I was hoping that you could finally use Smite with a ranged weapon, but it seems that Wizards really doesn't like this and I don't understand why
Tradition; demarcation of roles; a limitation on the power of smites. Take your pick. At the end of the day D&D is a roleplaying game, not just a toolbox of features. Part of roleplay is determining what things a given role cannot do, in addition to giving powers that define what they can.
I was hoping that you could finally use Smite with a ranged weapon, but it seems that Wizards really doesn't like this and I don't understand why
IIRC, it was largely the community, through the survey that nixed the idea. For the reasons Ace of Rogues said, and also because it would vault paladins into being top tier archers. Pallys are already really strong. Ranged combat is about the only thing they don’t do.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I was hoping that you could finally use Smite with a ranged weapon, but it seems that Wizards really doesn't like this and I don't understand why
It was actually put back to being melee only by popular demand. The survey responses indicated most responders saw being melee-focused was an essential part of the Paladin archetype. Which does make sense, they are the archtypal knight in shining armour, riding atop their noble steed into battle - most people wouldn't associate that image with a mongolian horse-archer or a British longbowman.
I was hoping that you could finally use Smite with a ranged weapon,
but it seems that Wizards really doesn't like this and I don't understand why
Tradition; demarcation of roles; a limitation on the power of smites. Take your pick. At the end of the day D&D is a roleplaying game, not just a toolbox of features. Part of roleplay is determining what things a given role cannot do, in addition to giving powers that define what they can.
IIRC, it was largely the community, through the survey that nixed the idea. For the reasons Ace of Rogues said, and also because it would vault paladins into being top tier archers. Pallys are already really strong. Ranged combat is about the only thing they don’t do.
Warlocks can.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
It was actually put back to being melee only by popular demand. The survey responses indicated most responders saw being melee-focused was an essential part of the Paladin archetype. Which does make sense, they are the archtypal knight in shining armour, riding atop their noble steed into battle - most people wouldn't associate that image with a mongolian horse-archer or a British longbowman.