I like the idea of this subclass, but its mechanical execution is either too resource intensive for the result or it doesn't seem to pack a punch. The following are considerations to make the Paladin Spellguard a more viable subclass.
Level 3 Features
Guardian Bond
It costs a magic action, a channel divinity, and a reaction to give a one-time parry to an attack if the bonded creature is 5 ft from you.
This is alot of resources for a one-time benefit against an attack for a creature that has to be only 5ft away.
Alternatively, don't have it cost a reaction: just have the bonded creature gain the AC bonus if it's within 5ft of you, it's essentially a lesser warding bond, but no resistance, just the AC boost for the duration while they're within range. At level 6, when the aura of protection becomes active, the bond creature benefits from that new aura range.
Subclass Spell List
Generally like the spell selection, but if the focus is to shut down casters, I'd consider the following:
Level 2: switch out See Invisibility for Hypnotic Pattern
Level 4: switch out Freedom of Movement for Banishment
Level 5: switch out Hallow for Synaptic Static
Spellguard Strike
The reaction hit should hinder the caster from casting the spell by:
Either the reaction hit rolled a critical hit,
Or, it forces the caster to do a concentration check at disadvantage (like Mage Slayer)
A failure results in the caster rolling a spell attack roll with a d4 reduction (like Bane) or the caster's target gets to add a d4 to their saving throw (like Bless).
As this is a separate effect from Bane and Bless, its effects would stack
A successful reaction hit would still damage regardless if the added effect succeeds or fails
Level 15 Feature
Spell-Breaking Blade
Since this is tied to Spellguard Strike, the added effect condition test remains:
Either the reaction hit rolled a critical hit,
Or, it forces the caster to do a concentration check at disadvantage (like Mage Slayer)
A failure results in Counterspell being cast successfully while expending a spell slot (no need for the Counterspell test since the condition required a test to begin with), and the caster's spell fails but they get to keep that spell slot
A success results in the Level 3 Spellguard Strike failure of the added effect
The caster is essentially baned from the spell attack roll
The target of the spell is essentially blessed from the spell saving throw
A successful reaction hit would still damage regardless if the added effect succeeds or fails
Level 3 Guardian Bond's benefits align more with the channel divinity expenditure, the Level 3 spell adjustments align more with shutting down enemy casters, the Level 3 Spellguard Strike gives a Mage Slayer edge to the reaction, and Level 15 Spell-Breaking Blade improves upon the Level 3 Spellguard Strike feature.
It costs a magic action, a channel divinity, and a reaction to give a one-time parry to an attack if the bonded creature is 5 ft from you.
This is alot of resources for a one-time benefit against an attack for a creature that has to be only 5ft away.
Alternatively, don't have it cost a reaction: just have the bonded creature gain the AC bonus if it's within 5ft of you, it's essentially a lesser warding bond, but no resistance, just the AC boost for the duration while they're within range. At level 6, when the aura of protection becomes active, the bond creature benefits from that new aura range.
I disagree. It's a magic action and a channel divinity to establish a 1-hour bond. After that, you can use a reaction to provide an AC bonus that stacks with other AC bonuses that don't cost your reaction. You can use this reaction as many times as the triggering event occurs during the 1-hour period as long as you have your reaction available.
It gives the Paladin essentially an attack of opportunity against a spellcaster that they would not normally get and will force the spellcaster to make a saving throw to preserve concentration. There is a decent chance that they won't be proficient. It's fine the way it is. It is unfortunate that it competes with the Guardian Bond's reaction. If I would change anything is potentially not consuming the reaction if the spell is an attack that targets your bond, but that is probably too strong. Perhaps the bond's AC is increased per Guardian Bond against any attack rolls from the spell that triggered the reaction. That is probably still unnecessary.
Generally like the spell selection, but if the focus is to shut down casters, I'd consider the following:
Level 2: switch out See Invisibility for Hypnotic Pattern
Level 4: switch out Freedom of Movement for Banishment
Level 5: switch out Hallow for Synaptic Static
See Invisibility and Freedom of Movement are excellent choices and I wouldn't change them out. Synaptic Static is okay. It's an Intelligence AoE nuke with a debuff. Hallow is a decent choice and fits as an Abjuration spell. It's unfortunately a 24-hour cast time. It's good when you have the prep time.
Essentially casting Counterspell as part of an Attack of Opportunity when a creature casts a spell is awesome as long as you can cast it after they pass or fail their Constitution save to maintain Concentration. Add to that, failing to counter the spell doesn't use up the spell slot? Pretty amazing.
Technically, it does not require you to target the same spellcaster. You could hit one with your Spellguard Strike and cast Counterspell at another caster as part of the same reaction, but that is probably not intended.
It costs a magic action, a channel divinity, and a reaction to give a one-time parry to an attack if the bonded creature is 5 ft from you.
This is alot of resources for a one-time benefit against an attack for a creature that has to be only 5ft away.
Alternatively, don't have it cost a reaction: just have the bonded creature gain the AC bonus if it's within 5ft of you, it's essentially a lesser warding bond, but no resistance, just the AC boost for the duration while they're within range. At level 6, when the aura of protection becomes active, the bond creature benefits from that new aura range.
I disagree. It's a magic action and a channel divinity to establish a 1-hour bond. After that, you can use a reaction to provide an AC bonus that stacks with other AC bonuses that don't cost your reaction. You can use this reaction as many times as the triggering event occurs during the 1-hour period as long as you have your reaction available.
But the bond is a 1-time parry IF the creature remains within 5ft. If the creature leaves that reach, the resource is effectively wasted. Also, because it’s acting like parry instead of shield, the bonded creature only gets the benefit on the first attack. If the bonded creature is multi-attacked, the AC boost won’t work for the 2nd or 3rd attack. The way it’s worded, “potentially causing the attack to miss” singular. And you only have 1 reaction. Compare this to the Guardian Paladin, and it uses a reaction and a channel divinity to become the target instead of the bonded creature and it’s a 30ft range, thereby taking all the attacks.
It gives the Paladin essentially an attack of opportunity against a spellcaster that they would not normally get and will force the spellcaster to make a saving throw to preserve concentration. There is a decent chance that they won't be proficient. It's fine the way it is. It is unfortunate that it competes with the Guardian Bond's reaction. If I would change anything is potentially not consuming the reaction if the spell is an attack that targets your bond, but that is probably too strong. Perhaps the bond's AC is increased per Guardian Bond against any attack rolls from the spell that triggered the reaction. That is probably still unnecessary.
It doesn’t though. It triggers the AOO when the caster initially casts the spell, not while the caster is concentrating so that would only apply if the caster has already casted a concentration spell and is currently concentrating and then casted a new spell that triggers Spellguard Strike. Only then would there be a concentration check to dispel the concentrating spell but does nothing to the new spell the caster just casted. If the caster is not concentrating, it’s just a 1-time hit, and if that hit has a magic weapon proc or some other proc to disrupt the spell, it’s just a 1-time. If you don’t kill the caster, the spell still goes off. And it also competes with reaction of the bonded creature. There’s no synergy.
Generally like the spell selection, but if the focus is to shut down casters, I'd consider the following:
Level 2: switch out See Invisibility for Hypnotic Pattern
Level 4: switch out Freedom of Movement for Banishment
Level 5: switch out Hallow for Synaptic Static
See Invisibility and Freedom of Movement are excellent choices and I wouldn't change them out. Synaptic Static is okay. It's an Intelligence AoE nuke with a debuff. Hallow is a decent choice and fits as an Abjuration spell. It's unfortunately a 24-hour cast time. It's good when you have the prep
To each their own I guess? It’s a matter of preference. To me, Paladin spell slots are a limited commodity, so expending one on a spell that takes more than action is wasteful. Let a full caster with slots to spare have at it. See Invisibility is a spell I rarely see used by a caster to conceal themselves, and for me, doesn’t fit the theme of a spellguard paladin protecting their allies from villainous magic: best to shut down casters so that’s why I’d rather have those spells used then the other spells presented.
Essentially casting Counterspell as part of an Attack of Opportunity when a creature casts a spell is awesome as long as you can cast it after they pass or fail their Constitution save to maintain Concentration. Add to that, failing to counter the spell doesn't use up the spell slot? Pretty amazing.
Technically, it does not require you to target the same spellcaster. You could hit one with your Spellguard Strike and cast Counterspell at another caster as part of the same reaction, but that is probably not intended.
And Spell-Breaking Blade just improves from the changes I suggested to Spellguard Strike: with its main thing to hinder a caster from casting when it’s within range. I also don’t see Counterspell being used by another caster since the caster that triggered the AOO is the only one casting: how would a Counterspell go to another caster unless another caster was using their reaction to cast a spell, which is unlikely in the action economy.
It costs a magic action, a channel divinity, and a reaction to give a one-time parry to an attack if the bonded creature is 5 ft from you.
This is alot of resources for a one-time benefit against an attack for a creature that has to be only 5ft away.
Alternatively, don't have it cost a reaction: just have the bonded creature gain the AC bonus if it's within 5ft of you, it's essentially a lesser warding bond, but no resistance, just the AC boost for the duration while they're within range. At level 6, when the aura of protection becomes active, the bond creature benefits from that new aura range.
I disagree. It's a magic action and a channel divinity to establish a 1-hour bond. After that, you can use a reaction to provide an AC bonus that stacks with other AC bonuses that don't cost your reaction. You can use this reaction as many times as the triggering event occurs during the 1-hour period as long as you have your reaction available.
But the bond is a 1-time parry IF the creature remains within 5ft. If the creature leaves that reach, the resource is effectively wasted. Also, because it’s acting like parry instead of shield, the bonded creature only gets the benefit on the first attack. If the bonded creature is multi-attacked, the AC boost won’t work for the 2nd or 3rd attack. The way it’s worded, “potentially causing the attack to miss” singular. And you only have 1 reaction.
You have a few misconceptions:
It's a magic action to establish the bond and expends a channel divinity. I think we're on the same page here.
The creature has to be with 5 feet to establish the bond but can leave that range and come back with no issues. The bond only ends if the paladin has the unconscious condition, if the paladin forms a new bond, the paladin chooses to end the bond, or the hour time limit expires. If the creature moves more than 5 feet from you, that's fine.
During that time period, if the creature is hit by an attack and is within your reach (10 feet with a reach weapon, further with other effects), you can use your reaction to add your Charisma Modifier (+1 to +10, probably +3 at 3rd level) to the creatures AC.
Once you use this reaction, the bond continues and you can use the reaction every time the bonded creature is hit and you have your reaction available.
You will never get anywhere near the potential 600 reactions that this theoretically allowed, but a 1-hour duration is generally considered sufficient to potentially get through 2 or 3 encounters. With good time, you may be looking at a handful of uses for one Channel Divinity.
Compare this to the Guardian Paladin, and it uses a reaction and a channel divinity to become the target instead of the bonded creature and it’s a 30ft range, thereby taking all the attacks.
All I can find on a "Guardian Paladin" is some homebrew content. Let's keep comparison official and balanced content.
It gives the Paladin essentially an attack of opportunity against a spellcaster that they would not normally get and will force the spellcaster to make a saving throw to preserve concentration. There is a decent chance that they won't be proficient. It's fine the way it is. It is unfortunate that it competes with the Guardian Bond's reaction. If I would change anything is potentially not consuming the reaction if the spell is an attack that targets your bond, but that is probably too strong. Perhaps the bond's AC is increased per Guardian Bond against any attack rolls from the spell that triggered the reaction. That is probably still unnecessary.
It doesn’t though. It triggers the AOO when the caster initially casts the spell, not while the caster is concentrating so that would only apply if the caster has already casted a concentration spell and is currently concentrating and then casted a new spell that triggers Spellguard Strike. Only then would there be a concentration check to dispel the concentrating spell but does nothing to the new spell the caster just casted. If the caster is not concentrating, it’s just a 1-time hit, and if that hit has a magic weapon proc or some other proc to disrupt the spell, it’s just a 1-time. If you don’t kill the caster, the spell still goes off. And it also competes with reaction of the bonded creature. There’s no synergy.
Certain spells—including a spell cast as a Ritual—require more time to cast: minutes or even hours. While you cast a spell with a casting time of 1 minute or more, you must take the Magic action on each of your turns, and you must maintain Concentration (see the Rules Glossary) while you do so. If your Concentration is broken, the spell fails, but you don’t expend a spell slot. To cast the spell again, you must start over.
Now, I take this to mean that you must maintain Concentration until the spell is completed, but technically, it doesn't apply if the casting time is one Action, a Reaction, or a Bonus Action. I think the intention is that it does force a save so to be safe, I would suggest that they update the Sage Advice and/or state explicitly in Spellguard Strike that they must make a Save or lose the spell.
Either way, there doesn't need to be particular synergy. It is an ability that doesn't require a bonded creature. Additionally, it's not limited to spells that require attack rolls, so it gives you an option versus Save or suck spells, AoEs, control spells, or anything else you want to shut down. BBEG is teleporting away? Not before I get a hit in! Actually, what would be nice is if it was actually called an Attack of Opportunity for synergy with Sentinel.
Generally like the spell selection, but if the focus is to shut down casters, I'd consider the following:
Level 2: switch out See Invisibility for Hypnotic Pattern
Level 4: switch out Freedom of Movement for Banishment
Level 5: switch out Hallow for Synaptic Static
See Invisibility and Freedom of Movement are excellent choices and I wouldn't change them out. Synaptic Static is okay. It's an Intelligence AoE nuke with a debuff. Hallow is a decent choice and fits as an Abjuration spell. It's unfortunately a 24-hour cast time. It's good when you have the prep
To each their own I guess? It’s a matter of preference. To me, Paladin spell slots are a limited commodity, so expending one on a spell that takes more than action is wasteful. Let a full caster with slots to spare have at it. See Invisibility is a spell I rarely see used by a caster to conceal themselves, and for me, doesn’t fit the theme of a spellguard paladin protecting their allies from villainous magic: best to shut down casters so that’s why I’d rather have those spells used then the other spells presented.
Hallow is definitely meh. However, if you use it, it lasts indefinitely. It is never going to be a combat spell and you will probably have a long rest before you benefit from it. It should be a ritual spell, but that's not really here nor there. I feel like your alternative suggestion is basically a fire ball for Paladins with disappointing results against Wizards. Invisibility and control spells are a serious problem when they come up. You may have alternative solutions, like Faerie Fire or Misty Step, but the ones in UA definitely fit for Paladins seeking to battle other magic users.
Essentially casting Counterspell as part of an Attack of Opportunity when a creature casts a spell is awesome as long as you can cast it after they pass or fail their Constitution save to maintain Concentration. Add to that, failing to counter the spell doesn't use up the spell slot? Pretty amazing.
Technically, it does not require you to target the same spellcaster. You could hit one with your Spellguard Strike and cast Counterspell at another caster as part of the same reaction, but that is probably not intended.
And Spell-Breaking Blade just improves from the changes I suggested to Spellguard Strike: with its main thing to hinder a caster from casting when it’s within range. I also don’t see Counterspell being used by another caster since the caster that triggered the AOO is the only one casting: how would a Counterspell go to another caster unless another caster was using their reaction to cast a spell, which is unlikely in the action economy.
Like I said, it's probably not intended. You are overriding the reaction of Counterspell so there is the possibility that it also removes the targeting restriction. If it does, there would be very few cases where it would make a difference. Even if it doesn't allow it practically or otherwise, it's still a good ability.
It costs a magic action, a channel divinity, and a reaction to give a one-time parry to an attack if the bonded creature is 5 ft from you.
This is alot of resources for a one-time benefit against an attack for a creature that has to be only 5ft away.
Alternatively, don't have it cost a reaction: just have the bonded creature gain the AC bonus if it's within 5ft of you, it's essentially a lesser warding bond, but no resistance, just the AC boost for the duration while they're within range. At level 6, when the aura of protection becomes active, the bond creature benefits from that new aura range.
I disagree. It's a magic action and a channel divinity to establish a 1-hour bond. After that, you can use a reaction to provide an AC bonus that stacks with other AC bonuses that don't cost your reaction. You can use this reaction as many times as the triggering event occurs during the 1-hour period as long as you have your reaction available.
But the bond is a 1-time parry IF the creature remains within 5ft. If the creature leaves that reach, the resource is effectively wasted. Also, because it’s acting like parry instead of shield, the bonded creature only gets the benefit on the first attack. If the bonded creature is multi-attacked, the AC boost won’t work for the 2nd or 3rd attack. The way it’s worded, “potentially causing the attack to miss” singular. And you only have 1 reaction.
You have a few misconceptions:
It's a magic action to establish the bond and expends a channel divinity. I think we're on the same page here.
The creature has to be with 5 feet to establish the bond but can leave that range and come back with no issues. The bond only ends if the paladin has the unconscious condition, if the paladin forms a new bond, the paladin chooses to end the bond, or the hour time limit expires. If the creature moves more than 5 feet from you, that's fine.
During that time period, if the creature is hit by an attack and is within your reach (10 feet with a reach weapon, further with other effects), you can use your reaction to add your Charisma Modifier (+1 to +10, probably +3 at 3rd level) to the creatures AC.
Once you use this reaction, the bond continues and you can use the reaction every time the bonded creature is hit and you have your reaction available.
You will never get anywhere near the potential 600 reactions that this theoretically allowed, but a 1-hour duration is generally considered sufficient to potentially get through 2 or 3 encounters. With good time, you may be looking at a handful of uses for one Channel Divinity.
No misconception. We're on the same page. Still doesn't change the fact that if the bonded creature is not in your reach when they get hit, they don't get the AC boost, rendering the bond ineffective and the resource spent on it wasteful in my opinion. When you look at Vengeance Paladin, the channel divinity use will always grant advantage on a hit in its duration and transferrable. When you look at Devotion Paladin, the +10 hit is always used in its duration. When you look at Glory Paladin, the channel divinity use will always deliver the Temp HP, either to yourself or party members within 30 ft. When you look at Genie Paladin, its rider effects will always happen (with the exception of Marid's Surge with requires an enemy saving throw) with the channel divinity use. Ancient Paladin is the other one that has a channel divinity use which is conditional because it requires an enemy saving throw. With this Spellguard Paladin, you use a magic action and channel divinity to activate, and then a reaction to grant the benefit IF they're within reach (5ft unless they have a reach weapon). And not only that, but it only works on the first hit. If a monster has multi-attack, it won't work on the second and third attack because you've used your reaction on the first attack. You can have all the reactions you want, but it only works once on the first hit until you get a reaction back. Compare that to the Protection Feat that grants disadvantage on ALL attacks when they're within reach: it uses your reaction, but no other resources to activate or limits other than the reaction use. Also, compare this to Gift of the Metallic Dragon feat which does the same thing as Guardian Bond, but only costs a reaction and no other resources, and while its limited to proficiency bonus uses, it still doesn't use additional resources to activate it.
To me, a magic action, a channel divinity, AND a reaction is a lot of resources spent for a 1-time benefit in a round. And sure you're not spending the magic action and channel divinity again to keep it up, you're still spending a reaction to activate it. And if your bonded creature dies in combat, you'll have to spend those resources again to reforge the bond. TLDR: One reaction, 1 time benefit IF they're in reach. It doesn't matter that it lasts for an hour. It only grants a 1 time benefit in a round, again, if they're within reach and you using your reaction. Seems dumb and resource intensive to me.
It gives the Paladin essentially an attack of opportunity against a spellcaster that they would not normally get and will force the spellcaster to make a saving throw to preserve concentration. There is a decent chance that they won't be proficient. It's fine the way it is. It is unfortunate that it competes with the Guardian Bond's reaction. If I would change anything is potentially not consuming the reaction if the spell is an attack that targets your bond, but that is probably too strong. Perhaps the bond's AC is increased per Guardian Bond against any attack rolls from the spell that triggered the reaction. That is probably still unnecessary.
It doesn’t though. It triggers the AOO when the caster initially casts the spell, not while the caster is concentrating so that would only apply if the caster has already casted a concentration spell and is currently concentrating and then casted a new spell that triggers Spellguard Strike. Only then would there be a concentration check to dispel the concentrating spell but does nothing to the new spell the caster just casted. If the caster is not concentrating, it’s just a 1-time hit, and if that hit has a magic weapon proc or some other proc to disrupt the spell, it’s just a 1-time. If you don’t kill the caster, the spell still goes off. And it also competes with reaction of the bonded creature. There’s no synergy.
Certain spells—including a spell cast as a Ritual—require more time to cast: minutes or even hours. While you cast a spell with a casting time of 1 minute or more, you must take the Magic action on each of your turns, and you must maintain Concentration (see the Rules Glossary) while you do so. If your Concentration is broken, the spell fails, but you don’t expend a spell slot. To cast the spell again, you must start over.
Now, I take this to mean that you must maintain Concentration until the spell is completed, but technically, it doesn't apply if the casting time is one Action, a Reaction, or a Bonus Action. I think the intention is that it does force a save so to be safe, I would suggest that they update the Sage Advice and/or state explicitly in Spellguard Strike that they must make a Save or lose the spell.
Either way, there doesn't need to be particular synergy. It is an ability that doesn't require a bonded creature. Additionally, it's not limited to spells that require attack rolls, so it gives you an option versus Save or suck spells, AoEs, control spells, or anything else you want to shut down. BBEG is teleporting away? Not before I get a hit in! Actually, what would be nice is if it was actually called an Attack of Opportunity for synergy with Sentinel.
As it reads today in UA, all it does is allow for a hit and nothing else. During initiative, NO ONE is casting a spell longer than an action time, so while in theory you could interrupt a spell caster from casting a ritual or spell that's a minute or longer, but that's wouldn't be exclusive to this class ability. A minute during initiative is 10 rounds: ANY ONE that can reach that caster will be able to interrupt that spell, so this feature is not a highlight for a paladin dedicated to stopping villainous magic. The only time it does that is the level 15 feature, which allows you to cast counterspell along with the hit: at that late in the game, you better hope your Spellguard Paladin has maxed out Charisma otherwise the save DC for your counter spell is not going to successfully stop the caster from casting that spell.
And this feature, before level 15, cannot and does not shut down any spell from the caster unless the hit somehow kills the caster outright. The one highlight would be to get a back-door AOO on a caster trying to magically teleport away since regular AOO wouldn't trigger the reaction.
Generally like the spell selection, but if the focus is to shut down casters, I'd consider the following:
Level 2: switch out See Invisibility for Hypnotic Pattern
Level 4: switch out Freedom of Movement for Banishment
Level 5: switch out Hallow for Synaptic Static
See Invisibility and Freedom of Movement are excellent choices and I wouldn't change them out. Synaptic Static is okay. It's an Intelligence AoE nuke with a debuff. Hallow is a decent choice and fits as an Abjuration spell. It's unfortunately a 24-hour cast time. It's good when you have the prep
To each their own I guess? It’s a matter of preference. To me, Paladin spell slots are a limited commodity, so expending one on a spell that takes more than action is wasteful. Let a full caster with slots to spare have at it. See Invisibility is a spell I rarely see used by a caster to conceal themselves, and for me, doesn’t fit the theme of a spellguard paladin protecting their allies from villainous magic: best to shut down casters so that’s why I’d rather have those spells used then the other spells presented.
Hallow is definitely meh. However, if you use it, it lasts indefinitely. It is never going to be a combat spell and you will probably have a long rest before you benefit from it. It should be a ritual spell, but that's not really here nor there. I feel like your alternative suggestion is basically a fire ball for Paladins with disappointing results against Wizards. Invisibility and control spells are a serious problem when they come up. You may have alternative solutions, like Faerie Fire or Misty Step, but the ones in UA definitely fit for Paladins seeking to battle other magic users.
I mean the spells I suggested don't cause damage (other than Synaptic Static) and aren't meant to be the equivalent to Fireball, so I'm not understanding the comparison. Hypnotic Pattern, Banishment, and Synaptic Static at their respective spell levels are control spells meant to shut down or hamper enemy action economy: to me, those spells do just that. Will they be successful? Maybe. Hypnotic Pattern is a WiS save, Banishment is a CHA save, and Synaptic Static is an INT save: the last one will likely get passed by enemy Wizards, but they'll take half damage. But its primary function is to hamper the enemy's action economy. The damage is just a plus. Maybe Dominate Person or Gaes would be better 5th level alternatives, but IMO, See Invincibility and Freedom of Movement don't scream protect the party from villainous magic.
Essentially casting Counterspell as part of an Attack of Opportunity when a creature casts a spell is awesome as long as you can cast it after they pass or fail their Constitution save to maintain Concentration. Add to that, failing to counter the spell doesn't use up the spell slot? Pretty amazing.
Technically, it does not require you to target the same spellcaster. You could hit one with your Spellguard Strike and cast Counterspell at another caster as part of the same reaction, but that is probably not intended.
And Spell-Breaking Blade just improves from the changes I suggested to Spellguard Strike: with its main thing to hinder a caster from casting when it’s within range. I also don’t see Counterspell being used by another caster since the caster that triggered the AOO is the only one casting: how would a Counterspell go to another caster unless another caster was using their reaction to cast a spell, which is unlikely in the action economy.
Like I said, it's probably not intended. You are overriding the reaction of Counterspell so there is the possibility that it also removes the targeting restriction. If it does, there would be very few cases where it would make a difference. Even if it doesn't allow it practically or otherwise, it's still a good ability.
Because it activates to late in the game, you have to hope that the DM rolls low and you've invested CHA into your Spellguard Paladin to get a decent spell save DC, otherwise the counter spell won't work and then it's just a level 3 feature that causes you to hit. Seems lackluster, hence why my suggestion at least builds upon the level 3 suggestions of it at least doing something other than hit for a level 15 class feature.
I'm glad you like the subclass as-is. I think it could be way better. And the subclass is essentially JUST reactions. Without using a reaction, you have no subclass. You only have the level 7 benefit which is basically Mass Eldritch Mind.
The conditions required to use any of the Spellguard's abilities and hence their "frequency" are way too low.
Guardian Bond
This isn't bad on the surface but it requires you to stay in melee range of your ally. But since the ally you want to protect is likely to be of the squishy variety and unlikely to want to be on the front-line, it means you have to hang back with them as well if you want to ensure you can use this ability. And that's not really where a paladin wants to be.
It also means that if either of you wants or needs to move, then the other has to move as well but there will be a time between your initiative counts where you're not protecting them.
Plus, this ability is going to be competing with your other abilities over your Reaction
For this to be usable they need to get rid of that melee range condition. Even though the 'fantasy' may be that you're parrying the enemies blows with your weapon or shield, hence the melee range...it requires your Channel Divinity to activate so, you know....magic. Just let it work within 30 feet or something.
Spellguard Strike
Way too many conditions make the "frequency" of this basically non-existent.
You have to:
Be facing spellcasters. Not many monsters are actually spellcasters, especially in the newer releases (a lot of abilities that were previously spells were moved to be basic abilities/Actions
Those spellcasters have to use spell components and, ironically, many of the monsters that are spellcasters don't use spell components!
The spellcaster has to be in melee range with you and not, you know, just back away before casting (which, yes provokes an OA but so would casting the spell next to you so....)
Have your Reaction available (i.e. not used it for your Guardian's Bond)
All of this means you essentially need a co-operative DM who creates a campaign where you're fighting spellcasters on a very frequent basis. Because if you're not, then you do not have a subclass ability.
Aura of Concentration
This is not bad. Though maybe not as good as many may think.
You need to have at least some allies that are spellcasters (admittedly this is pretty likely) and they need to stay within 10 feet of you because, at this level, that's the range of your aura.
But the real issue is that your spellcaster allies are very like to have the Warcaster feat, which gives them advantage on concentration checks anyway! Really, this ability is good only because it affects the Paladin themselves (who are unlikely to pick up the Warcaster feat)
Spell-Breaking Blade
Bad bad bad for all the same reasons as Spellguard Strike. Its just never going to happen. Especially because, as said there, the enemy can simply move away from you first (provoking a OA but now they can't be counterspelled). This really relies on you having a friendly DM willing to put the enemies in a dumb situation just to let the paladin Do Their thing.
Otherwise, you do not have a subclass ability
Eternal Spellguard
This isn't bad. The Bodyguard part is the best bit really (though only affects your one ally of Guardian's Bond). The other abilities are fine...assuming your are facing spellcasters of course (many monsters that attack with magical effects don't actually use spells or spell attack rolls, so...)
The conditions required to use any of the Spellguard's abilities and hence their "frequency" are way too low.
Guardian Bond
This isn't bad on the surface but it requires you to stay in melee range of your ally. But since the ally you want to protect is likely to be of the squishy variety and unlikely to want to be on the front-line, it means you have to hang back with them as well if you want to ensure you can use this ability. And that's not really where a paladin wants to be.
It also means that if either of you wants or needs to move, then the other has to move as well but there will be a time between your initiative counts where you're not protecting them.
Plus, this ability is going to be competing with your other abilities over your Reaction
For this to be usable they need to get rid of that melee range condition. Even though the 'fantasy' may be that you're parrying the enemies blows with your weapon or shield, hence the melee range...it requires your Channel Divinity to activate so, you know....magic. Just let it work within 30 feet or something.
Imagine a squishy being directly behind you. Without a reach weapon, the bond being behind you is 10 feet away from the enemy. With a reach weapon, they are 15 feet to 20 feet away from the enemy while you are in melee range of the enemy. It is possible to increase the distance even further, but it is difficult. Additionally, you can bond another low-AC frontliner, such as a Barbarian, instead of a caster. Not all fights have the space for the enemy to maneuver around you, allowing you to potentially wall off squishies from melee enemies. Not all fights will be so constrained either, most probably won't, but even then, you can control the battlefield a bit with positioning.
If a Paladin wants to protect a creature at a distance, they can already cast Warding Bond.
Way too many conditions make the "frequency" of this basically non-existent.
You have to:
Be facing spellcasters. Not many monsters are actually spellcasters, especially in the newer releases (a lot of abilities that were previously spells were moved to be basic abilities/Actions
Those spellcasters have to use spell components and, ironically, many of the monsters that are spellcasters don't use spell components!
The spellcaster has to be in melee range with you and not, you know, just back away before casting (which, yes provokes an OA but so would casting the spell next to you so....)
Have your Reaction available (i.e. not used it for your Guardian's Bond)
All of this means you essentially need a co-operative DM who creates a campaign where you're fighting spellcasters on a very frequent basis. Because if you're not, then you do not have a subclass ability.
You should be facing a mix of spellcasters and nonspellcasters.
Where the spellcasting descriptions exist doesn't matter. What does matter is that they must use spell components and many of the monsters don't require material components but still must provide somatic and verbal components. Spot-checking 2025 Monsters and newer, spellcasting without any spell components at all appears to be an extreme rarity. Casting without material components is very common but still requires the verbal and somatic components.
The Giant Owl and Cloaker require no spell components at all.
A Kenku requires normal (verbal) components.
A Pixie went from only requiring pixie dust (material) components to requiring only verbal and somatic components.
Mephits are a good example of what you described where they went from requiring no material components to no spell components.
Dryads stayed the same and require Verbal and Somatic components.
Sea Hags have lost the requirement to be in coven but now ignore Material components only and provide the rest as normal.
You probably want to be in melee range of them whether they want to be melee range of you. Certain feats, like Sentinel, help you stay there. Casting a spell next to you does not provoke an attack of opportunity. It provokes an attack, but hitting would not trigger effects from Sentinel, for example. On the other hand, effects that give the attacker disadvantage on attacks of opportunity would not trigger either.
Yep. It's a choice.
If you think a spellcaster is going to attack your bond with a spell that doesn't require an attack roll, Spellguard Strike!
If you don't have a bond active (the bond only lasts an hour), Spellguard Strike!
If you are not in melee range of your bond, Spellguard Strike!
If you are never fighting Spellcasters (never?), this feature won't come up. The strength of this feature will scale upwards the more spellcasters you fight. The fewer you fight, the more valuable the Guardian Bond will be, regardless of who it is on.
This is not bad. Though maybe not as good as many may think.
You need to have at least some allies that are spellcasters (admittedly this is pretty likely) and they need to stay within 10 feet of you because, at this level, that's the range of your aura.
But the real issue is that your spellcaster allies are very like to have the Warcaster feat, which gives them advantage on concentration checks anyway! Really, this ability is good only because it affects the Paladin themselves (who are unlikely to pick up the Warcaster feat)
Warcaster is not a given at all.
Even if it only helps the Paladin, that's advantage on Concentrating on Bless, Compelled Duel, Protection Against Evil & Good, Shield of Faith, Aura of Vitality, Crusader's Mantle and a few other good options.
Reading some of the initial comments to upscale "Guardian Bond," saying "it can be a +1 to +10," prompts the thought: "Oh, the 30 Charisma Paladin has arrived to the campaign," lol.
Guardian Bond is probably the most restrictive Paladin Channel Divinity to date, and its actively competing with the Paladin's Spellcasting (Shield), and the other 3rd level Spellguard strike (which is evolving with that Paladin's progression, while Guardian's stuck on your Charisma modifier).
Make Guardian Bond a ranged channel divinity that you can use on multiple targets for the duration, and then we're talking about a feature that doesn't feel so bad to use (that definitely is more in line with the Paladin's overall theme of the Aura class, before it has its next aura).
Reading some of the initial comments to upscale "Guardian Bond," saying "it can be a +1 to +10," prompts the thought: "Oh, the 30 Charisma Paladin has arrived to the campaign," lol.
Yes, it's theoretically possible, but unlikely. Effects that scale with attributes can potentially scale if play continues past level 20 with Epic Boons but will plateau early (usually at 5 starting at level 8). In most games, the features that scale with proficiency bonus will scale evenly, but peak theoretically lower (6). It can impact the stories that can be told.
Compare Guardian Bond with Protective Wings from Gift of the Metallic Dragon from Fizban's. One requires a Channel Divinity to protect a target for an hour, the other requires a feat. Guardian Bond is within your reach while Protective Wings is 5 feet only. Both require your reaction. Guardian Bond will probably be higher or equal for much, if not most, of the Paladin's career depending on the Paladin's focus on attributes. Protective Wings peak at +6, which would be higher than the Charisma modifiers for most Paladins. A Paladin/Bladelock, in particular could lean heavily into Charisma but you lose out on a really cool endcap.
I do suppose a solid question is how does a feat spent on Gift of the Metallic Dragon compare to the Guardian Bond. Does it invalidate the class feature, making the Feat an automatic pick for anyone who would want the Guardian Bond effect?
I like the idea of this subclass, but its mechanical execution is either too resource intensive for the result or it doesn't seem to pack a punch. The following are considerations to make the Paladin Spellguard a more viable subclass.
Level 3 Guardian Bond's benefits align more with the channel divinity expenditure, the Level 3 spell adjustments align more with shutting down enemy casters, the Level 3 Spellguard Strike gives a Mage Slayer edge to the reaction, and Level 15 Spell-Breaking Blade improves upon the Level 3 Spellguard Strike feature.
I disagree. It's a magic action and a channel divinity to establish a 1-hour bond. After that, you can use a reaction to provide an AC bonus that stacks with other AC bonuses that don't cost your reaction. You can use this reaction as many times as the triggering event occurs during the 1-hour period as long as you have your reaction available.
It gives the Paladin essentially an attack of opportunity against a spellcaster that they would not normally get and will force the spellcaster to make a saving throw to preserve concentration. There is a decent chance that they won't be proficient. It's fine the way it is. It is unfortunate that it competes with the Guardian Bond's reaction. If I would change anything is potentially not consuming the reaction if the spell is an attack that targets your bond, but that is probably too strong. Perhaps the bond's AC is increased per Guardian Bond against any attack rolls from the spell that triggered the reaction. That is probably still unnecessary.
See Invisibility and Freedom of Movement are excellent choices and I wouldn't change them out. Synaptic Static is okay. It's an Intelligence AoE nuke with a debuff. Hallow is a decent choice and fits as an Abjuration spell. It's unfortunately a 24-hour cast time. It's good when you have the prep time.
Essentially casting Counterspell as part of an Attack of Opportunity when a creature casts a spell is awesome as long as you can cast it after they pass or fail their Constitution save to maintain Concentration. Add to that, failing to counter the spell doesn't use up the spell slot? Pretty amazing.
Technically, it does not require you to target the same spellcaster. You could hit one with your Spellguard Strike and cast Counterspell at another caster as part of the same reaction, but that is probably not intended.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
But the bond is a 1-time parry IF the creature remains within 5ft. If the creature leaves that reach, the resource is effectively wasted. Also, because it’s acting like parry instead of shield, the bonded creature only gets the benefit on the first attack. If the bonded creature is multi-attacked, the AC boost won’t work for the 2nd or 3rd attack. The way it’s worded, “potentially causing the attack to miss” singular. And you only have 1 reaction. Compare this to the Guardian Paladin, and it uses a reaction and a channel divinity to become the target instead of the bonded creature and it’s a 30ft range, thereby taking all the attacks.
It doesn’t though. It triggers the AOO when the caster initially casts the spell, not while the caster is concentrating so that would only apply if the caster has already casted a concentration spell and is currently concentrating and then casted a new spell that triggers Spellguard Strike. Only then would there be a concentration check to dispel the concentrating spell but does nothing to the new spell the caster just casted. If the caster is not concentrating, it’s just a 1-time hit, and if that hit has a magic weapon proc or some other proc to disrupt the spell, it’s just a 1-time. If you don’t kill the caster, the spell still goes off. And it also competes with reaction of the bonded creature. There’s no synergy.
To each their own I guess? It’s a matter of preference. To me, Paladin spell slots are a limited commodity, so expending one on a spell that takes more than action is wasteful. Let a full caster with slots to spare have at it. See Invisibility is a spell I rarely see used by a caster to conceal themselves, and for me, doesn’t fit the theme of a spellguard paladin protecting their allies from villainous magic: best to shut down casters so that’s why I’d rather have those spells used then the other spells presented.
And Spell-Breaking Blade just improves from the changes I suggested to Spellguard Strike: with its main thing to hinder a caster from casting when it’s within range. I also don’t see Counterspell being used by another caster since the caster that triggered the AOO is the only one casting: how would a Counterspell go to another caster unless another caster was using their reaction to cast a spell, which is unlikely in the action economy.
You have a few misconceptions:
All I can find on a "Guardian Paladin" is some homebrew content. Let's keep comparison official and balanced content.
I suppose it's not clear.
Now, I take this to mean that you must maintain Concentration until the spell is completed, but technically, it doesn't apply if the casting time is one Action, a Reaction, or a Bonus Action. I think the intention is that it does force a save so to be safe, I would suggest that they update the Sage Advice and/or state explicitly in Spellguard Strike that they must make a Save or lose the spell.
Either way, there doesn't need to be particular synergy. It is an ability that doesn't require a bonded creature. Additionally, it's not limited to spells that require attack rolls, so it gives you an option versus Save or suck spells, AoEs, control spells, or anything else you want to shut down. BBEG is teleporting away? Not before I get a hit in! Actually, what would be nice is if it was actually called an Attack of Opportunity for synergy with Sentinel.
Hallow is definitely meh. However, if you use it, it lasts indefinitely. It is never going to be a combat spell and you will probably have a long rest before you benefit from it. It should be a ritual spell, but that's not really here nor there. I feel like your alternative suggestion is basically a fire ball for Paladins with disappointing results against Wizards. Invisibility and control spells are a serious problem when they come up. You may have alternative solutions, like Faerie Fire or Misty Step, but the ones in UA definitely fit for Paladins seeking to battle other magic users.
Like I said, it's probably not intended. You are overriding the reaction of Counterspell so there is the possibility that it also removes the targeting restriction. If it does, there would be very few cases where it would make a difference. Even if it doesn't allow it practically or otherwise, it's still a good ability.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
No misconception. We're on the same page. Still doesn't change the fact that if the bonded creature is not in your reach when they get hit, they don't get the AC boost, rendering the bond ineffective and the resource spent on it wasteful in my opinion. When you look at Vengeance Paladin, the channel divinity use will always grant advantage on a hit in its duration and transferrable. When you look at Devotion Paladin, the +10 hit is always used in its duration. When you look at Glory Paladin, the channel divinity use will always deliver the Temp HP, either to yourself or party members within 30 ft. When you look at Genie Paladin, its rider effects will always happen (with the exception of Marid's Surge with requires an enemy saving throw) with the channel divinity use. Ancient Paladin is the other one that has a channel divinity use which is conditional because it requires an enemy saving throw. With this Spellguard Paladin, you use a magic action and channel divinity to activate, and then a reaction to grant the benefit IF they're within reach (5ft unless they have a reach weapon). And not only that, but it only works on the first hit. If a monster has multi-attack, it won't work on the second and third attack because you've used your reaction on the first attack. You can have all the reactions you want, but it only works once on the first hit until you get a reaction back. Compare that to the Protection Feat that grants disadvantage on ALL attacks when they're within reach: it uses your reaction, but no other resources to activate or limits other than the reaction use. Also, compare this to Gift of the Metallic Dragon feat which does the same thing as Guardian Bond, but only costs a reaction and no other resources, and while its limited to proficiency bonus uses, it still doesn't use additional resources to activate it.
To me, a magic action, a channel divinity, AND a reaction is a lot of resources spent for a 1-time benefit in a round. And sure you're not spending the magic action and channel divinity again to keep it up, you're still spending a reaction to activate it. And if your bonded creature dies in combat, you'll have to spend those resources again to reforge the bond. TLDR: One reaction, 1 time benefit IF they're in reach. It doesn't matter that it lasts for an hour. It only grants a 1 time benefit in a round, again, if they're within reach and you using your reaction. Seems dumb and resource intensive to me.
As it reads today in UA, all it does is allow for a hit and nothing else. During initiative, NO ONE is casting a spell longer than an action time, so while in theory you could interrupt a spell caster from casting a ritual or spell that's a minute or longer, but that's wouldn't be exclusive to this class ability. A minute during initiative is 10 rounds: ANY ONE that can reach that caster will be able to interrupt that spell, so this feature is not a highlight for a paladin dedicated to stopping villainous magic. The only time it does that is the level 15 feature, which allows you to cast counterspell along with the hit: at that late in the game, you better hope your Spellguard Paladin has maxed out Charisma otherwise the save DC for your counter spell is not going to successfully stop the caster from casting that spell.
And this feature, before level 15, cannot and does not shut down any spell from the caster unless the hit somehow kills the caster outright. The one highlight would be to get a back-door AOO on a caster trying to magically teleport away since regular AOO wouldn't trigger the reaction.
I mean the spells I suggested don't cause damage (other than Synaptic Static) and aren't meant to be the equivalent to Fireball, so I'm not understanding the comparison. Hypnotic Pattern, Banishment, and Synaptic Static at their respective spell levels are control spells meant to shut down or hamper enemy action economy: to me, those spells do just that. Will they be successful? Maybe. Hypnotic Pattern is a WiS save, Banishment is a CHA save, and Synaptic Static is an INT save: the last one will likely get passed by enemy Wizards, but they'll take half damage. But its primary function is to hamper the enemy's action economy. The damage is just a plus. Maybe Dominate Person or Gaes would be better 5th level alternatives, but IMO, See Invincibility and Freedom of Movement don't scream protect the party from villainous magic.
Because it activates to late in the game, you have to hope that the DM rolls low and you've invested CHA into your Spellguard Paladin to get a decent spell save DC, otherwise the counter spell won't work and then it's just a level 3 feature that causes you to hit. Seems lackluster, hence why my suggestion at least builds upon the level 3 suggestions of it at least doing something other than hit for a level 15 class feature.
I'm glad you like the subclass as-is. I think it could be way better. And the subclass is essentially JUST reactions. Without using a reaction, you have no subclass. You only have the level 7 benefit which is basically Mass Eldritch Mind.
The conditions required to use any of the Spellguard's abilities and hence their "frequency" are way too low.
Guardian Bond
This isn't bad on the surface but it requires you to stay in melee range of your ally. But since the ally you want to protect is likely to be of the squishy variety and unlikely to want to be on the front-line, it means you have to hang back with them as well if you want to ensure you can use this ability. And that's not really where a paladin wants to be.
It also means that if either of you wants or needs to move, then the other has to move as well but there will be a time between your initiative counts where you're not protecting them.
Plus, this ability is going to be competing with your other abilities over your Reaction
For this to be usable they need to get rid of that melee range condition. Even though the 'fantasy' may be that you're parrying the enemies blows with your weapon or shield, hence the melee range...it requires your Channel Divinity to activate so, you know....magic. Just let it work within 30 feet or something.
Spellguard Strike
Way too many conditions make the "frequency" of this basically non-existent.
You have to:
All of this means you essentially need a co-operative DM who creates a campaign where you're fighting spellcasters on a very frequent basis. Because if you're not, then you do not have a subclass ability.
Aura of Concentration
This is not bad. Though maybe not as good as many may think.
You need to have at least some allies that are spellcasters (admittedly this is pretty likely) and they need to stay within 10 feet of you because, at this level, that's the range of your aura.
But the real issue is that your spellcaster allies are very like to have the Warcaster feat, which gives them advantage on concentration checks anyway! Really, this ability is good only because it affects the Paladin themselves (who are unlikely to pick up the Warcaster feat)
Spell-Breaking Blade
Bad bad bad for all the same reasons as Spellguard Strike. Its just never going to happen. Especially because, as said there, the enemy can simply move away from you first (provoking a OA but now they can't be counterspelled). This really relies on you having a friendly DM willing to put the enemies in a dumb situation just to let the paladin Do Their thing.
Otherwise, you do not have a subclass ability
Eternal Spellguard
This isn't bad. The Bodyguard part is the best bit really (though only affects your one ally of Guardian's Bond). The other abilities are fine...assuming your are facing spellcasters of course (many monsters that attack with magical effects don't actually use spells or spell attack rolls, so...)
Imagine a squishy being directly behind you. Without a reach weapon, the bond being behind you is 10 feet away from the enemy. With a reach weapon, they are 15 feet to 20 feet away from the enemy while you are in melee range of the enemy. It is possible to increase the distance even further, but it is difficult. Additionally, you can bond another low-AC frontliner, such as a Barbarian, instead of a caster. Not all fights have the space for the enemy to maneuver around you, allowing you to potentially wall off squishies from melee enemies. Not all fights will be so constrained either, most probably won't, but even then, you can control the battlefield a bit with positioning.
If a Paladin wants to protect a creature at a distance, they can already cast Warding Bond.
If you are never fighting Spellcasters (never?), this feature won't come up. The strength of this feature will scale upwards the more spellcasters you fight. The fewer you fight, the more valuable the Guardian Bond will be, regardless of who it is on.
Warcaster is not a given at all.
Even if it only helps the Paladin, that's advantage on Concentrating on Bless, Compelled Duel, Protection Against Evil & Good, Shield of Faith, Aura of Vitality, Crusader's Mantle and a few other good options.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
Reading some of the initial comments to upscale "Guardian Bond," saying "it can be a +1 to +10," prompts the thought: "Oh, the 30 Charisma Paladin has arrived to the campaign," lol.
Guardian Bond is probably the most restrictive Paladin Channel Divinity to date, and its actively competing with the Paladin's Spellcasting (Shield), and the other 3rd level Spellguard strike (which is evolving with that Paladin's progression, while Guardian's stuck on your Charisma modifier).
Make Guardian Bond a ranged channel divinity that you can use on multiple targets for the duration, and then we're talking about a feature that doesn't feel so bad to use (that definitely is more in line with the Paladin's overall theme of the Aura class, before it has its next aura).
Yes, it's theoretically possible, but unlikely. Effects that scale with attributes can potentially scale if play continues past level 20 with Epic Boons but will plateau early (usually at 5 starting at level 8). In most games, the features that scale with proficiency bonus will scale evenly, but peak theoretically lower (6). It can impact the stories that can be told.
Compare Guardian Bond with Protective Wings from Gift of the Metallic Dragon from Fizban's. One requires a Channel Divinity to protect a target for an hour, the other requires a feat. Guardian Bond is within your reach while Protective Wings is 5 feet only. Both require your reaction. Guardian Bond will probably be higher or equal for much, if not most, of the Paladin's career depending on the Paladin's focus on attributes. Protective Wings peak at +6, which would be higher than the Charisma modifiers for most Paladins. A Paladin/Bladelock, in particular could lean heavily into Charisma but you lose out on a really cool endcap.
I do suppose a solid question is how does a feat spent on Gift of the Metallic Dragon compare to the Guardian Bond. Does it invalidate the class feature, making the Feat an automatic pick for anyone who would want the Guardian Bond effect?
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.