Okay I need an official RAW ruling on the use of divine smite , how often it can be used in one turn, and does the Divine smite also stack with spells such as searing strike
And since Divine smite requires the use of one spell slot and so does searing smite so that means every time you use that does it not burn up to spell slots?
I want official ruling for these questions please because I have seen many dungeon Master's playing at many different ways but I want official RAW ruling and the page that I can read it on and what book it is on under 5th edition
The only book that you need to check for this is the PHB as all rules pertaining to base classes (except for Artificers) are contained within their entry in that book. Under the Paladin entry it states:
Divine Smite
Starting at 2nd level, when you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one spell slot to deal radiant damage to the target, in addition to the weapon’s damage. The extra damage is 2d8 for a 1st-level spell slot, plus 1d8 for each spell level higher than 1st, to a maximum of 5d8. The damage increases by 1d8 if the target is an undead or a fiend, to a maximum of 6d8.
As it gives no restrictions whatsoever on how many time you can use it per turn, the RAW answer is ♾, but practically it is limited by the total number of attacks you can make per turn. You can even use it for Bonus Action and Reaction attacks such as (but not limited to) attacks made by dual wielding and opportunity attacks.
The Smite Spells require a Bonus Action to cast, the Divine Smite feature does not require a Bonus Action, so there is absolutely no restriction RAW against using both a Smite spell and Divine Smite on the same Attack. If you used both the spell and the feature, it requires the “use” of one spell slot to cast the spell, and the “expense” of one spell slot to fuel the the Divine Smite.
Improved Divine Smite has no such restrictions or associated costs whatsoever:
Improved Divine Smite
By 11th level, you are so suffused with righteous might that all your melee weapon strikes carry divine power with them. Whenever you hit a creature with a melee weapon, the creature takes an extra 1d8 radiant damage.
It simply provides a standing bonus that applies to every attack the Paladin makes. This happens even if you do not use Divine Smite on the attack.
The only strange restriction that applies to Improved Divine Smite is that it requires a hit with a “melee weapon” whereas Divine Smite only requires a hit “with a melee weapon attack” which can include Unarmed Strikes.
Please note too, to use Searing Smite or other similar -Smite spells, you need to cast them as a Bonus Action before you make your attack, they aren't something you can just tack on after confirming that you've hit. By contrast, the Divine Smite (or other similar "when you hit..." abilities like Sneak Attack) is a decision you can make after you make an attack, once you know whether you've hit (or even crit!) your target.
Okay I have one other question for all of you dungeon Master's old-school dungeon Master's and the official RAW Ruling
previous versions of dungeons & dragons as far as I can remember paladins have always had to be a lawful alignment because they had to obey a oath to their deity , which restricted them to lawful alignment. My question is if a paladin does something against his God and breaking the laws, in traditional dungeons & dragons , the God who stripped them of their powers as punishment or did that change with 5th edition?
Has paladin's changed to wear they can do what they want without regard for their God their faith are the country they live in breaking laws murdering and killing and plundering people including children and so forth and so on , and not have to worry about any consequences from his God ?
Can paladins can now do what they want without regard and consequences from their God which they draw their power from? Because the entire base of a paladin is faith-based much like cleric? Or has the creators of fifth edition completely water that down and destroyed the entire backstory of paladins and clerics? ,
The reason why I am asking was because I had a paladin who claimed to be chaotic good and he was a oath of devotion , he broke into a house , there was a family of five including three children ,he fought with the parents knocking over a lantern and burned the entire family alive everybody died except him.
so how should that play out with his God,
another paladin in the party attack of the ruling leader of a country. I imagine everyone will know the lady" Laerail Silverhand" and he escaped before the law could get ahold of him but he expected his powers to work regardless of what he did
There are no alignment requirements for any class. Paladins still take Oaths, but that Oath isn't necessarily in service to a particular god. A vow of revenge against an enemy (or an entire race, or a concept like "evil doers," etc.) would be enough to justify the Oath of Vengeance. Ambition to conquer and build your own nation, or fight in the name of your country, that could be the Oath of Conquest. The Oaths do a pretty good job of laying out some roleplaying tenants that should guide you, and one of the subclasses (the "Oathbreaker") is in theory something that your DM could force you into if you do a crap job of upholding the oath you supposedly took.
In practice though, classes and subclasses are balanced mechanically, and a DM shouldn't try to punish players mechanically for roleplaying. If a player is being dumb or disruptive, the DM should have a conversation with them about expectations for the game, or even kick them out of the group, not try to beat them into compliance by changing their class. By and large 5E moved away from putting the DM in control of the player's roleplaying and character choices, but the Paladin is probably the one class where a little bit of the bad old days still has a chance to rear its head if a DM isn't respectful of their player's autonomy.
Okay I have one other question for all of you dungeon Master's old-school dungeon Master's and the official RAW Ruling
previous versions of dungeons & dragons as far as I can remember paladins have always had to be a lawful alignment because they had to obey a oath to their deity , which restricted them to lawful alignment. My question is if a paladin does something against his God and breaking the laws, in traditional dungeons & dragons , the God who stripped them of their powers as punishment or did that change with 5th edition?
Has dungeons & dragons watered that down to where that is just absolutely? And paladins can now do what they want without regard and consequences from their God which they draw their power from? Because the entire base of a paladin is faith-based much like cleric? Or has their creators of fifth edition completely water that down and destroyed the entire backstory of paladins and clerics?
Paladins no longer get their powers from a deity. Clerics can still PO their deities and suffer consequences as a result. A Paladin now gets their power through their convictions to their oath. If a Paladin breaks their oath, the DM can make them become an “Oathbreaker.” Basically, they lose their subclass and all of its benefits and gain this different subclass instead. So, if an Oath of Vengeance Paladin shows mercy to a mortal enemy, boom, potential character hijack until they get back on track. (Of course, if that happened to me I would go Oath of Redemption instead because it’s cool narratively, but that’s just me.)
Of course, as with everything else, that is all up to the DM’s discretion.
Okay I see so fifth edition has completely destroyed the alignment system for some of the classes
Taking the power away from dungeon Masters 4 characters who are being completely unruly and disruptiveand they completely changed the entire mechanics of paladin
There are no alignment requirements for any class. Paladins still take Oaths, but that Oath isn't necessarily in service to a particular god. A vow of revenge against an enemy (or an entire race, or a concept like "evil doers," etc.) would be enough to justify the Oath of Vengeance. Ambition to conquer and build your own nation, or fight in the name of your country, that could be the Oath of Conquest. The Oaths do a pretty good job of laying out some roleplaying tenants that should guide you, and one of the subclasses (the "Oathbreaker") is in theory something that your DM could force you into if you do a crap job of upholding the oath you supposedly took.
In practice though, classes and subclasses are balanced mechanically, and a DM shouldn't try to punish players mechanically for roleplaying. If a player is being dumb or disruptive, the DM should have a conversation with them about expectations for the game, or even kick them out of the group, not try to beat them into compliance by changing their class. By and large 5E moved away from putting the DM in control of the player's roleplaying and character choices, but the Paladin is probably the one class where a little bit of the bad old days still has a chance to rear its head if a DM isn't respectful of their player's autonomy.
Personally, If my Paladin went off oath I would expect to get whacked with Oathbreaker. I miss “the bad old days” a little and would love the RP possibilities inherent in a good face-heel turn.
Well I feel sorry for that paladin because he's about to face an entire army of level 20 elite soldiers led by Royal guards each of them with 10 wizards , with five paladin's and five barbarians at all of them level 20 and they are going to bring that pally to Justice and if he refuses he will die
The thing is, Oathbreaker doesn't really make sense, for precisely the situation Sposta just laid out. I've taken vows of Vengeance, grrrr no mercy for the wicked! But I fell in love with this villain, and let mercy stay my hand because I think she can be redeemed..... so now I'm an Oathbreaker and raise Undead and Demonic minions?
I've taken vows to the Crown, loyalty and duty above all! But the prince is a monster, for the good of the land I must take his life and end his reign of terror..... so now I'm an Oathbreaker, with an Aura of Hate?
Especially with Oaths not being to gods, but instead being commitments of personal conviction from which the Paladin draws insiration and strength through their pure force of will.... it's just nonsensical that there's some sort of "curse" that comes from changing your mind or recognizing the moral complexity of a situation. If you want to be an Oathbreaker, some sort of tragic Dark Knight archetype, then build one... but don't tell me that the Oath of Redemption goody-two-shoes who just can't bring himself to forgive the bandit that murdered a child necessarily breaks all the way bad and starts hanging out with demons, just because he transgresses his oaths.
Okay I see so fifth edition has completely destroyed the alignment system for some of the classes
Taking the power away from dungeon Masters 4 characters who are being completely unruly and disruptiveand they completely changed the entire mechanics of paladin
Not really, a lot of that stuff changed way back in 3rd edition, or maybe 3.5. Basically, they realized that alignment was something that the vast majority of people either didn’t use or didn’t use well, so it became a lot less important. And to be honest, I get the impression that if 6e ever does come out, that alignment might be gone completely.
They changed the entire mechanics of every class. Wizards, Bards and Druids are probably the most obvious in which to see the changes. The game used to be about outwitting the DM, killing monsters, taking their stuff (if you survived), and using it to kill more monsters. Yes, there was also role playing to, and lot of it. Now it’s all about “Role Playing” (like Shatner’s acting, or soap operas) and there’s some monsters too. Now you get to level 2 with “a fight and a conversation” (I forget who said that) and the vast majority of PCs survive to the end of the campaign.
The thing is, Oathbreaker doesn't really make sense, for precisely the situation Sposta just laid out. I've taken vows of Vengeance, grrrr no mercy for the wicked! But I fell in love with this villain, and let mercy stay my hand because I think she can be redeemed..... so now I'm an Oathbreaker and raise Undead and Demonic minions?
I've taken vows to the Crown, loyalty and duty above all! But the prince is a monster, for the good of the land I must take his life and end his reign of terror..... so now I'm an Oathbreaker, with an Aura of Hate?
Especially with Oaths not being to gods, but instead being commitments of personal conviction from which the Paladin draws insiration and strength through their pure force of will.... it's just nonsensical that there's some sort of "curse" that comes from changing your mind or recognizing the moral complexity of a situation. If you want to be an Oathbreaker, some sort of tragic Dark Knight archetype, then build one... but don't tell me that the Oath of Redemption goody-two-shoes who just can't bring himself to forgive the bandit that murdered a child necessarily breaks all the way bad and starts hanging out with demons, just because he transgresses his oaths.
I absolutely agree. (I do legitimately miss those “bad old days” just a little.) But there are better ways to present the repercussions of a Paladin breaking their oath.
Good to know that we can have homicidal psychopathic child murdering paladins in dungeons & dragons and they do not suffer any consequences good job for the new writers lol.... anyway thank you for your support on clarifying the new mechanics of dungeons & dragons 5th .....
The thing is, Oathbreaker doesn't really make sense, for precisely the situation Sposta just laid out. I've taken vows of Vengeance, grrrr no mercy for the wicked! But I fell in love with this villain, and let mercy stay my hand because I think she can be redeemed..... so now I'm an Oathbreaker and raise Undead and Demonic minions?
I've taken vows to the Crown, loyalty and duty above all! But the prince is a monster, for the good of the land I must take his life and end his reign of terror..... so now I'm an Oathbreaker, with an Aura of Hate?
I'd have to agree, Oathbreaker as its own subclass is strange, and honestly doesn't work out so great. Each of the individual Oaths should have their own version of Oathbreaker baked into it.
Good to know that we can have homicidal psychopathic child murdering paladins in dungeons & dragons and they do not suffer any consequences good job for the new writers lol.... anyway thank you for your support on clarifying the new mechanics of dungeons & dragons 5th .....
The new rules are the same as the old rules where the DM's call trump rules. If you want Alignments to have meaning, make it so.
I'd have to agree, Oathbreaker as its own subclass is strange, and honestly doesn't work out so great. Each of the individual Oaths should have their own version of Oathbreaker baked into it.
I again object to the idea that the DM should punish a player mechanically for a role playing scenario... but if we MUST have that:
”When a Paladin breaks his Oath, the DM May direct them to make a Charisma save, or lose 1d10 combined spell slots for the day. This save will be repeated at the end of each long rest, until the Paladin has sufficiently atoned, or taken a new Paladin Oath.”
There. Sucks, but gives the player a clear way out through either appeasement or force if will, demonstrates that it’s more a matter of them feeling distracted and conflicted than cursed, and provides a mechanical penalty that doesn’t presume their alignment or ethos.
Okay I need an official RAW ruling on the use of divine smite , how often it can be used in one turn, and does the Divine smite also stack with spells such as searing strike
And since Divine smite requires the use of one spell slot and so does searing smite so that means every time you use that does it not burn up to spell slots?
I want official ruling for these questions please because I have seen many dungeon Master's playing at many different ways but I want official RAW ruling and the page that I can read it on and what book it is on under 5th edition
The only book that you need to check for this is the PHB as all rules pertaining to base classes (except for Artificers) are contained within their entry in that book. Under the Paladin entry it states:
As it gives no restrictions whatsoever on how many time you can use it per turn, the RAW answer is ♾, but practically it is limited by the total number of attacks you can make per turn. You can even use it for Bonus Action and Reaction attacks such as (but not limited to) attacks made by dual wielding and opportunity attacks.
The Smite Spells require a Bonus Action to cast, the Divine Smite feature does not require a Bonus Action, so there is absolutely no restriction RAW against using both a Smite spell and Divine Smite on the same Attack. If you used both the spell and the feature, it requires the “use” of one spell slot to cast the spell, and the “expense” of one spell slot to fuel the the Divine Smite.
Improved Divine Smite has no such restrictions or associated costs whatsoever:
It simply provides a standing bonus that applies to every attack the Paladin makes. This happens even if you do not use Divine Smite on the attack.
The only strange restriction that applies to Improved Divine Smite is that it requires a hit with a “melee weapon” whereas Divine Smite only requires a hit “with a melee weapon attack” which can include Unarmed Strikes.
I hope this was helpful.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Please note too, to use Searing Smite or other similar -Smite spells, you need to cast them as a Bonus Action before you make your attack, they aren't something you can just tack on after confirming that you've hit. By contrast, the Divine Smite (or other similar "when you hit..." abilities like Sneak Attack) is a decision you can make after you make an attack, once you know whether you've hit (or even crit!) your target.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
That was very helpful thank you both very much
There was a lot of miscommunication about the use of divine smite and improved Divine smite so I wanted the official RAW
Happy to help. But I’ll also point out that if the DM chooses to change it that is always their prerogative.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Okay I have one other question for all of you dungeon Master's old-school dungeon Master's and the official RAW Ruling
previous versions of dungeons & dragons as far as I can remember paladins have always had to be a lawful alignment because they had to obey a oath to their deity , which restricted them to lawful alignment. My question is if a paladin does something against his God and breaking the laws, in traditional dungeons & dragons , the God who stripped them of their powers as punishment or did that change with 5th edition?
Has paladin's changed to wear they can do what they want without regard for their God their faith are the country they live in breaking laws murdering and killing and plundering people including children and so forth and so on , and not have to worry about any consequences from his God ?
Can paladins can now do what they want without regard and consequences from their God which they draw their power from? Because the entire base of a paladin is faith-based much like cleric? Or has the creators of fifth edition completely water that down and destroyed the entire backstory of paladins and clerics? ,
The reason why I am asking was because I had a paladin who claimed to be chaotic good and he was a oath of devotion , he broke into a house , there was a family of five including three children ,he fought with the parents knocking over a lantern and burned the entire family alive everybody died except him.
so how should that play out with his God,
another paladin in the party attack of the ruling leader of a country. I imagine everyone will know the lady" Laerail Silverhand" and he escaped before the law could get ahold of him but he expected his powers to work regardless of what he did
There are no alignment requirements for any class. Paladins still take Oaths, but that Oath isn't necessarily in service to a particular god. A vow of revenge against an enemy (or an entire race, or a concept like "evil doers," etc.) would be enough to justify the Oath of Vengeance. Ambition to conquer and build your own nation, or fight in the name of your country, that could be the Oath of Conquest. The Oaths do a pretty good job of laying out some roleplaying tenants that should guide you, and one of the subclasses (the "Oathbreaker") is in theory something that your DM could force you into if you do a crap job of upholding the oath you supposedly took.
In practice though, classes and subclasses are balanced mechanically, and a DM shouldn't try to punish players mechanically for roleplaying. If a player is being dumb or disruptive, the DM should have a conversation with them about expectations for the game, or even kick them out of the group, not try to beat them into compliance by changing their class. By and large 5E moved away from putting the DM in control of the player's roleplaying and character choices, but the Paladin is probably the one class where a little bit of the bad old days still has a chance to rear its head if a DM isn't respectful of their player's autonomy.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Paladins no longer get their powers from a deity. Clerics can still PO their deities and suffer consequences as a result. A Paladin now gets their power through their convictions to their oath. If a Paladin breaks their oath, the DM can make them become an “Oathbreaker.” Basically, they lose their subclass and all of its benefits and gain this different subclass instead. So, if an Oath of Vengeance Paladin shows mercy to a mortal enemy, boom, potential character hijack until they get back on track. (Of course, if that happened to me I would go Oath of Redemption instead because it’s cool narratively, but that’s just me.)
Of course, as with everything else, that is all up to the DM’s discretion.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Okay I see so fifth edition has completely destroyed the alignment system for some of the classes
Taking the power away from dungeon Masters 4 characters who are being completely unruly and disruptiveand they completely changed the entire mechanics of paladin
Personally, If my Paladin went off oath I would expect to get whacked with Oathbreaker. I miss “the bad old days” a little and would love the RP possibilities inherent in a good face-heel turn.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Well I feel sorry for that paladin because he's about to face an entire army of level 20 elite soldiers led by Royal guards each of them with 10 wizards , with five paladin's and five barbarians at all of them level 20 and they are going to bring that pally to Justice and if he refuses he will die
The thing is, Oathbreaker doesn't really make sense, for precisely the situation Sposta just laid out. I've taken vows of Vengeance, grrrr no mercy for the wicked! But I fell in love with this villain, and let mercy stay my hand because I think she can be redeemed..... so now I'm an Oathbreaker and raise Undead and Demonic minions?
I've taken vows to the Crown, loyalty and duty above all! But the prince is a monster, for the good of the land I must take his life and end his reign of terror..... so now I'm an Oathbreaker, with an Aura of Hate?
Especially with Oaths not being to gods, but instead being commitments of personal conviction from which the Paladin draws insiration and strength through their pure force of will.... it's just nonsensical that there's some sort of "curse" that comes from changing your mind or recognizing the moral complexity of a situation. If you want to be an Oathbreaker, some sort of tragic Dark Knight archetype, then build one... but don't tell me that the Oath of Redemption goody-two-shoes who just can't bring himself to forgive the bandit that murdered a child necessarily breaks all the way bad and starts hanging out with demons, just because he transgresses his oaths.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Not really, a lot of that stuff changed way back in 3rd edition, or maybe 3.5. Basically, they realized that alignment was something that the vast majority of people either didn’t use or didn’t use well, so it became a lot less important. And to be honest, I get the impression that if 6e ever does come out, that alignment might be gone completely.
They changed the entire mechanics of every class. Wizards, Bards and Druids are probably the most obvious in which to see the changes. The game used to be about outwitting the DM, killing monsters, taking their stuff (if you survived), and using it to kill more monsters. Yes, there was also role playing to, and lot of it. Now it’s all about “Role Playing” (like Shatner’s acting, or soap operas) and there’s some monsters too. Now you get to level 2 with “a fight and a conversation” (I forget who said that) and the vast majority of PCs survive to the end of the campaign.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I absolutely agree. (I do legitimately miss those “bad old days” just a little.) But there are better ways to present the repercussions of a Paladin breaking their oath.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Wow, this is turning out to be a good conversation. Thank you Reverie_Nicole.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Good to know that we can have homicidal psychopathic child murdering paladins in dungeons & dragons and they do not suffer any consequences good job for the new writers lol.... anyway thank you for your support on clarifying the new mechanics of dungeons & dragons 5th .....
I'd have to agree, Oathbreaker as its own subclass is strange, and honestly doesn't work out so great. Each of the individual Oaths should have their own version of Oathbreaker baked into it.
The new rules are the same as the old rules where the DM's call trump rules. If you want Alignments to have meaning, make it so.
That would get... cumbersome to say the least.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I again object to the idea that the DM should punish a player mechanically for a role playing scenario... but if we MUST have that:
”When a Paladin breaks his Oath, the DM May direct them to make a Charisma save, or lose 1d10 combined spell slots for the day. This save will be repeated at the end of each long rest, until the Paladin has sufficiently atoned, or taken a new Paladin Oath.”
There. Sucks, but gives the player a clear way out through either appeasement or force if will, demonstrates that it’s more a matter of them feeling distracted and conflicted than cursed, and provides a mechanical penalty that doesn’t presume their alignment or ethos.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.