Technically speaking a holy symbol cover material components not somatic, if it had both it would work but RAW you would need a hand free to smite.

I wish they'd allowed Smite to be used with Ranged Weapons. That was a good change.

I hate this change. Making it a spell, AND a bonus action seems to be more punitive then anything.

Quote from Arnagorn >>

According to the War Caster feat, you have to have that feat to cast a spell while you are holding a shield in one hand and a weapon in the other.

This is true for spells in 2014 that take a somatic component as well, however I usually overlook that as a DM. It feels like a paladin should have the training to do so with either their sword hand or shield hand, but that's not RAW. (Important for Adventure League games, but not so much for home games)

 but can't you perform somatic components with the hand holding a holy symbol.  other classes that need a different thing then holy symbol definitely need warcaster but it's at least easily arguable that holy symbols in particular render warcaster a bit redundant in that regard.  now if you were like a level in cleric then went wizard. you.d need warcaster for the wizard spells but I think the cleric or paladin stuff would be fine

look more garbage to throw on the fire

It’s fixed now

You know what limitation isn’t there that was? Max of 5d8. IF you MC with sorcerer (sorcadin) after …3rd level. And you get Sorcerer to 17th level… you can cast a 9th level ‘Divine Smite’. (Barring silence or counter spell).

Why is this the only Smite that requires Somatic components? 
Feels like an oversight making it harder for Paladins to use their core smite.

Edit: Nevermind, it's just another error on dndbeyond's part, as usual. (eye roll)

This shows as transmutation, but PHB lists it as Evocation.

I feel like at my table I will be treating this like Sneak Attack were you can do it 'Once Per Turn' and not as a 'Bonus Action'. It allows Paladins to do other things with their Bonus Action like the new version of Lay on Hands and it keeps it to one attack on the Paladins turn so lets hope that it is the crit it is used on but also allows them to do it on a Reaction like Sneak Attack. Also it isn't a spell for my players.

Quote from srathnal >>

You know what limitation isn’t there that was? Max of 5d8. IF you MC with sorcerer (sorcadin) after …3rd level. And you get Sorcerer to 17th level… you can cast a 9th level ‘Divine Smite’. (Barring silence or counter spell).

 Why stop with just attacking? Pick up new True Strike to get some extra d6 depending on your level. You can also keep your Str at 13 and max out Cha to hit harder and have better spell saves.

This seems like a huge nerf, and an unnecessary one at that. The Smite is what paladins are all about, and now any creature with Counterspell or Antimagic capabilities can turn them into a Charisma-based Fighter.

Dislike

The paladin can’t smite Tiamat anymore. 

Quote from CoolaireOfDankstora >>

This is the worst decision made in the 2024 edition. Paladin smite can now be counterspelled and only once per turn, which flies in the face of making lay on hands a bonus action as well. Another five-head decision from y'all. Great that I can just ignore this and run smite as normal, because you can't stop me from doing that. 

 As a DM of many different games right now with Paladins, I heartily disagree with this statement.  Nothing worse than the Paladin going Super-Saiyan on the first turn against the boss you've built up as the Big Bad and finishing him off in a turn or close to it.  This is one of the best and most balancing changes in 2024 and I'm very happy with it.  As you said, though, you can completely ignore the change if it suits you, but I'm definitely keeping it.

No offense but this seems like a you problem.

Your Big Bad is your Big Bad. You shouldn't have the players facing them with all their resources and abilities fresh and unused. 

Legendary Monsters are immune to a lot of effects and spell resistances. Meaning they can take only 1/2 or 1/4 damage to many spells. Take Resistance to Fire for example. Fireball, they make the save, is now halving the damage to a 1/4.

So make your Big Bad resistant to Radiant. Stack up their HP to compensate for a Paladin being in play. Crit hit? Silvery Barbs or Adamantine armour. 

If you give your players smaller fights that are still challenging the Paladin is going to be wasting Smites to deal with the fight quicker. If the Paladin wishes to keep his reserves and isn't dropping them. Then the fight prolongs and thus Healing and other spells are being used from other party members. 

This is by no means any insults being thrown, but pretty basic advice. Playing by these New Rules is your choice and any Homebrew you apply is yours too. However to outrightly say this is "one of the best" as a solution to your problem is folly. All you had to do was add a Radiant Resistance at the very least and that wouldn't be making it unfair at all.

Is this sarcasm?

Aside from facing a monster that is resistant or immune to Radiant. Divine Smite is now the only Smite worth casting since it's D8 vs the other Smites being D6.

Even upcasting them for extra D6 doesn't defeat the Divine Smite which increases by D8. Even the Level 3 Blinding Smite deals only 3D8 where Divine is doing 4D8. 

The only really counter point you can have is the condition effects, but the old Paladin could stack this on top of Divine Smite and still do the condition effect. Which is clearly a power boost and not a nerf if you pulled this off. 

The only Smite Spell that beats Divine is Banishing, which is 5th Level and only accessable to the Paladin at level 17. And even then 5D10 vs 6D8 the 6D8 potentially still could yield a better result for the fact that it gets one extra die to roll. 

I mean, if it wasn't more than a "me" problem, they wouldn't have felt a need to fix it.  Professional designers clearly disagreed with you for a reason.
  
You're telling me that I should punish my player's special abilities just to prolong a boss battle?  Sounds pretty lame to me.  Nothing makes a player happier than telling them they did half damage with their special ability, especially when pretty much nothing has radiant resistance and most players knows that.  No thanks.  I'd rather the game rules allow my players to be special but also be balanced, which this does.  

Challenging your players by simply hamstringing them so they can't do the things that make their characters special in the final boss battle makes that battle a lot less fun.  My decades of DMing tells me that players would much rather do cool things.  That methodology has worked for me for a long time, so I'll stick with it.

>Professional designers clearly disagreed with you for a reason.
No they didn't. They disagreed with themselves as they wrote the rules in 2014 also. Neither have I debated or talked with them, so they haven't disagreed with me. I disagree with them as they wrote the new rules. Also again "you" is referring to me specifically which I doubt they know to disagree with me.

>You're telling me that I should punish my player's special abilities just to prolong a boss battle?
No I said you could try (the examples I gave) because you can. It's your choice whether or not you want to. I didn't tell you do it. I gave examples of work arounds non of which you need take verbatim, but apply the concept to fit with your style should you want. Remember Divine Smite ending your Boss in a single round was an issue for you.
You find this New Rule a solution, but also at the cost of Hamstringing new Paladin Players. It restricts their special ability and locks it out completely if they already use a Bonus Action. The same question can be asked where's the fun in that? As the question can be applied vice versa for yourself as the DM when your Boss is destroyed in that single round. 

My other solutions was to stack on the HP or apply Silvery Barbs to force a Crit hit re-roll. Both these fall within the rules yet you hitched onto the Radiant Resistance as my go to solution when it was one of several yet still fell within the rules as Monsters have resistances to damage types and spells. Some even immunity. 
My other solution was to apply several smaller fights in the attempt to have resources wasted. It is presented to the players, but up to the players to be conservative or not. 

 >Challenging your players by simply hamstringing them so they can't do the things that make their characters special in the final boss battle makes that battle a lot less fun. 
Yet you fall into doing the same thing when a player wishes to Multi-class Pal/Bar for the Rage Smites or the Hexblade who can't Eldritch Smite and misty step.

Finally decades doesn't always equate Wisdom. You were struggling with a solution to your Divine Smite problem as stated in your original comment. How were you unable to find a solution with all those decades? If the methodology has worked for you and you will stick with it, then why are you changing now? Either you want to keep it fun for your players and if they have issues with the New Smite rules will you ignore them and stick to the 2014? 
Or compromise and find a middle ground. Have Divine Smite be useable once per round similar to Sneak Attack and at no action cost, but still expend the spell slot. 
This allows for fun Rage Smites, Stacking Smites for a singular hit only, or splitting the smites over two hits. Bonus Thunderous on first attack. Attack 2 apply the Divine smite on. 

This example seems to be the solution most people in other forums and comment sections in YouTube prefer. Nerfs Divine Smite, but doesn't take away their ability to do it entirely when their BA has been used on something else. 

Lastly my argument was due to the fact you found the New Rule to Divine Smite to be one of the Best and Balancing Solutions yet it removes fun Multiclass Builds and what happens when you meet the same issue of a Level 9 Smite critting your Big Bad? That's 20d8s solely of Divine Smite (and frankly a waste of a level 9 if it doesn't kill or cripple) and if they have a level 9, they also have an 8 and a 7. Which is definitely being reserved for Critting. So you're stuck with the same problem of your Big Bad getting pulverised.

Do a little math. 2014 Divine Smite is capped at 5d8 with two attacks = 10d8s. Follow up round you're down to 4d8 on both attacks for 8d8
2024 is single use but 10d8 level 9 = two 2014 attacks
2nd round = 9d8 (level 8) to the 2014s 8d8 for two attacks
The damage is really not different until a crit becomes a factor for 1 attack, but if we apply the crit to the 2024 to be fair then the damage remains the same. In which case the 2 attacks becomes 15d8 when one crits vs the 20d8 on the 2024 Crit.

EDIT: I would like to reiterate that my original comment was me trying to find a solution to your Divine Smite problem that offered an alternative to the rules. If I came across harshly I humbly apologise for that. You clearly find Divine Smite an issue and I can relate as a DM myself, but the few years which is by far much less than yourself, I've been able to keep it challenging and engaging for my Paladin players without complaint (except dice rolls seemingly giving the Bad guy a cold because of the amount of missing). At the end of the day you are going to find what is right for you, I just hope your own players are no longer discouraged from playing a Paladin and subsequently as you have said, you'd rather fun and this works for you, but my players find it unfun. So we both have to find which fits for our players and a test run is the best way to do it. 

This is the worst thing you could have done to paladins. Divine smite is not a spell, it should never be a spell. Some fiends are almost completely immune to spells, for example the Rakshasa: "Limited Magic Immunity: The rakshasa can't be affected or detected by spells of 6th level or lower unless it wishes to be. It has advantage on saving throws against all other spells and magical effects." Paladins only get up to 5th level spell slots. A paladin is meant to be a fiend killing machine, and you've broken it. It can not do anything more to a rakshasa now than simple weapon attacks (provided the weapon is magical).

If you wanted to nerf divine smite, you could have simply added a "You can use this ability once per turn", like rogue's sneak attack (though smite was already limited by using spell slots). That would have been more acceptable. Instead, you've just made it unnecessarily complicated and broken how it works completely in some cases.