Paladin does get extra attack, sure. at level 9 paladin over 15 round of combat, assuming they used all smite spells is doing 30 attacks, we are talking ~1.5 critical hits. Over an adventuring day that is 8 + 9 + 8 die in smites, with an additional 4 or 8 die from critical hits, so around 33 dies. So with a +1 longsword you're going to expect roughly ((4.5×.7+8×.65)×30+33×4.5) / 15 damage or 26.6 DPR.
Rogue over the same 15 turns, assuming two weapon fighting with two +1 short swords would be doing, (3.5×.7)×2+(7×0.65)+(17.5×0.945) is 25.77 DPR a round.
This is a good example of why these kinds of comparisons aren't always useful though; the Rogue's Sneak Attack may not require a resource, but it's conditional on having advantage or an ally within 5 feet, so you can't always guarantee it on a first round, or even on later rounds.
You can sort of do it reliably by going ranged and using Steady Aim, but that's only useful if you can get within short range, otherwise you lose the chance at Sneak Attack by using Steady Aim to counter long range, or having to bonus action Dash to get closer. And one of the benefits of Rogue having Weapon Mastery is that this reduces the dominance of ranged Rogues since Nick means you've got two shots at Sneak Attack without spending your bonus action.
Meanwhile, the Paladin's Divine Smite is only conditional on hitting, and you wait until you hit or miss before deciding whether to spend the resource (and at what level) so you can choose situationally whether to do more damage in a shorter time, fish for critical hits, spend big on key targets etc. Sneak Attack by comparison can be wasted on weaker targets (no benefit to doing excess damage if you would have killed them anyway).
Plus the Paladin's Divine Smite has the substantial benefit of being on a Paladin rather than a Rogue, so you're talking about a character with more base hit-points, higher base AC, the ability to heal themselves (now as a bonus action action) etc. etc.
The Paladin is in no way being short changed by the fact that a Rogue can do similar damage, in fact it's the opposite because the Paladin is doing it as part of a solid all around package, while the Rogue comes with greater risk/lesser durability.
Rogues can use a BA to gain advantage now can't they? Careful Aim or something like that? I think it came out with Tasha's
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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.
Rogues can use a BA to gain advantage now can't they? Careful Aim or something like that? I think it came out with Tasha's
Steady Aim, yeah, but you give up your movement to do it; it requires you to already be within short range though (or have Sharpshooter) otherwise it's cancelling out the disadvantage you'll have for being at long range. You can use it with melee attacks as well though if you're already next to the target.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
It's worth pointing out that needing advantage for Sneak Attack is far less of an obstacle with One D&D, as the Vex mastery gives advantage on the user's next attack roll against a target - and given how finesse/ranged weapons have little to no access to other desirable Weapon Mastery properties, there is never any reason for a Rogue to not be using a Vex primary weapon given its synergy with Sneak Attack.
Paladin does get extra attack, sure. at level 9 paladin over 15 round of combat, assuming they used all smite spells is doing 30 attacks, we are talking ~1.5 critical hits. Over an adventuring day that is 8 + 9 + 8 die in smites, with an additional 4 or 8 die from critical hits, so around 33 dies. So with a +1 longsword you're going to expect roughly ((4.5×.7+8×.65)×30+33×4.5) / 15 damage or 26.6 DPR.
You're really cooking the books by using a longsword and 15 rounds of combat per day. However, I'm willing to model the dex paladin, who probably does pick up dueling fighting style.
The rogue's base damage per round is 2d6+7 (+1 scimitar, +shortsword) + 5d6. Between Vex and Steady Aim, almost all attacks will be at advantage; call it 90% to hit, and pretty near 100% on sneak attack, so our total dpr is about 30.
The paladin's base damage per round is 2d8+16 (+1 rapier). Thanks to Vex, most but not all attacks will have advantage, figure around 80% (and since blinding smite is a thing), with more than 90% to smite. Total base dpr is 20. Thus, we need 10 dpr from smites to keep ahead.
A greatsword paladin has a base damage per round of 4d6+12, and 5 damage on a miss (graze). At a 70% hit chance (no reliable advantage) he's doing 23 dpr and needs 7 dpr from smites.
There's no particularly great feat options for either of the first two. The greatsword paladin may well take great weapon mastery, which is adding 3.6 dpr (and potential for bonus actions that don't cost slots)
Our daily allocation of smites, assuming we don't do anything special for applying conditions (the rogue isn't trying to use cunning strike) is
Total 28d8 [126] bonus damage, or [147] if using the greatsword. It takes 13 rounds for the rogue to catch up to the shield/rapier dex paladin, 21 to catch up with the great weapon paladin, and as we've already discussed, more than 10 rounds is pretty unrealistic.
It's worth pointing out that needing advantage for Sneak Attack is far less of an obstacle with One D&D, as the Vex mastery gives advantage on the user's next attack roll against a target - and given how finesse/ranged weapons have little to no access to other desirable Weapon Mastery properties, there is never any reason for a Rogue to not be using a Vex primary weapon given its synergy with Sneak Attack.
This is indeed true of hand crossbow, which two hand crossbows and crossbow expert makes it a very powerful option for rogue, however you'd need to be in 30 foot or have sharpshooter to go with that since hand crossbows are 30/120. Alternatively drop crossbow expert and just put your second hand crossbow away after the first round, you only get vex when you hit but then you have advantage and are very unlikely to drop it particularly quickly.
Paladin's Divine Smite is conditional on hitting with a melee weapon or unarmed strike in the latest UA, but it also consumes a bonus action and an additional resource. Essentially Paladin needs to be that ally within 5 ft that rogue relies on in the first place.
The rogue often needs to spend their BA too, is my point - whether on Steady Aim, Cunning Action Hide, or the offhand attack for a second chance at sneak attack.
Consider both classes at level 5 - Assuming 18s for both of them, Rogue with a Rapier does 1d8+4+3d6 (avg 4.5+4+10.5 = 19) while the Paladin with a longsword and Dueling Style is doing 2d8+12 (avg 9+12=21). The paladin is already ahead on resourceless damage without considering smite or concentrating on anything. Now once you factor in advantage and chance to hit, the Rogue pulls ahead, but they're also behind defensively on multiple fronts (worse AC, worse HP, and if they want to stick to range the weapon damage drops too) and they will end up losing DPR needing to do things like disengage or hide because they can't just hang around in melee with a rapier and leather armor with no shield. Even the Swashbuckler can't do that.
As for disregarding MAD - again, MAD only matters if you're trying to max out two stats for your damage and/or defenses. If you're perfectly happy with one staying at 16 or 14, that's not MAD. A cleric with a 14 Dex and Con is not MAD, because those stats never need to go any higher - the same is true for a paladin with 14 Con and Cha.
Paladin's Divine Smite is conditional on hitting with a melee weapon or unarmed strike in the latest UA, but it also consumes a bonus action and an additional resource. Essentially Paladin needs to be that ally within 5 ft that rogue relies on in the first place.
The rogue often needs to spend their BA too, is my point - whether on Steady Aim, Cunning Action Hide, or the offhand attack for a second chance at sneak attack.
Consider both classes at level 5 - Assuming 18s for both of them, Rogue with a Rapier does 1d8+4+3d6 (avg 4.5+4+10.5 = 19) while the Paladin with a longsword and Dueling Style is doing 2d8+12 (avg 9+12=21). The paladin is already ahead on resourceless damage without considering smite or concentrating on anything. Now once you factor in advantage and chance to hit, the Rogue pulls ahead, but they're also behind defensively on multiple fronts (worse AC, worse HP, and if they want to stick to range the weapon damage drops too) and they will end up losing DPR needing to do things like disengage or hide because they can't just hang around in melee with a rapier and leather armor with no shield. Even the Swashbuckler can't do that.
As for disregarding MAD - again, MAD only matters if you're trying to max out two stats for your damage and/or defenses. If you're perfectly happy with one staying at 16 or 14, that's not MAD. A cleric with a 14 Dex and Con is not MAD, because those stats never need to go any higher - the same is true for a paladin with 14 Con and Cha.
1) Does rogue need to use their BA? They have a lot of options with BA, and so they choose to use the BA. But if you strike a killing blow and no other enemies in 5 foot, do you need too? Or if you're using ranged attacks? Steady Aim is good until level 13, at which point it's pointless and you'd never use it again, or if you're benefiting from the vex property? Rogue is not being forced to use that BA to perform their damage. Now the argument could be made with TWF or crossbow expert that they are, and I'd agree with that, but then the nick property exists which mitigates that in the UA for scimitar.
2) level 5 is an abnormality, Rogue is a class who's base DPR increases relatively consistently, basically the only class in the game that does it so consistently. 5 Difference classes get extra attack at level 5, rogue is the only non-caster that does not. However, I'd be remiss to point out that Rogue can use 2 Scimitar at level 1 in the UA, and so can also make two attacks, it'd be switching 1d8+4 for 2d6+4, but they can do this, at this point rogue is already ahead. Rogue is not a tank, so obviously they don't have the AC and HP of one, however they still have numerous defensive features on top of offering party utility that paladin simply doesn't have, a paladin is not picking locks, searching for traps, scouting a head, etc.
Of course paladin could use great sword or polearms, I get that, but the 2 scimitar thing is kind of important a note for Rogue for just how good it is. Going to a greatsword or polearm for a paladin requires taking feats or building towards but 2 scimitar is sort of a default best melee option in the UA, since it gives a second chance of getting that sneak attack in if you miss your first attack and doesn't even cost BA to use, which massively increases the chance of sneak attack. 2 short swords also work as a potential way to sneak attack without allies within 5 foot but hand crossbow does the same job and is far safer, you just put down the second handcross bow once your into vex and pull out another if you lose vex on a later round... hand crossbow has some brokenness in latest UA.
3) Charisma is defence for Paladin, Saving throws are defence and not just your own, if you get hit by a dragon's breath, or a mages AoE spell, that defence can save more than just yourself as a paladin, it's a higher chance to make saves and avoid a number of other nasty effects too. There seems to be quiet a disparity of people who think Aura of Protection is the strongest feature ever and those who think it's basically worthless and not worth increasing... I'm guessing you're the latter if you're thinking like this. I personally believe Aura of Protection is a vital support and role of the Paladin class that separates it from fighter and barbarian in how it plays and operates, smites are just damage whereas spellcasting and auras are utility which actually makes paladin different in combat.
I do think Aura of Protection is a great feature, but you're still overvaluing it. It's a nice to have, not a necessity. Are you saying that parties that don't have a paladin are useless/fodder against a dragon's breath or any random mage? Especially since the entire party is highly unlikely to be within 10ft of the paladin, and if they are, they're probably eating more damage with such bad positioning than the aura can compensate for; it doesn't expand to 30ft until 18th level, and even then, you probably want the party spread out further than that in a lot of endgame fights. So sacrificing all your other stats/making yourself MAD to pump Charisma is just bad character building unless you're specifically going for something like a Lockadin or Soradin that can afford lower Str and Con instead.
As for the rogue - yes, they can TWF and use nick mastery, but they're still putting themselves at risk to do so. Sure they can Disengage for free, but they're still going to be within melee range of a lot of enemies doing that. If the enemy can walk up and multiattack you in one turn, you're in melee, even if you ended your turn more than 5ft away; 5e isn't 3.5 or PF where any movement at all keeps you from getting all your attacks. And the melee rogue is going to have lower defenses than even a monk, much less a paladin.
I do think Aura of Protection is a great feature, but you're still overvaluing it. It's a nice to have, not a necessity. Are you saying that parties that don't have a paladin are useless/fodder against a dragon's breath or any random mage? Especially since the entire party is highly unlikely to be within 10ft of the paladin, and if they are, they're probably eating more damage with such bad positioning than the aura can compensate for; it doesn't expand to 30ft until 18th level, and even then, you probably want the party spread out further than that in a lot of endgame fights. So sacrificing all your other stats/making yourself MAD to pump Charisma is just bad character building unless you're specifically going for something like a Lockadin or Soradin that can afford lower Str and Con instead.
As for the rogue - yes, they can TWF and use nick mastery, but they're still putting themselves at risk to do so. Sure they can Disengage for free, but they're still going to be within melee range of a lot of enemies doing that. If the enemy can walk up and multiattack you in one turn, you're in melee, even if you ended your turn more than 5ft away; 5e isn't 3.5 or PF where any movement at all keeps you from getting all your attacks. And the melee rogue is going to have lower defenses than even a monk, much less a paladin.
I'm not saying Paladin is getting the whole party with their auras, but the auras really help a lot. It can still be the difference between a victory and a TPK in some instances. Aura of protection not the strongest defensive ability in the game, but it is permanently active while the paladin is up and all allies in range do benefit from it, that is likely to be other melee fighters, include rogue, fighter, barbarian, monk, melee ranger, gish builds, circle of the moon druid and a couple of other potential classes. It is also potentially traps, environmental damage, and unexpected or expected spells.
Monk and Rogue have evasion and generally are only going to try and position themselves where they are in range of only one enemy most of the time, they will retreat which means anything that goes after them is suspect to opportunity attacks, it is of course not risk free but the rewards should be greater than being the ranged rogue who sits back 30 foot and uses two crossbows. As the paladin you are meant to be taking more hits and will generally take more hits than a rogue, so not certain where this comparison is going since rogue serves another important role in the party whereas paladin's only other role outside of being that front-line tanker is based on charisma being a broken social ability score. Rogue still gets thieves cant so they can go to the shadier parts of town and get that information other classes can't, so not entirely out in the cold on social encounters either.
From what I've seen in the UA playtests, most classes seem to have been improved - quite possibly because they needed it. Paladin however seems to have been changed rather sparingly - with the major changes being Lay on Hands being changed from action to bonus action and most Smites not requiring concentration. Now we might actually see more use of spell slots to cast support spells in addition to Smiting. On that note I don't get why Shining Smite (the rebranded Branding Smite) still requires concentration. Overall it's also my perception that the Paladin class is generally considered quite good and these changes are unlikely to make them the bottom of the barrel.
With that being said I would like to say that the new Smite subcategory feels like a half-measure. I'm not terribly happy about the one free smite per long rest + the bonus action cost of the regular Divine Smite. The free smite is not a leveled slot so it'll mostly get used for the highest level smite available with applicable utility to make the most out of the free spell, making the regular Divine Smite a suboptimal choice. I get the reasoning for restricting Smite to once per turn, but that could literally just be configured like Sneak Attack - which would also get rid of the bonus action cost of using a Smite + you could use it for a Reaction or Bonus Action attack.
I want to explore some design space for Smite because Smiting feels like a very iconic Paladin feature, more so than tanking or healing. I'm going to steal the basis for the feature from Sorcerer's Sorcery Points as a separate resource (including the conversion of spell slots to points but not points to slots) and couple it with the trigger from Rogue's Sneak Attack. I will let the Smite Points follow your proficiency bonus in strictly Paladin levels. Aka: Lvl 2 - 4: 2 points Lvl 5 - 8: 3 points Lvl 9 - 12: 4 points Lvl 13 - 16: 5 points Lvl 17 - 20: 6 points
The class feature would look something like this:
Divine Smite
Starting at 2nd level, your strong convictions allows you to tap into divine power to empower your strikes to fell your foes.
Smite Points: You have 2 smite points, and you gain more as you reach higher levels, as shown in the Smite Points column of the Paladin table. You can never have more smite points than shown on the table for your level. You regain 2 smite points whenever you finish a short rest and regain all smite points when you finish a long rest.
Channel Magic: As a bonus action you can expend one spell slot to regain a number of smite points equal to the slot's level.
Once per turn, when you hit a creature with a melee weapon or unarmed strike, you may spend an amount of Smite Points to infuse your attack with one Smite Power.
Paladin Level // Smite Point cost // Smite power (easy reference effect) 2 1 Divine Smite* +1d8 Radiant, 2d8 at PC lvl 11, 3d8 at PC lvl 17 2 2 Thunderous Smite +2d6 Thunder + knock back and Prone 2 2 Searing Smite +1d6 Fire + target on fire (1d6 per start of turn, ending on a successful CON save after taking fire damage) 5 2 Chilling Smite* +2d6 Cold + 5 ft. selective AoE slow by 10 ft. on a failed CON save 5 2 Wrathful Smite* +1d6 Psychic + 1d6 Radiant + Frightened 5 3 Shining Smite* +2d8 Radiant + invis-break 9 4 Blinding Smite +3d8 Radiant + blinded on failed CON save, may repeat saving throw at end of their turn 13 5 Staggering Smite +4d6 Psychic + Stun on failed CON save 17 6 Banishing Smite* +5d10 Force + Banishment if target below 50 hit points. Uses a separate concentration condition than spell concentration. * indicates a change from UA or current version. See spoiler.
Divine Smite: Damage reduced to 1d8 Radiant damage from 2d8. However like a cantrip it increases in power to 2d8 at level 11 and 3d8 at level 17 - yes skipping the level 5 upgrade.
(New) Chilling Smite: Your attack deals an extra 2d6 Cold damage and the target plus any number of other creatures of your choice that you can see within 5 feet of the target each must make a Constitution saving throw or have its movement reduced by 10 feet until the end of its next turn.
Wrathful Smite: Damage increased from 1d6 psychic to 1d6 psychic plus 1d6 radiant.
Shining Smite: Damage increased from 2d6 Radiant to 2d8 Radiant. No longer requires concentration but doesn't grant attackers advantage. It lasts the full 60 second duration where the target emits dim light in a 5 foot radius and the target cannot benefit from invisibility and have disadvantage on stealth checks that rely on sight.
Banishing Smite: Doesn't utilize concentration like a spell but if you receive damage while the banishment is active you must succeed a Constitution saving throw, benefitting from any bonuses to maintain concentration, or the Banishment is cancelled. Also utilizes the wording from the Banishment spell regarding where the target ends up rather than Banishing Smite from either PHB or the UA. The UA doesn't allow banishment of an outsider to home plane (only to demi-dimension) and the PHB's Ban Smite doesn't allow a concentration break to return an outsider that was sent to its home plane.
I was debating back and forth whether or not to make Divine Smite the "default smite", the bread-and-butter version and how to achieve that without simply granting the Paladin a hefty amount of damage per day compared to most other classes in the early game. I also wanted to scale it while having removed the opportunity to "upcast" Smites. In the end I actually made Paladins weaker in any given encounter before character level 11 as the regular Divine Smite deals less damage than before and all their other Smite variants basically costs one spell level more than currently. This also makes in-combat spell slot conversion a tad awkward or rather slow because you need two turns to convert two level one spell slots to fuel a Thunderous Smite for instance and it costs your bonus action on those turns. This means you often prefer to do conversions out of combat and this will force decision making between refilling your Smite Points before the next fight or keep your spell slots and deal with the more arduous conversion while in action if need be.
The higher costs are partially off-set by the amount of Smite Points available per Long Rest and also the ability to regain two Smite Points per Short Rest - meaning a level 2 Paladin with 2 short rests per day can Divine Smite upwards of 8 times for a total of 8d8 damage whereas the UA allows 3 Divine Smites for a total of 6d8 damage, gaining no benefit from short rests. A level 5 Paladin with 2 short rests under Smite Points will be able to deal 15d8 damage in 15 smites over the course of a day with the UA version dealing 16d8 in 7 smites which could be in their very first encounter. This shifts drastically at level 11 where Smite Points' Divine Smite upgrades to the 2d8 damage variant for a total of 50d8 versus UA's 31d8. However that is 25 smites versus 11.
The base Smite Points basically reflects the one free smite you get in the UA, however instead of feeling "forced" to use it on your most powerful Smite variant for "optimal gain", you're given a much more flexible model. This also makes it a lot easier to potentially have class or subclass features or even feats that interact with your Smite Points, either using them for something else or increasing the maximum amount, or granting increased or alternative ways to regain points, much more than spell slots could.
From what I've seen in the UA playtests, most classes seem to have been improved - quite possibly because they needed it. Paladin however seems to have been changed rather sparingly - with the major changes being Lay on Hands being changed from action to bonus action and most Smites not requiring concentration. Now we might actually see more use of spell slots to cast support spells in addition to Smiting. On that note I don't get why Shining Smite (the rebranded Branding Smite) still requires concentration. Overall it's also my perception that the Paladin class is generally considered quite good and these changes are unlikely to make them the bottom of the barrel.
With that being said I would like to say that the new Smite subcategory feels like a half-measure. I'm not terribly happy about the one free smite per long rest + the bonus action cost of the regular Divine Smite. The free smite is not a leveled slot so it'll mostly get used for the highest level smite available with applicable utility to make the most out of the free spell, making the regular Divine Smite a suboptimal choice. I get the reasoning for restricting Smite to once per turn, but that could literally just be configured like Sneak Attack - which would also get rid of the bonus action cost of using a Smite + you could use it for a Reaction or Bonus Action attack.
I want to explore some design space for Smite because Smiting feels like a very iconic Paladin feature, more so than tanking or healing. I'm going to steal the basis for the feature from Sorcerer's Sorcery Points as a separate resource (including the conversion of spell slots to points but not points to slots) and couple it with the trigger from Rogue's Sneak Attack. I will let the Smite Points follow your proficiency bonus in strictly Paladin levels. Aka: Lvl 2 - 4: 2 points Lvl 5 - 8: 3 points Lvl 9 - 12: 4 points Lvl 13 - 16: 5 points Lvl 17 - 20: 6 points
The class feature would look something like this:
Divine Smite
Starting at 2nd level, your strong convictions allows you to tap into divine power to empower your strikes to fell your foes.
Smite Points: You have 2 smite points, and you gain more as you reach higher levels, as shown in the Smite Points column of the Paladin table. You can never have more smite points than shown on the table for your level. You regain 2 smite points whenever you finish a short rest and regain all smite points when you finish a long rest.
Channel Magic: As a bonus action you can expend one spell slot to regain a number of smite points equal to the slot's level.
Once per turn, when you hit a creature with a melee weapon or unarmed strike, you may spend an amount of Smite Points to infuse your attack with one Smite Power.
Paladin Level // Smite Point cost // Smite power (easy reference effect) 2 1 Divine Smite* +1d8 Radiant, 2d8 at PC lvl 11, 3d8 at PC lvl 17 2 2 Thunderous Smite +2d6 Thunder + knock back and Prone 2 2 Searing Smite +1d6 Fire + target on fire (1d6 per start of turn, ending on a successful CON save after taking fire damage) 5 2 Chilling Smite* +2d6 Cold + 5 ft. selective AoE slow by 10 ft. on a failed CON save 5 2 Wrathful Smite* +1d6 Psychic + 1d6 Radiant + Frightened 5 3 Shining Smite* +2d8 Radiant + invis-break 9 4 Blinding Smite +3d8 Radiant + blinded on failed CON save, may repeat saving throw at end of their turn 13 5 Staggering Smite +4d6 Psychic + Stun on failed CON save 17 6 Banishing Smite* +5d10 Force + Banishment if target below 50 hit points. Uses a separate concentration condition than spell concentration. * indicates a change from UA or current version. See spoiler.
Divine Smite: Damage reduced to 1d8 Radiant damage from 2d8. However like a cantrip it increases in power to 2d8 at level 11 and 3d8 at level 17 - yes skipping the level 5 upgrade.
(New) Chilling Smite: Your attack deals an extra 2d6 Cold damage and the target plus any number of other creatures of your choice that you can see within 5 feet of the target each must make a Constitution saving throw or have its movement reduced by 10 feet until the end of its next turn.
Wrathful Smite: Damage increased from 1d6 psychic to 1d6 psychic plus 1d6 radiant.
Shining Smite: Damage increased from 2d6 Radiant to 2d8 Radiant. No longer requires concentration but doesn't grant attackers advantage. It lasts the full 60 second duration where the target emits dim light in a 5 foot radius and the target cannot benefit from invisibility and have disadvantage on stealth checks that rely on sight.
Banishing Smite: Doesn't utilize concentration like a spell but if you receive damage while the banishment is active you must succeed a Constitution saving throw, benefitting from any bonuses to maintain concentration, or the Banishment is cancelled. Also utilizes the wording from the Banishment spell regarding where the target ends up rather than Banishing Smite from either PHB or the UA. The UA doesn't allow banishment of an outsider to home plane (only to demi-dimension) and the PHB's Ban Smite doesn't allow a concentration break to return an outsider that was sent to its home plane.
I was debating back and forth whether or not to make Divine Smite the "default smite", the bread-and-butter version and how to achieve that without simply granting the Paladin a hefty amount of damage per day compared to most other classes in the early game. I also wanted to scale it while having removed the opportunity to "upcast" Smites. In the end I actually made Paladins weaker in any given encounter before character level 11 as the regular Divine Smite deals less damage than before and all their other Smite variants basically costs one spell level more than currently. This also makes in-combat spell slot conversion a tad awkward or rather slow because you need two turns to convert two level one spell slots to fuel a Thunderous Smite for instance and it costs your bonus action on those turns. This means you often prefer to do conversions out of combat and this will force decision making between refilling your Smite Points before the next fight or keep your spell slots and deal with the more arduous conversion while in action if need be.
The higher costs are partially off-set by the amount of Smite Points available per Long Rest and also the ability to regain two Smite Points per Short Rest - meaning a level 2 Paladin with 2 short rests per day can Divine Smite upwards of 8 times for a total of 8d8 damage whereas the UA allows 3 Divine Smites for a total of 6d8 damage, gaining no benefit from short rests. A level 5 Paladin with 2 short rests under Smite Points will be able to deal 15d8 damage in 15 smites over the course of a day with the UA version dealing 16d8 in 7 smites which could be in their very first encounter. This shifts drastically at level 11 where Smite Points' Divine Smite upgrades to the 2d8 damage variant for a total of 50d8 versus UA's 31d8. However that is 25 smites versus 11.
The base Smite Points basically reflects the one free smite you get in the UA, however instead of feeling "forced" to use it on your most powerful Smite variant for "optimal gain", you're given a much more flexible model. This also makes it a lot easier to potentially have class or subclass features or even feats that interact with your Smite Points, either using them for something else or increasing the maximum amount, or granting increased or alternative ways to regain points, much more than spell slots could.
Why are you giving them another resource to track without removing the resource they already use? You are technically just giving them more power while making resource management tougher.
Why are you giving them another resource to track without removing the resource they already use? You are technically just giving them more power while making resource management tougher.
I don't know what resource you're referring to that you think I should remove. Looking through the different resources Paladins currently have, I do lean towards agreeing with you that they have a lot of small stuff to keep track of. However the UA seems to have helped clean some of that up.
In current PHB you keep track of: Spell Slots, Channel Divinity, Lay on Hands, Divine Sense, (Optional) Harness Divine Power, and Cleansing Touch. Most subclasses have a once per long rest resource, but it is often their level 20 with two having one at level 15, and one of them being more than once per long rest. (Harness Divine Power: convert Channel Divinity to spell slot, which has not been adapted in the UA)
In the UA you keep track of: Spell Slots, Channel Divinity, Lay on Hands, and your one free Smite cast per long rest. (In the UA they absorbed Divine Sense into Channel Divinity and gave you 2 uses of Channel Divinity with short rest regaining one use and long rest regaining all uses, upgraded to 3 uses from lvl 11. Similarly they removed Cleansing Touch and instead gave Paladin the option to remove most conditions with their Lay on Hands similar to how they could already remove poisons and disease. They can't end spells anymore.)
Using the UA as a basis and replacing the one free Smite cast with Smite Points doesn't seem like a big deal, especially since you can keep track of Smite Points on a d6.
That being said it could be considered to meld the Channel Divinity mechanic (and resource) into this mechanic and then rebrand it something like Divine Power. The cost of different Channel Divinities can then be either fixed across all subclasses or have separate costs that balances cost to effect. Granted this gives Paladin way more flexibility for using their Channel Divinities, but that doesn't necessarily seem like a bad thing. Do keep in mind that the UA has limited Channel Divinity options to one per subclass (except Devotion) and tweaked some of them. Of course there is also Divine Sense as part of the Paladin class features as a Channel Divinity option. One moderate issue here is that using Channel Divinities are mostly done with a bonus action, which clashes with the spell slot conversion feature of Smite Points. But that might just be a resource management limitation that is healthy overall.
For the second part of your comment, I don't agree that I just gave Paladins more power. I gave them more flexibility to cast Smites. I actually believe I made them categorically weaker, at least up until level 11. In terms of damage they are only stronger when considering their ceiling / maximum damage but not in efficiency - they do it slower, much slower. However due to the conversion option, they are a lot more flexible and can use their Smites, especially higher powered Smites, more than currently by sacrificing their magic.
At level 17 a Paladin with Smite Points could cast Banishing Smite 7 times over the course of a day. They have 6 points per long rest and can convert all their spell slots (over the course of a day, minding the 6 point maximum at even given time) to 36 Smite Points for a total of 42 points (+2 per short rest, but irrelevant here). Banishing Smite costs 6 points per use for a total of 7 times, again over the course of a day.
The UA version can cast Banishing Smite only twice per day and the current PHB only once.
However that is also draining all your magic into Smite Points to accomplish that and it will take a lot of time. Furthermore to be perfectly honest Banishing Smite is not that powerful (in the UA the target gets a CHA saving throw like if it was Banishment). If Banishment was that powerful there would be an uproar about a level 17 Sorcerer who could cast lvl 4 Banishments up to 15 times per day. The Banishing Smite's damage of 5d10 force is neither that great for the level 5 spell slot when comparing an upcast Divine Smite at level 4 (its maximum) deals 5d8 Radiant - or for that matter when compared to a lvl 5 Fireball's 10d6 or a Cone of Cold's 8d8. As such I sincerely doubt Paladin will be considered overpowered on the basis of the flexibility of this mechanic. Even with the cantrip-like Divine Smite I made for Smite Points that deals 3d8 radiant (at PC lvl 17) for 1 point per use (the point where this Paladin is likely at its strongest damage-wise), again a level 17 Paladin can achieve 42 + 2 points per short rest for a maximum of 46 points / casts of Divine Smite. That's a total average of 621 Radiant damage over the course of 46 rounds. Lets add the level 11 Radiant Strikes' 1d8 atop and account for Extra Attacks with RS for a total average of 1,035 Radiant (not accounting weapon damage obviously). If we place a level 17 Rogue at his side, his Sneak Attacks deals a comparable 46 hits * 9d6 or 1,449 damage. The Paladin is still not winning any damage competitions, and neither should they, but they will not lack as far behind whilst Smiting a lot more than currently.
I still think that this is a better Paladin smite formula than what we have now:
Move "Divine Smite" from a spell to a "Channel Divinity" that does the same damage as the Cleric's DIvine Spark CD
Give the Paladin the "True Strike" cantrip as part of the 2nd level feature that currently gives them the Divine Smite spell.
Give the Paladin's Extra Attack the rider that they can sacrifice one of their attacks to instead cast True Strike or a Cleric Cantrip that they know that has a range of 15 feet or less.
(why 15' or less? This basically includes every Cleric cantrip except the Cleric's ranged attack cantrips (Sacred Flame, Toll the Dead), but does include the new 15' range Spare the Dying. Most of the Cleric cantrips will be pretty harmless and not really what a Paladin would be doing in melee, so it keeps the Paladin focused on close quarters attack with Word of Radiance, a smite-like attack with True Strike, or saving an ally with Spare the Dying)
I still think that this is a better Paladin smite formula than what we have now:
Move "Divine Smite" from a spell to a "Channel Divinity" that does the same damage as the Cleric's DIvine Spark CD
Give the Paladin the "True Strike" cantrip as part of the 2nd level feature that currently gives them the Divine Smite spell.
Give the Paladin's Extra Attack the rider that they can sacrifice one of their attacks to instead cast True Strike or a Cleric Cantrip that they know that has a range of 15 feet or less.
(why 15' or less? This basically includes every Cleric cantrip except the Cleric's ranged attack cantrips (Sacred Flame, Toll the Dead), but does include the new 15' range Spare the Dying. Most of the Cleric cantrips will be pretty harmless and not really what a Paladin would be doing in melee, so it keeps the Paladin focused on close quarters attack with Word of Radiance, a smite-like attack with True Strike, or saving an ally with Spare the Dying)
But this would limit Divine Smite to 2-3 uses per long rest, with +1 per short rest (if we go by UA rules, otherwise it's 1 + 1 per short rest). That's not a lot of smiting, even if the damage is xd8, where x is your proficiency bonus. And aren't you afraid this will either overshadow or get overshadowed by the Channel Divinity granted by the Paladin subclass? Oath of Vengeance basically rides everything on their Vow of Enmity, so they will hardly ever use Divine Smite then. And if Divine Smite turns out too good to pass up, the entire subclass falls apart.
I'm not terribly enthusiastic about that proposition, unless we're also talking about increasing the amount of Channel Divinity uses available or some other ways to regain their uses - in combat.
True Strike is an action cantrip that grants advantage for one attack (on your next turn). I see little reason for a Paladin to forego their attack to cast this, and if they cannot get into range with their walking movement to make an attack, they can either ready an attack for when an enemy comes close, use dodge or cast a spell like Bless. With the flanking rules (which are optional, granted) advantage is fairly easy to acquire for parties with multiple melee combatants.
The Extra Attack rider to forego an attack to cast a Cleric cantrip (that they know) seems a bit contrived as now we need Paladins to know Cleric cantrips. This either rides or dies on picking up the Fighting Style Blessed Warrior to learn two Cleric cantrips, or you're limited to True Strike, or that Paladins now have cantrips or can just use short range Cleric cantrips as part of the Extra Attack feature without otherwise having access to them. As for True Strike; between the option of attacking twice or attacking once with advantage (here ignoring that True Strike first functions on your next turn), there's no reason to not attack twice, as you get the same amount of attack rolls but twice the damage if you can pass their AC. Exceptions may apply if you have disadvantage against a high AC target.
Personally I like the distinction between Paladins and Clerics, that Paladins are not that oriented on casting or healing, except when they use their Lay on Hands which is one of the most efficient and flexible healing abilities in the game but does require touch. Giving them access to Spare the Dying seems like a mistake to me. Furthermore Paladins are only half-caster, so putting more emphasis on direct spell casting seems to pull them away from their core, even if its only cantrips. Smite spells are exclusive to Paladin and is very iconic to the class (yes I know Searing can be picked up by Ranger and a few classes can pick up Paladin spells, hereunder Smites if they want). I feel like this part of the class should be more prominent than what it currently is.
I don't feel like this change puts much emphasis on Paladin being the Smiter of foes.
I still think that this is a better Paladin smite formula than what we have now:
Move "Divine Smite" from a spell to a "Channel Divinity" that does the same damage as the Cleric's DIvine Spark CD
Give the Paladin the "True Strike" cantrip as part of the 2nd level feature that currently gives them the Divine Smite spell.
Give the Paladin's Extra Attack the rider that they can sacrifice one of their attacks to instead cast True Strike or a Cleric Cantrip that they know that has a range of 15 feet or less.
Or how about an even simpler formula that apes off of the UA Druid mechanics:
1) Divine Smite become a Channel Divinity option that reads: When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend a use of your Channel Divinity as a bonus action to deal additional radiant damage to the target. This damage is a number of d8s equal to your proficiency bonus. 2) Allow Paladins to recharge their CD with spellslots like Druids can : (3rd or 5th level class feature) You can expend a spellslot to regain 1 use of your channel divinity (no action required).
1) Divine Smite become a Channel Divinity option that reads: When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend a use of your Channel Divinity as a bonus action to deal additional radiant damage to the target. This damage is a number of d8s equal to your proficiency bonus. 2) Allow Paladins to recharge their CD with spellslots like Druids can : (3rd or 5th level class feature) You can expend a spellslot to regain 1 use of your channel divinity (no action required).
I wouldn't tie it to the proficiency bonus or it'll be abusable in a multiclass. We really need to introduce the concept of class-specific proficiency bonus, but for Paladin there's probably room in the table to just specify it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
1) Divine Smite become a Channel Divinity option that reads: When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend a use of your Channel Divinity as a bonus action to deal additional radiant damage to the target. This damage is a number of d8s equal to your proficiency bonus. 2) Allow Paladins to recharge their CD with spellslots like Druids can : (3rd or 5th level class feature) You can expend a spellslot to regain 1 use of your channel divinity (no action required).
I wouldn't tie it to the proficiency bonus or it'll be abusable in a multiclass. We really need to introduce the concept of class-specific proficiency bonus, but for Paladin there's probably room in the table to just specify it.
Agreed. It might even be better to make it scale like cantrips but exclusively based on Paladin levels: 1d8 at Paladin 2, 2d8 at Paladin 5 level, 3d8 at Paladin 11, and 4d8 at Paladin 17.
I still think that this is a better Paladin smite formula than what we have now:
Move "Divine Smite" from a spell to a "Channel Divinity" that does the same damage as the Cleric's DIvine Spark CD
Give the Paladin the "True Strike" cantrip as part of the 2nd level feature that currently gives them the Divine Smite spell.
Give the Paladin's Extra Attack the rider that they can sacrifice one of their attacks to instead cast True Strike or a Cleric Cantrip that they know that has a range of 15 feet or less.
(why 15' or less? This basically includes every Cleric cantrip except the Cleric's ranged attack cantrips (Sacred Flame, Toll the Dead), but does include the new 15' range Spare the Dying. Most of the Cleric cantrips will be pretty harmless and not really what a Paladin would be doing in melee, so it keeps the Paladin focused on close quarters attack with Word of Radiance, a smite-like attack with True Strike, or saving an ally with Spare the Dying)
But this would limit Divine Smite to 2-3 uses per long rest, with +1 per short rest (if we go by UA rules, otherwise it's 1 + 1 per short rest). That's not a lot of smiting, even if the damage is xd8, where x is your proficiency bonus. And aren't you afraid this will either overshadow or get overshadowed by the Channel Divinity granted by the Paladin subclass? Oath of Vengeance basically rides everything on their Vow of Enmity, so they will hardly ever use Divine Smite then. And if Divine Smite turns out too good to pass up, the entire subclass falls apart.
I'm not terribly enthusiastic about that proposition, unless we're also talking about increasing the amount of Channel Divinity uses available or some other ways to regain their uses - in combat.
True Strike is an action cantrip that grants advantage for one attack (on your next turn). I see little reason for a Paladin to forego their attack to cast this, and if they cannot get into range with their walking movement to make an attack, they can either ready an attack for when an enemy comes close, use dodge or cast a spell like Bless. With the flanking rules (which are optional, granted) advantage is fairly easy to acquire for parties with multiple melee combatants.
The Extra Attack rider to forego an attack to cast a Cleric cantrip (that they know) seems a bit contrived as now we need Paladins to know Cleric cantrips. This either rides or dies on picking up the Fighting Style Blessed Warrior to learn two Cleric cantrips, or you're limited to True Strike, or that Paladins now have cantrips or can just use short range Cleric cantrips as part of the Extra Attack feature without otherwise having access to them. As for True Strike; between the option of attacking twice or attacking once with advantage (here ignoring that True Strike first functions on your next turn), there's no reason to not attack twice, as you get the same amount of attack rolls but twice the damage if you can pass their AC. Exceptions may apply if you have disadvantage against a high AC target.
Personally I like the distinction between Paladins and Clerics, that Paladins are not that oriented on casting or healing, except when they use their Lay on Hands which is one of the most efficient and flexible healing abilities in the game but does require touch. Giving them access to Spare the Dying seems like a mistake to me. Furthermore Paladins are only half-caster, so putting more emphasis on direct spell casting seems to pull them away from their core, even if its only cantrips. Smite spells are exclusive to Paladin and is very iconic to the class (yes I know Searing can be picked up by Ranger and a few classes can pick up Paladin spells, hereunder Smites if they want). I feel like this part of the class should be more prominent than what it currently is.
I don't feel like this change puts much emphasis on Paladin being the Smiter of foes.
Your entire reply seems to be predicated on not having seen the current version of True Strike (which is essentially a smite cantrip). Your analysis is entirely based on the 2014 version of the cantrip, so it’s not really relevant. Giving them True Strike plays INTO their Smitey nature, not away from it. The Smite Channel Divinity lets them have a few uses to nova smite, or also pile damage into the attack that doesn’t get substituted. All of that in addition to whatever their smite spells might be.
The wording I gave for Extra Attack is so that IF a Paladin wants to use their Fighting Style to pick up 2 cleric cantrips they can ALSO use one of those cantrips (and not be limited to only using True Strike for that extra attack). But if they don’t bring back that Fighting Style (or even if they do), this wording also covers picking up some Cleric cantrips via Magic Initiate, but isn’t subject to abuse by throwing in any of attack cantrips that would heavily change the theme of the Paladin by making them a fire bolt machine, eldeitvh blast machine, etc.
And having Spare the Dying as a cantrip they can use as an attack substitute isn’t against the Paladin’s grain: they are already often the party’s back up healer. Letting them attack an enemy AND stabilize a character is entirely Paladin-like.
Your entire reply seems to be predicated on not having seen the current version of True Strike (which is essentially a smite cantrip). Your analysis is entirely based on the 2014 version of the cantrip, so it’s not really relevant. Giving them True Strike plays INTO their Smitey nature, not away from it. The Smite Channel Divinity lets them have a few uses to nova smite, or also pile damage into the attack that doesn’t get substituted. All of that in addition to whatever their smite spells might be.
The wording I gave for Extra Attack is so that IF a Paladin wants to use their Fighting Style to pick up 2 cleric cantrips they can ALSO use one of those cantrips (and not be limited to only using True Strike for that extra attack). But if they don’t bring back that Fighting Style (or even if they do), this wording also covers picking up some Cleric cantrips via Magic Initiate, but isn’t subject to abuse by throwing in any of attack cantrips that would heavily change the theme of the Paladin by making them a fire bolt machine, eldeitvh blast machine, etc.
And having Spare the Dying as a cantrip they can use as an attack substitute isn’t against the Paladin’s grain: they are already often the party’s back up healer. Letting them attack an enemy AND stabilize a character is entirely Paladin-like.
You're right that I was under the impression that you were talking about the current version of True Strike and not the UA version. I didn't know about that change. When referring to an existing feature, spell, or similar gameplay item, it would have been a nice gesture to specify that you were talking about a changed variant.
As for the UA version of True Strike, it's somewhat akin to Warlock's UA Pact of the Blade, to substitute your attack's ability modifier (STR or DEX) for your spell casting modifier (CHA) and then it gets the cantrip upgrade treatment with a d6 die - and like Pact of the Blade it can also change damage type. It's not bad as a substitute Divine Smite, even though I'd rather prefer that Smites are a limited resource but generally more available than currently, but this is a nice consolation prize, I'll give you that. There is still the slight awkwardness that it scales off of character level. However it is "locked" behind a level 5 class feature, so it is hardly a big deal - you need to invest quite a bit into the class to achieve it.
Edit: Still not a fan of casting Spare the Dying during an attack action.
I believe you can use your background feat to pick up pact of the blade now, so true strike has very little value to the paladin imo.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Rogues can use a BA to gain advantage now can't they? Careful Aim or something like that? I think it came out with Tasha's
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
Steady Aim, yeah, but you give up your movement to do it; it requires you to already be within short range though (or have Sharpshooter) otherwise it's cancelling out the disadvantage you'll have for being at long range. You can use it with melee attacks as well though if you're already next to the target.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
It's worth pointing out that needing advantage for Sneak Attack is far less of an obstacle with One D&D, as the Vex mastery gives advantage on the user's next attack roll against a target - and given how finesse/ranged weapons have little to no access to other desirable Weapon Mastery properties, there is never any reason for a Rogue to not be using a Vex primary weapon given its synergy with Sneak Attack.
You're really cooking the books by using a longsword and 15 rounds of combat per day. However, I'm willing to model the dex paladin, who probably does pick up dueling fighting style.
Our daily allocation of smites, assuming we don't do anything special for applying conditions (the rogue isn't trying to use cunning strike) is
Total 28d8 [126] bonus damage, or [147] if using the greatsword. It takes 13 rounds for the rogue to catch up to the shield/rapier dex paladin, 21 to catch up with the great weapon paladin, and as we've already discussed, more than 10 rounds is pretty unrealistic.
This is indeed true of hand crossbow, which two hand crossbows and crossbow expert makes it a very powerful option for rogue, however you'd need to be in 30 foot or have sharpshooter to go with that since hand crossbows are 30/120. Alternatively drop crossbow expert and just put your second hand crossbow away after the first round, you only get vex when you hit but then you have advantage and are very unlikely to drop it particularly quickly.
The rogue often needs to spend their BA too, is my point - whether on Steady Aim, Cunning Action Hide, or the offhand attack for a second chance at sneak attack.
Consider both classes at level 5 - Assuming 18s for both of them, Rogue with a Rapier does 1d8+4+3d6 (avg 4.5+4+10.5 = 19) while the Paladin with a longsword and Dueling Style is doing 2d8+12 (avg 9+12=21). The paladin is already ahead on resourceless damage without considering smite or concentrating on anything. Now once you factor in advantage and chance to hit, the Rogue pulls ahead, but they're also behind defensively on multiple fronts (worse AC, worse HP, and if they want to stick to range the weapon damage drops too) and they will end up losing DPR needing to do things like disengage or hide because they can't just hang around in melee with a rapier and leather armor with no shield. Even the Swashbuckler can't do that.
As for disregarding MAD - again, MAD only matters if you're trying to max out two stats for your damage and/or defenses. If you're perfectly happy with one staying at 16 or 14, that's not MAD. A cleric with a 14 Dex and Con is not MAD, because those stats never need to go any higher - the same is true for a paladin with 14 Con and Cha.
1) Does rogue need to use their BA? They have a lot of options with BA, and so they choose to use the BA. But if you strike a killing blow and no other enemies in 5 foot, do you need too? Or if you're using ranged attacks? Steady Aim is good until level 13, at which point it's pointless and you'd never use it again, or if you're benefiting from the vex property? Rogue is not being forced to use that BA to perform their damage. Now the argument could be made with TWF or crossbow expert that they are, and I'd agree with that, but then the nick property exists which mitigates that in the UA for scimitar.
2) level 5 is an abnormality, Rogue is a class who's base DPR increases relatively consistently, basically the only class in the game that does it so consistently. 5 Difference classes get extra attack at level 5, rogue is the only non-caster that does not. However, I'd be remiss to point out that Rogue can use 2 Scimitar at level 1 in the UA, and so can also make two attacks, it'd be switching 1d8+4 for 2d6+4, but they can do this, at this point rogue is already ahead. Rogue is not a tank, so obviously they don't have the AC and HP of one, however they still have numerous defensive features on top of offering party utility that paladin simply doesn't have, a paladin is not picking locks, searching for traps, scouting a head, etc.
Of course paladin could use great sword or polearms, I get that, but the 2 scimitar thing is kind of important a note for Rogue for just how good it is. Going to a greatsword or polearm for a paladin requires taking feats or building towards but 2 scimitar is sort of a default best melee option in the UA, since it gives a second chance of getting that sneak attack in if you miss your first attack and doesn't even cost BA to use, which massively increases the chance of sneak attack. 2 short swords also work as a potential way to sneak attack without allies within 5 foot but hand crossbow does the same job and is far safer, you just put down the second handcross bow once your into vex and pull out another if you lose vex on a later round... hand crossbow has some brokenness in latest UA.
3) Charisma is defence for Paladin, Saving throws are defence and not just your own, if you get hit by a dragon's breath, or a mages AoE spell, that defence can save more than just yourself as a paladin, it's a higher chance to make saves and avoid a number of other nasty effects too. There seems to be quiet a disparity of people who think Aura of Protection is the strongest feature ever and those who think it's basically worthless and not worth increasing... I'm guessing you're the latter if you're thinking like this. I personally believe Aura of Protection is a vital support and role of the Paladin class that separates it from fighter and barbarian in how it plays and operates, smites are just damage whereas spellcasting and auras are utility which actually makes paladin different in combat.
I do think Aura of Protection is a great feature, but you're still overvaluing it. It's a nice to have, not a necessity. Are you saying that parties that don't have a paladin are useless/fodder against a dragon's breath or any random mage? Especially since the entire party is highly unlikely to be within 10ft of the paladin, and if they are, they're probably eating more damage with such bad positioning than the aura can compensate for; it doesn't expand to 30ft until 18th level, and even then, you probably want the party spread out further than that in a lot of endgame fights. So sacrificing all your other stats/making yourself MAD to pump Charisma is just bad character building unless you're specifically going for something like a Lockadin or Soradin that can afford lower Str and Con instead.
As for the rogue - yes, they can TWF and use nick mastery, but they're still putting themselves at risk to do so. Sure they can Disengage for free, but they're still going to be within melee range of a lot of enemies doing that. If the enemy can walk up and multiattack you in one turn, you're in melee, even if you ended your turn more than 5ft away; 5e isn't 3.5 or PF where any movement at all keeps you from getting all your attacks. And the melee rogue is going to have lower defenses than even a monk, much less a paladin.
I'm not saying Paladin is getting the whole party with their auras, but the auras really help a lot. It can still be the difference between a victory and a TPK in some instances. Aura of protection not the strongest defensive ability in the game, but it is permanently active while the paladin is up and all allies in range do benefit from it, that is likely to be other melee fighters, include rogue, fighter, barbarian, monk, melee ranger, gish builds, circle of the moon druid and a couple of other potential classes. It is also potentially traps, environmental damage, and unexpected or expected spells.
Monk and Rogue have evasion and generally are only going to try and position themselves where they are in range of only one enemy most of the time, they will retreat which means anything that goes after them is suspect to opportunity attacks, it is of course not risk free but the rewards should be greater than being the ranged rogue who sits back 30 foot and uses two crossbows. As the paladin you are meant to be taking more hits and will generally take more hits than a rogue, so not certain where this comparison is going since rogue serves another important role in the party whereas paladin's only other role outside of being that front-line tanker is based on charisma being a broken social ability score. Rogue still gets thieves cant so they can go to the shadier parts of town and get that information other classes can't, so not entirely out in the cold on social encounters either.
From what I've seen in the UA playtests, most classes seem to have been improved - quite possibly because they needed it. Paladin however seems to have been changed rather sparingly - with the major changes being Lay on Hands being changed from action to bonus action and most Smites not requiring concentration. Now we might actually see more use of spell slots to cast support spells in addition to Smiting. On that note I don't get why Shining Smite (the rebranded Branding Smite) still requires concentration. Overall it's also my perception that the Paladin class is generally considered quite good and these changes are unlikely to make them the bottom of the barrel.
With that being said I would like to say that the new Smite subcategory feels like a half-measure. I'm not terribly happy about the one free smite per long rest + the bonus action cost of the regular Divine Smite. The free smite is not a leveled slot so it'll mostly get used for the highest level smite available with applicable utility to make the most out of the free spell, making the regular Divine Smite a suboptimal choice. I get the reasoning for restricting Smite to once per turn, but that could literally just be configured like Sneak Attack - which would also get rid of the bonus action cost of using a Smite + you could use it for a Reaction or Bonus Action attack.
I want to explore some design space for Smite because Smiting feels like a very iconic Paladin feature, more so than tanking or healing. I'm going to steal the basis for the feature from Sorcerer's Sorcery Points as a separate resource (including the conversion of spell slots to points but not points to slots) and couple it with the trigger from Rogue's Sneak Attack. I will let the Smite Points follow your proficiency bonus in strictly Paladin levels. Aka:
Lvl 2 - 4: 2 points
Lvl 5 - 8: 3 points
Lvl 9 - 12: 4 points
Lvl 13 - 16: 5 points
Lvl 17 - 20: 6 points
The class feature would look something like this:
Divine Smite
Starting at 2nd level, your strong convictions allows you to tap into divine power to empower your strikes to fell your foes.
Once per turn, when you hit a creature with a melee weapon or unarmed strike, you may spend an amount of Smite Points to infuse your attack with one Smite Power.
Paladin Level // Smite Point cost // Smite power (easy reference effect)
2 1 Divine Smite* +1d8 Radiant, 2d8 at PC lvl 11, 3d8 at PC lvl 17
2 2 Thunderous Smite +2d6 Thunder + knock back and Prone
2 2 Searing Smite +1d6 Fire + target on fire (1d6 per start of turn, ending on a successful CON save after taking fire damage)
5 2 Chilling Smite* +2d6 Cold + 5 ft. selective AoE slow by 10 ft. on a failed CON save
5 2 Wrathful Smite* +1d6 Psychic + 1d6 Radiant + Frightened
5 3 Shining Smite* +2d8 Radiant + invis-break
9 4 Blinding Smite +3d8 Radiant + blinded on failed CON save, may repeat saving throw at end of their turn
13 5 Staggering Smite +4d6 Psychic + Stun on failed CON save
17 6 Banishing Smite* +5d10 Force + Banishment if target below 50 hit points. Uses a separate concentration condition than spell concentration.
* indicates a change from UA or current version. See spoiler.
Divine Smite: Damage reduced to 1d8 Radiant damage from 2d8. However like a cantrip it increases in power to 2d8 at level 11 and 3d8 at level 17 - yes skipping the level 5 upgrade.
(New) Chilling Smite: Your attack deals an extra 2d6 Cold damage and the target plus any number of other creatures of your choice that you can see within 5 feet of the target each must make a Constitution saving throw or have its movement reduced by 10 feet until the end of its next turn.
Wrathful Smite: Damage increased from 1d6 psychic to 1d6 psychic plus 1d6 radiant.
Shining Smite: Damage increased from 2d6 Radiant to 2d8 Radiant. No longer requires concentration but doesn't grant attackers advantage. It lasts the full 60 second duration where the target emits dim light in a 5 foot radius and the target cannot benefit from invisibility and have disadvantage on stealth checks that rely on sight.
Banishing Smite: Doesn't utilize concentration like a spell but if you receive damage while the banishment is active you must succeed a Constitution saving throw, benefitting from any bonuses to maintain concentration, or the Banishment is cancelled. Also utilizes the wording from the Banishment spell regarding where the target ends up rather than Banishing Smite from either PHB or the UA. The UA doesn't allow banishment of an outsider to home plane (only to demi-dimension) and the PHB's Ban Smite doesn't allow a concentration break to return an outsider that was sent to its home plane.
I was debating back and forth whether or not to make Divine Smite the "default smite", the bread-and-butter version and how to achieve that without simply granting the Paladin a hefty amount of damage per day compared to most other classes in the early game. I also wanted to scale it while having removed the opportunity to "upcast" Smites. In the end I actually made Paladins weaker in any given encounter before character level 11 as the regular Divine Smite deals less damage than before and all their other Smite variants basically costs one spell level more than currently. This also makes in-combat spell slot conversion a tad awkward or rather slow because you need two turns to convert two level one spell slots to fuel a Thunderous Smite for instance and it costs your bonus action on those turns. This means you often prefer to do conversions out of combat and this will force decision making between refilling your Smite Points before the next fight or keep your spell slots and deal with the more arduous conversion while in action if need be.
The higher costs are partially off-set by the amount of Smite Points available per Long Rest and also the ability to regain two Smite Points per Short Rest - meaning a level 2 Paladin with 2 short rests per day can Divine Smite upwards of 8 times for a total of 8d8 damage whereas the UA allows 3 Divine Smites for a total of 6d8 damage, gaining no benefit from short rests. A level 5 Paladin with 2 short rests under Smite Points will be able to deal 15d8 damage in 15 smites over the course of a day with the UA version dealing 16d8 in 7 smites which could be in their very first encounter. This shifts drastically at level 11 where Smite Points' Divine Smite upgrades to the 2d8 damage variant for a total of 50d8 versus UA's 31d8. However that is 25 smites versus 11.
The base Smite Points basically reflects the one free smite you get in the UA, however instead of feeling "forced" to use it on your most powerful Smite variant for "optimal gain", you're given a much more flexible model. This also makes it a lot easier to potentially have class or subclass features or even feats that interact with your Smite Points, either using them for something else or increasing the maximum amount, or granting increased or alternative ways to regain points, much more than spell slots could.
Why are you giving them another resource to track without removing the resource they already use? You are technically just giving them more power while making resource management tougher.
I don't know what resource you're referring to that you think I should remove. Looking through the different resources Paladins currently have, I do lean towards agreeing with you that they have a lot of small stuff to keep track of. However the UA seems to have helped clean some of that up.
In current PHB you keep track of: Spell Slots, Channel Divinity, Lay on Hands, Divine Sense, (Optional) Harness Divine Power, and Cleansing Touch. Most subclasses have a once per long rest resource, but it is often their level 20 with two having one at level 15, and one of them being more than once per long rest.
(Harness Divine Power: convert Channel Divinity to spell slot, which has not been adapted in the UA)
In the UA you keep track of: Spell Slots, Channel Divinity, Lay on Hands, and your one free Smite cast per long rest.
(In the UA they absorbed Divine Sense into Channel Divinity and gave you 2 uses of Channel Divinity with short rest regaining one use and long rest regaining all uses, upgraded to 3 uses from lvl 11. Similarly they removed Cleansing Touch and instead gave Paladin the option to remove most conditions with their Lay on Hands similar to how they could already remove poisons and disease. They can't end spells anymore.)
Using the UA as a basis and replacing the one free Smite cast with Smite Points doesn't seem like a big deal, especially since you can keep track of Smite Points on a d6.
That being said it could be considered to meld the Channel Divinity mechanic (and resource) into this mechanic and then rebrand it something like Divine Power. The cost of different Channel Divinities can then be either fixed across all subclasses or have separate costs that balances cost to effect. Granted this gives Paladin way more flexibility for using their Channel Divinities, but that doesn't necessarily seem like a bad thing. Do keep in mind that the UA has limited Channel Divinity options to one per subclass (except Devotion) and tweaked some of them. Of course there is also Divine Sense as part of the Paladin class features as a Channel Divinity option. One moderate issue here is that using Channel Divinities are mostly done with a bonus action, which clashes with the spell slot conversion feature of Smite Points. But that might just be a resource management limitation that is healthy overall.
For the second part of your comment, I don't agree that I just gave Paladins more power. I gave them more flexibility to cast Smites. I actually believe I made them categorically weaker, at least up until level 11.
In terms of damage they are only stronger when considering their ceiling / maximum damage but not in efficiency - they do it slower, much slower. However due to the conversion option, they are a lot more flexible and can use their Smites, especially higher powered Smites, more than currently by sacrificing their magic.
At level 17 a Paladin with Smite Points could cast Banishing Smite 7 times over the course of a day. They have 6 points per long rest and can convert all their spell slots (over the course of a day, minding the 6 point maximum at even given time) to 36 Smite Points for a total of 42 points (+2 per short rest, but irrelevant here). Banishing Smite costs 6 points per use for a total of 7 times, again over the course of a day.
The UA version can cast Banishing Smite only twice per day and the current PHB only once.
However that is also draining all your magic into Smite Points to accomplish that and it will take a lot of time. Furthermore to be perfectly honest Banishing Smite is not that powerful (in the UA the target gets a CHA saving throw like if it was Banishment). If Banishment was that powerful there would be an uproar about a level 17 Sorcerer who could cast lvl 4 Banishments up to 15 times per day. The Banishing Smite's damage of 5d10 force is neither that great for the level 5 spell slot when comparing an upcast Divine Smite at level 4 (its maximum) deals 5d8 Radiant - or for that matter when compared to a lvl 5 Fireball's 10d6 or a Cone of Cold's 8d8. As such I sincerely doubt Paladin will be considered overpowered on the basis of the flexibility of this mechanic.
Even with the cantrip-like Divine Smite I made for Smite Points that deals 3d8 radiant (at PC lvl 17) for 1 point per use (the point where this Paladin is likely at its strongest damage-wise), again a level 17 Paladin can achieve 42 + 2 points per short rest for a maximum of 46 points / casts of Divine Smite. That's a total average of 621 Radiant damage over the course of 46 rounds. Lets add the level 11 Radiant Strikes' 1d8 atop and account for Extra Attacks with RS for a total average of 1,035 Radiant (not accounting weapon damage obviously). If we place a level 17 Rogue at his side, his Sneak Attacks deals a comparable 46 hits * 9d6 or 1,449 damage. The Paladin is still not winning any damage competitions, and neither should they, but they will not lack as far behind whilst Smiting a lot more than currently.
I still think that this is a better Paladin smite formula than what we have now:
(why 15' or less? This basically includes every Cleric cantrip except the Cleric's ranged attack cantrips (Sacred Flame, Toll the Dead), but does include the new 15' range Spare the Dying. Most of the Cleric cantrips will be pretty harmless and not really what a Paladin would be doing in melee, so it keeps the Paladin focused on close quarters attack with Word of Radiance, a smite-like attack with True Strike, or saving an ally with Spare the Dying)
But this would limit Divine Smite to 2-3 uses per long rest, with +1 per short rest (if we go by UA rules, otherwise it's 1 + 1 per short rest). That's not a lot of smiting, even if the damage is xd8, where x is your proficiency bonus. And aren't you afraid this will either overshadow or get overshadowed by the Channel Divinity granted by the Paladin subclass? Oath of Vengeance basically rides everything on their Vow of Enmity, so they will hardly ever use Divine Smite then. And if Divine Smite turns out too good to pass up, the entire subclass falls apart.
I'm not terribly enthusiastic about that proposition, unless we're also talking about increasing the amount of Channel Divinity uses available or some other ways to regain their uses - in combat.
True Strike is an action cantrip that grants advantage for one attack (on your next turn). I see little reason for a Paladin to forego their attack to cast this, and if they cannot get into range with their walking movement to make an attack, they can either ready an attack for when an enemy comes close, use dodge or cast a spell like Bless. With the flanking rules (which are optional, granted) advantage is fairly easy to acquire for parties with multiple melee combatants.
The Extra Attack rider to forego an attack to cast a Cleric cantrip (that they know) seems a bit contrived as now we need Paladins to know Cleric cantrips. This either rides or dies on picking up the Fighting Style Blessed Warrior to learn two Cleric cantrips, or you're limited to True Strike, or that Paladins now have cantrips or can just use short range Cleric cantrips as part of the Extra Attack feature without otherwise having access to them.
As for True Strike; between the option of attacking twice or attacking once with advantage (here ignoring that True Strike first functions on your next turn), there's no reason to not attack twice, as you get the same amount of attack rolls but twice the damage if you can pass their AC. Exceptions may apply if you have disadvantage against a high AC target.
Personally I like the distinction between Paladins and Clerics, that Paladins are not that oriented on casting or healing, except when they use their Lay on Hands which is one of the most efficient and flexible healing abilities in the game but does require touch. Giving them access to Spare the Dying seems like a mistake to me. Furthermore Paladins are only half-caster, so putting more emphasis on direct spell casting seems to pull them away from their core, even if its only cantrips. Smite spells are exclusive to Paladin and is very iconic to the class (yes I know Searing can be picked up by Ranger and a few classes can pick up Paladin spells, hereunder Smites if they want). I feel like this part of the class should be more prominent than what it currently is.
I don't feel like this change puts much emphasis on Paladin being the Smiter of foes.
Or how about an even simpler formula that apes off of the UA Druid mechanics:
1) Divine Smite become a Channel Divinity option that reads: When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend a use of your Channel Divinity as a bonus action to deal additional radiant damage to the target. This damage is a number of d8s equal to your proficiency bonus.
2) Allow Paladins to recharge their CD with spellslots like Druids can : (3rd or 5th level class feature) You can expend a spellslot to regain 1 use of your channel divinity (no action required).
I wouldn't tie it to the proficiency bonus or it'll be abusable in a multiclass. We really need to introduce the concept of class-specific proficiency bonus, but for Paladin there's probably room in the table to just specify it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Agreed. It might even be better to make it scale like cantrips but exclusively based on Paladin levels: 1d8 at Paladin 2, 2d8 at Paladin 5 level, 3d8 at Paladin 11, and 4d8 at Paladin 17.
Your entire reply seems to be predicated on not having seen the current version of True Strike (which is essentially a smite cantrip). Your analysis is entirely based on the 2014 version of the cantrip, so it’s not really relevant. Giving them True Strike plays INTO their Smitey nature, not away from it. The Smite Channel Divinity lets them have a few uses to nova smite, or also pile damage into the attack that doesn’t get substituted. All of that in addition to whatever their smite spells might be.
The wording I gave for Extra Attack is so that IF a Paladin wants to use their Fighting Style to pick up 2 cleric cantrips they can ALSO use one of those cantrips (and not be limited to only using True Strike for that extra attack). But if they don’t bring back that Fighting Style (or even if they do), this wording also covers picking up some Cleric cantrips via Magic Initiate, but isn’t subject to abuse by throwing in any of attack cantrips that would heavily change the theme of the Paladin by making them a fire bolt machine, eldeitvh blast machine, etc.
And having Spare the Dying as a cantrip they can use as an attack substitute isn’t against the Paladin’s grain: they are already often the party’s back up healer. Letting them attack an enemy AND stabilize a character is entirely Paladin-like.
You're right that I was under the impression that you were talking about the current version of True Strike and not the UA version. I didn't know about that change. When referring to an existing feature, spell, or similar gameplay item, it would have been a nice gesture to specify that you were talking about a changed variant.
As for the UA version of True Strike, it's somewhat akin to Warlock's UA Pact of the Blade, to substitute your attack's ability modifier (STR or DEX) for your spell casting modifier (CHA) and then it gets the cantrip upgrade treatment with a d6 die - and like Pact of the Blade it can also change damage type. It's not bad as a substitute Divine Smite, even though I'd rather prefer that Smites are a limited resource but generally more available than currently, but this is a nice consolation prize, I'll give you that. There is still the slight awkwardness that it scales off of character level. However it is "locked" behind a level 5 class feature, so it is hardly a big deal - you need to invest quite a bit into the class to achieve it.
Edit: Still not a fan of casting Spare the Dying during an attack action.
I believe you can use your background feat to pick up pact of the blade now, so true strike has very little value to the paladin imo.
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