I have played the priest before but not the paladin, and several people on these forums have said that the paladin is what the priest should have been, and is basically the same as the priest but better. If that is the case I do not think it was intentional at all. However I can't help but notice that resurrection is the only holy spell currently existing that the paladin is not trained in which the priest is. I also can't help but notice that the priest's abilities seem to be intended for buddy builds, and a lot of his card support is more defensive than most buddy builds are. But if the priest is meant to buddy tank, The preconstructed priest book does not make sense at all, because it has Temple of Asyra in it. Also, the priest has one less channeling than the priestess. A Mage having one less channeling means that either they have to wait longer before casting higher mana-cost spells, or they have to cast fewer spells. Therefore the priest is probably meant to use his melee attack, hand of purification, and either the staff of Asyra or the Resplendent Bow. If he makes a non-spell attack he'll save mana. Why is the priest intended to make frequent use of non-spell light attacks?
Because of 1. Daze/stun chance, 2. Malakai's fire, 3. Just straight up attack damage without needing to pay any mana.
How do these three things fit together? Malakai's fire deals a burn to any creature that he deals damage to with a light attack, but only once per round. This increases the total amount of damage he does to that creature on average. The Daze/stun chance make it harder for that creature to fight back. On average creatures will roll successful daze rolls half the time, and for that half the time the priest can use healing spells to remove the damage he receives then.
While the priest can do this with a buddy build, I suspect he can also play a longer game where he is trying to destroy enemy creatures. Give him a temple of Asyra and some strong holy creatures to swarm, and have him use resplendent bow or staff of Asyra in addition to light attack spells to deal dazes, stuns and burns to enemies to make it easier for his creatures to kill the enemy creatures while making it harder for enemy creatures to kill his creatures. He can also use healing spells on his creatures, not just on himself. If he has a holy swarm he'll probably want some of his creatures to guard him so that his healing spells can be saved for friendly creatures other than himself. Holy avenger can be used to guard any friendly creature or holy comjurations, not just the Mage.
And if he's going for a buddy or using few big with 2-3 creatures build, he might want to guard his holy avenger and maybe another creature or two with his Mage in order to trigger holy avenger, then heal himself afterwards.
Are these all things that the Paladin can do in the same way better than the Priest? If so, how can the Priest and the Paladin be set apart from each other better? If not, why are most players having so much trouble with him? I haven't played the Paladin yet.
