. Cavalrymen have, apart from the weapons they use, virtually nothing in common with Paladins. I'll put it this way - Cavalrymen would live in barracks, Paladins would live in castles.

So, if you want to make an argument for splitting the Paladin from the Horseman line, IMHO you're going to have to take the Knight (and the Grand Knight) with you, and not graft the unit onto the Cavalryman tree, but make a new level 1 unit.

[Jew unit]

Ok entirly new plan
cavelry man gets the axe (sorry)

new branch that goes
squire-knight-grand knight
--palidan

horseman---lancer
--- mounted archer

squire would bascily be a caverlyman when you looked at its stats...
although im not sure if all of this is an improvment over the old system or simply two new players (me and IB) wanting to change things