As a DM this is how I read each: with caveat that I do consider player arguments & if I have no evidence to contrary I may accept their interpretation or say 'lets have a roll for persuasion say to see if I'll give in' possibly worth inspiration for presenting a good argument. Potentially more challenging encounters if makes the Paladin too OP though.
Searing Smite - BA - C - one minute - 1st lvl - add 1d6 per spell slot 2nd and up Cast>hit>victim Save vs Con - if they save, spell ends (no more spell) but if save fails they take 1d6 damage & are still burning so either them or creature within 5' may use action to put out flames or they try to save again the following rounds as still burning.
Thunderous Smite - BA - C - one minute - 1st lvl - no increased damage for higher spell slots Cast>hit> auto 2d6 damage + must make Str save or pushed 10 feet & knocked prone no continued effect (time to hit) only creatures affected by prone
Wrathful Smite - BA - C - one minute - 1st lvl - no increased damage for higher spell slots Cast>hit>1d6 necrotic auto plus roll save vs Wis or be frightened until spell ends - each turn victim rolls a save vs your Spell save DC to end the spell or continue to be frightened
Branding Smite - BA - C - one Minute - 2nd lvl - add 1d6 for each spell slot level 3 or higher cast>hit>add 2d6 damage to attack + invisible becomes visible + glows(astral radiance) with a dim 5' radiance and can't become invisible until spell ends. No save.
Blinding Smite - BA - C - one minute - 3rd lvl - no increased damage for higher spell slots cast>hit>extra 3d8 radiant damage +sav vs con or blinded until spell ends unless they save on one of their upcoming turns vs con to end spell to remove blinded.
Staggering Smite - BA - C - one Minute - 4th lvl - no increased damage for higher spell slots cast>hit>add 4d6 psychic damage. Target save vs Wis. Failed = disadv on attacks/ability checks and no reactions until end of next turn. (Doesn't continue, allows for time to hit)
Banishing Smite - BA - C - one Minute - 5th lvl - no increased damage for higher spell slots because :P cast>hit>extra 5d10 force damage to target> if target reduced to 50 hp or fewer = banished. If target native to other plane, returns to home plane. If target native here - banished to harmless demiplane. While there target incapacitated until spell ends then returns to same or nearest unoccupied space. (assumingly not incapacitated )
I find it concerning that after two years, and five pages of posts, there is no answer to the OP's question. Just a lot of bickering over english. It's a simple yes or no question: Does the damage from Smite Spells occur every round on the first hit, or is it a one and done spell?
I find it concerning that after two years, and five pages of posts, there is no answer to the OP's question. Just a lot of bickering over english. It's a simple yes or no question: Does the damage from Smite Spells occur every round on the first hit, or is it a one and done spell?
One and done. (The bickering is because of the people who want to cheese it trying to bend the English language to mean something it doesn’t.)
I find it concerning that after two years, and five pages of posts, there is no answer to the OP's question. Just a lot of bickering over english. It's a simple yes or no question: Does the damage from Smite Spells occur every round on the first hit, or is it a one and done spell?
One and done. (The bickering is because of the people who want to cheese it trying to bend the English language to mean something it doesn’t.)
You sir, are a scholar and a gentleman. Thank you for ripping the band-aid off so quick :)
I find it concerning that after two years, and five pages of posts, there is no answer to the OP's question. Just a lot of bickering over english. It's a simple yes or no question: Does the damage from Smite Spells occur every round on the first hit, or is it a one and done spell?
One and done. (The bickering is because of the people who want to cheese it trying to bend the English language to mean something it doesn’t.)
You sir, are a scholar and a gentleman. Thank you for ripping the band-aid off so quick :)
Just got to this thread and from rewatching some of Critical Role's ruling, which is how I style a lot of ruling at my table, the smite effects that would say "the next time" means you can, in my opinion and house ruling, initiate that damage with each strike. However, if it falls under the categorization of "the first time" then it will only add the damage and effect to the first hit made while concentrating on said spell. Again, this is house ruling so verify what your dm would say. Reading through this thread there's a lot of people that seem to be very black and white about it and say something like, "It is this way" or "It is that way", when it's really up for interpretation as a dm and as a table. Stay nice D&DBeyond community.
Hi, not to want to start it all over again, I refrain since I saw, read through and through that fearsome topic, to comment on it...
I'm all for the stay nice DnDBeyond community and please hear me as nice and gentle as this message is intended - though I must object about the fact it's not being B&W... The wording is clear in that case. I'm not first to advocate in favor of WotC lazy wording leaving many things unclear... but here it is. Interpretation has no place really in this specific case, this says it all :
I find it concerning that after two years, and five pages of posts, there is no answer to the OP's question. Just a lot of bickering over english. It's a simple yes or no question: Does the damage from Smite Spells occur every round on the first hit, or is it a one and done spell?
One and done. (The bickering is because of the people who want to cheese it trying to bend the English language to mean something it doesn’t.)
You sir, are a scholar and a gentleman. Thank you for ripping the band-aid off so quick :)
Now, I want to point out that while Matt Mercer is a great entertainer (I'm not commenting on my own opinion nor aim at discussing others' opinion - plain statement based on popularity), just like any DM, he can do mistake - and correct himself - his interpretation "on the fly" of the ruling in the few first Episonde of Season2 with Fjord were mistakes, which he corrected if memory serve me well.
And to conclude, you're talking about houserules, which in that realm is 200% up to the whole table and the DM dealing with it - I agree. You can reinterpret all you want as houserules, this was not the whole center of the fight; the question was not "what houserule can i do (to break the spell)" but "how does it work", answer: on the sole next (hitting) attack you do then the spell fizzle no matter what and thus breaking concentration (just the same Ranger spell with a similar mecanic such as Hail of Thorns).
At this point I don't know how to tell you that words mean things in a way you'll acknowledge, so sure. You can rule that way if you absolutely have to,but for balance's sake with that interpretation, all Smite spells should be considered 4th or 5th level to compensate for how exponentially you've increased their power.
I would say at least 3rd, to somewhat mimic Vampiric Touch - which IS a spell you can use to hit every turn until concentration is broken as per RAW "Until the spell ends, you can make the attack again on each of your turns as an action". Grant it, the spell is the attack itself, not a bonus over an attack, though, it still is in the same spirit. The damage would roughly match what a paladin can do with an attack + smite by this level. following the same logic it should be only the first attack every turn, not the whole attack action - but to that point this is full houseruling so you're free to... *shrug*.
I'll just add that it is really easy to break 5e balance with many builds, it's not robust at all and many builds have lots of exploit, you don't need to IMBA the smite to have powerful paladin/warlock - just use mana (DMG pp.288-289) you'll get a legit way to empower any kind of casters by giving them versatility and actually benefiting from their toolbox IMO.
Many programming languages have a variety of "next" procs, and all of them trigger the first (next) thing, and then stop.
As a DM this is how I read each: with caveat that I do consider player arguments & if I have no evidence to contrary I may accept their interpretation or say 'lets have a roll for persuasion say to see if I'll give in' possibly worth inspiration for presenting a good argument. Potentially more challenging encounters if makes the Paladin too OP though.
Searing Smite - BA - C - one minute - 1st lvl - add 1d6 per spell slot 2nd and up
Cast>hit>victim Save vs Con - if they save, spell ends (no more spell) but if save fails they take 1d6 damage & are still burning so either them or creature within 5' may use action to put out flames or they try to save again the following rounds as still burning.
Thunderous Smite - BA - C - one minute - 1st lvl - no increased damage for higher spell slots
Cast>hit> auto 2d6 damage + must make Str save or pushed 10 feet & knocked prone no continued effect (time to hit) only creatures affected by prone
Wrathful Smite - BA - C - one minute - 1st lvl - no increased damage for higher spell slots
Cast>hit>1d6 necrotic auto plus roll save vs Wis or be frightened until spell ends - each turn victim rolls a save vs your Spell save DC to end the spell or continue to be frightened
Branding Smite - BA - C - one Minute - 2nd lvl - add 1d6 for each spell slot level 3 or higher
cast>hit>add 2d6 damage to attack + invisible becomes visible + glows(astral radiance) with a dim 5' radiance and can't become invisible until spell ends. No save.
Blinding Smite - BA - C - one minute - 3rd lvl - no increased damage for higher spell slots
cast>hit>extra 3d8 radiant damage +sav vs con or blinded until spell ends unless they save on one of their upcoming turns vs con to end spell to remove blinded.
Staggering Smite - BA - C - one Minute - 4th lvl - no increased damage for higher spell slots
cast>hit>add 4d6 psychic damage. Target save vs Wis. Failed = disadv on attacks/ability checks and no reactions until end of next turn. (Doesn't continue, allows for time to hit)
Banishing Smite - BA - C - one Minute - 5th lvl - no increased damage for higher spell slots because :P
cast>hit>extra 5d10 force damage to target> if target reduced to 50 hp or fewer = banished. If target native to other plane, returns to home plane. If target native here - banished to harmless demiplane. While there target incapacitated until spell ends then returns to same or nearest unoccupied space. (assumingly not incapacitated )
I find it concerning that after two years, and five pages of posts, there is no answer to the OP's question. Just a lot of bickering over english. It's a simple yes or no question: Does the damage from Smite Spells occur every round on the first hit, or is it a one and done spell?
If you want sugar coating, go buy a dessert....
One and done. (The bickering is because of the people who want to cheese it trying to bend the English language to mean something it doesn’t.)
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
You sir, are a scholar and a gentleman. Thank you for ripping the band-aid off so quick :)
If you want sugar coating, go buy a dessert....
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Just got to this thread and from rewatching some of Critical Role's ruling, which is how I style a lot of ruling at my table, the smite effects that would say "the next time" means you can, in my opinion and house ruling, initiate that damage with each strike. However, if it falls under the categorization of "the first time" then it will only add the damage and effect to the first hit made while concentrating on said spell.
Again, this is house ruling so verify what your dm would say. Reading through this thread there's a lot of people that seem to be very black and white about it and say something like, "It is this way" or "It is that way", when it's really up for interpretation as a dm and as a table.
Stay nice D&DBeyond community.
Hi, not to want to start it all over again, I refrain since I saw, read through and through that fearsome topic, to comment on it...
I'm all for the stay nice DnDBeyond community and please hear me as nice and gentle as this message is intended - though I must object about the fact it's not being B&W... The wording is clear in that case. I'm not first to advocate in favor of WotC lazy wording leaving many things unclear... but here it is. Interpretation has no place really in this specific case, this says it all :
Now, I want to point out that while Matt Mercer is a great entertainer (I'm not commenting on my own opinion nor aim at discussing others' opinion - plain statement based on popularity), just like any DM, he can do mistake - and correct himself - his interpretation "on the fly" of the ruling in the few first Episonde of Season2 with Fjord were mistakes, which he corrected if memory serve me well.
And to conclude, you're talking about houserules, which in that realm is 200% up to the whole table and the DM dealing with it - I agree. You can reinterpret all you want as houserules, this was not the whole center of the fight; the question was not "what houserule can i do (to break the spell)" but "how does it work", answer: on the sole next (hitting) attack you do then the spell fizzle no matter what and thus breaking concentration (just the same Ranger spell with a similar mecanic such as Hail of Thorns).
Someone said:
I would say at least 3rd, to somewhat mimic Vampiric Touch - which IS a spell you can use to hit every turn until concentration is broken as per RAW "Until the spell ends, you can make the attack again on each of your turns as an action". Grant it, the spell is the attack itself, not a bonus over an attack, though, it still is in the same spirit. The damage would roughly match what a paladin can do with an attack + smite by this level. following the same logic it should be only the first attack every turn, not the whole attack action - but to that point this is full houseruling so you're free to... *shrug*.
I'll just add that it is really easy to break 5e balance with many builds, it's not robust at all and many builds have lots of exploit, you don't need to IMBA the smite to have powerful paladin/warlock - just use mana (DMG pp.288-289) you'll get a legit way to empower any kind of casters by giving them versatility and actually benefiting from their toolbox IMO.
All the best