Extra Smite

[Wik]

Paladins CAN only make one attack in a round that they smite. It's a supernatural ability.

Using a supernatural ability is a standard action unless noted otherwise.

the text in the PHB says "a paladin can smite evil with one normal melee attack", but nowhere says anything about making multiple attacks in that round. Thus, the supernatural ability takes precedence.

***

Which is why smites can really hurt.

And I'm not contesting that paladins can get high abilities - it's just that, so can the barbarian. That's why you just keep the numbers even.

As for charging smite - never happens. How often do paladins actually USE their mount?

 

[Rystil Arden]

Paladins CAN only make one attack in a round that they smite. It's a supernatural ability.



the text in the PHB says "a paladin can smite evil with one normal melee attack", but nowhere says anything about making multiple attacks in that round. Thus, the supernatural ability takes precedence.

***

Which is why smites can really hurt.

And I'm not contesting that paladins can get high abilities - it's just that, so can the barbarian. That's why you just keep the numbers even.

As for charging smite - never happens. How often do paladins actually USE their mount?

Oh, I remember reading that a few years back now. I'm so embarrassed But I thought they had errataed that out? It seems definitely to not be the intent. At least, I've always played it the other way, including in LEW.

As for the charging smite, I've seen it a lot, actually. You have no idea how fearsome a high-level Paladin riding a flying dragon for +480 damage smites can be And with halflings, they can ride a riding dog into almost any situation.

 

[Wik]

Fair enough. How we play the game at the table is a huge part of things. In my experience, I never see a charging smite (even though I'll be taking that ability over my mount, when I hit 5th level). As for halflings - a halfling paladin just makes me laugh.

But in LEW - while some GMs might let me make multiple attacks per round with smite, I should expect to follow RAW. And, by RAW, Paladins are BONED compared to Barbarians in, well, pretty much every way (except Paladins are Cooler).

 

[Rystil Arden]

Fair enough. How we play the game at the table is a huge part of things. In my experience, I never see a charging smite (even though I'll be taking that ability over my mount, when I hit 5th level). As for halflings - a halfling paladin just makes me laugh.

But in LEW - while some GMs might let me make multiple attacks per round with smite, I should expect to follow RAW. And, by RAW, Paladins are BONED compared to Barbarians in, well, pretty much every way (except Paladins are Cooler).

I had a halfling Paladin once who would have cut you for that Everyone always assumed that she was a con artist pretending to be a Paladin because she was a halfling. It didn't help that her mother was one of the most notorious thieves in the kingdom, and the resemblance was uncanny

But you're right--the RAW's the RAW. I could swear they errataed that though

 

[SlagMortar]

the text in the PHB says "a paladin can smite evil with one normal melee attack", but nowhere says anything about making multiple attacks in that round. Thus, the supernatural ability takes precedence.

Wait, so that means you can't make a smite during a charge attack? Charge is a full round action and so you can't take a standard action in conjunction with it.

However, I'm pretty sure the "one normal melee attack" could be considered to "otherwise noted" that smite evil is used as part of a normal melee attack.

Google found me a poll discussing the issue earlier this year here on enworld: Combat - Smite Evil as Part of a Full Attack?

 

[Rystil Arden]

Wait, so that means you can't make a smite during a charge attack? Charge is a full round action and so you can't take a standard action in conjunction with it.

However, I'm pretty sure the "one normal melee attack" could be considered to "otherwise noted" that smite evil is used as part of a normal melee attack.

Google found me a poll discussing the issue earlier this year here on enworld: Combat - Smite Evil as Part of a Full Attack?

Whew, well I thought I was right.

 

[Wik]

Charging Smite specifically words that you can make a smite as part of a charge attack - whereas normally you cannot.

Just because people say you can on ENWorld, don't mean it's right.

That being said, I'm all for making multiple smites in one round. That's damage city, baby.

So, is my feat gonna get some votes?

 

[Wik]

*cough*. Is there anything holding this one up?

 

[Rae ArdGaoth]

Not really, from a mechanical standpoint. I just don't think it adds anything to the campaign. I'm not a fan of rules bloat, our list of feats is already ridiculously long as it is, and I find it hard to believe that Galwynn has no satisfying option whatsoever for a L3 feat. I don't see too many people taking this feat, it has no fluff, and even if it did... I'd still probably vote the same way.

Sorry Wik, but I vote NO. :\

 

[Boddynock]

Wik, I'm like Rae - not a fan of rules bloat and not convinced that the feat does much more than allow the power levels to creep up a bit.

Neither am I convinced by the prior approval of the Extra Rage feat. I suppose my reservation could be summed up by the old saw, "Two wrongs don't make a right."

I vote NO.