Extra Smite

orsal · Nov 20, 2007

Patlin said:
Also, reading the thread and the rules text it is my personal conclusion that the phrase "Once per day, a paladin may attempt to smite evil with one normal melee attack" is refering to a type of action/unit of time. Therefore, it overrides the normal state of affairs of supernatural abilities being a standard action, and allows smiting as part of a full attack action or charge.

That's my interpretation too. As I see it, using the smite power does not involve taking an extra action (in addition to the melee attack), but rather changing the nature of the melee attack action itself. Therefore, the length of time comes from the basic action.

B4cchus · Nov 23, 2007

Patlin said:
Add: If you have more than one smite ability, you must choose which ability this feat applies to at the time you take the feat. For example, a multiclass Paladin/Cleric with the destruction domain must pick which of the two classes gains the extra smites per day on selecting the feat.

With Patlin's addition included, I also vote YES.

Solange · Nov 23, 2007

I don't think the domain ability applies, as it's not the specific Smite Attack ability.

Wik · Nov 24, 2007

Re: Patlin's addition - to be honest, I don't see why it's a distinction that needs to be made. If you have smites from multiple sources - why not let the feat benefit them both? If you have, for example, smite law and smite evil - to let the bonuses be interchangeable doesn't seem like a big deal to me. I guess because Smite is, well, fairly weak to begin with.

That being said, I'm not entirely concerned about it either way. Yeah, I can add in the change, since it doesn't really affect Galwynn at all.

Rystil Arden · Nov 24, 2007

Wik said:
Re: Patlin's addition - to be honest, I don't see why it's a distinction that needs to be made. If you have smites from multiple sources - why not let the feat benefit them both? If you have, for example, smite law and smite evil - to let the bonuses be interchangeable doesn't seem like a big deal to me. I guess because Smite is, well, fairly weak to begin with.

That being said, I'm not entirely concerned about it either way. Yeah, I can add in the change, since it doesn't really affect Galwynn at all.

Giving extra 2 extra smites to every sort of smite ability you have is completely unfair. Let's say you had the Destruction domain (somehow--maybe Holy Voice), Smite Evil (Paladin), and the holy voice Smite thing. You start with 2 Smite Evils, 1 Smite Destruction, and Cha bonus Holy Voice smites, and this feat ups you to 4 Smite Evils, 3 Smite Destruction, and Cha bonus + 2 Holy Voice smites. That is extremely unacceptable.

SlagMortar · Nov 24, 2007

You start with 2 Smite Evils, 1 Smite Destruction, and Cha bonus Holy Voice smites, and this feat ups you to 4 Smite Evils, 3 Smite Destruction, and Cha bonus + 2 Holy Voice smites. That is extremely unacceptable.

I think he meant the extra smites would be usable with any of the smite abilities, but not give you extras of each of the smite abilities. So you would start with 2 Smite Evils, 1 Smite Destruction, and Cha bonus Holy Voice smites and the feat ups you to 2 Smite Evils, 1 Smite Destruction, Cha bonus Holy Voice smites, and 2 extra smites that you can use to either smite evils, smite destruction, or holy voice smite.

Patlin · Nov 24, 2007

SlagMortar said:
I think he meant the extra smites would be usable with any of the smite abilities, but not give you extras of each of the smite abilities. So you would start with 2 Smite Evils, 1 Smite Destruction, and Cha bonus Holy Voice smites and the feat ups you to 2 Smite Evils, 1 Smite Destruction, Cha bonus Holy Voice smites, and 2 extra smites that you can use to either smite evils, smite destruction, or holy voice smite.

I guess two "wildcard" smites would be OK, I was just trying to avoid the six bonus smites in RA's example.

Wik · Nov 24, 2007

Yeah, I'm mentioning the "wild card" smites. Simply because, well, I don't often see Paladins getting a chance to smite evil - Galwynn hasn't used it yet. And even in games against evil critters, I often don't see Paladins bother using it. So, if you had multiple smites, I figure you would either a) apply the feat to the most broad one anyways, or b) to have to force a player to choose between "smite evil" and "smite law" seems sort of lame, since you just know that when they go for smite evil, the next seven adventures are going to be against Lawful Neutral constructs or something stupid.

In any case, I really don't mind making the change. As I said, it doesn't affect Galwynn one iota. I just think the feat would be much more interesting from a play perspective than Cleave or Reckless Offence (though at least that one sounds interesting).

Oh, and RA - Holy Voices don't get smite attacks. They can burn Turn Undead uses to make somewhat weaker attacks that are similar to smites, but they are not smites by any stretch. It even mentions that these "Voice's Wrath" attacks cannot be used in the same round as a smite.

Revised Edition:

Extra Smite
You can smite your enemies more often per day.
Prerequisites: Smite Attack
Benefit: You can use your smite attack you have two more times per day. The smite attack follows all normal rules in it's use; this feat merely allows you to make two additional attacks per day.
Special:If you have more than one smite ability, you must choose which ability this feat applies to at the time you take the feat. For example, a multiclass Paladin/Cleric with the destruction domain must pick which of the two classes gains the extra smites per day on selecting the feat.

So, uh. What's the tally, anyways?

B4cchus- YES
Rae - NO
Boddynock - NO
Orsal - YES
Patlin - YES

Bront · Nov 25, 2007

YES with the new clairification

Boddynock · Nov 25, 2007

Wik said:
well, I don't often see Paladins getting a chance to smite evil - Galwynn hasn't used it yet. And even in games against evil critters, I often don't see Paladins bother using it.

See, that surprises me. My paladin uses it whenever he can (including taking down a 4th level fighter - the paladin was 3rd at the time - in full plate with a single blow! The righteous might of god - ah how sweet it is! :lol: