Extra Smite

[Rystil Arden]

I didn't like Extra Rage when it came up either, mostly for the diptastic tendencies it inspires. I believe that it passed despite my non-vote either way. I'm actually the opposite of Rae and Boddynock on one thing, though--if it is balanced and interesting, I think it should always be added (they want fewer rules, and I want more, all else being equal). I don't find Extra Smite to be interesting, but I do find it to be balanced with previous things we have allowed. I might suggest, however, that you propose something cooler and more flavourful instead but equally balanced?

 

[Bison]

Clearly Im bored here at work today, because I am replying to this thread even though I dont think I have ever seriously played either a paladin or a barbarian ...

but if the question is which feat is better, I think you also need to consider how often a paladin would use his extra smites (which I imagine would be just about every day) vs how often a barabrian can use his extra rages. Does the barbarian usually get into that many encounters per day? I would imagine most of the time those extra rages would go unused.

 

[Solange]

Isn't the standard encounter rate 3-4 per day?

 

[Bison]

Isn't the standard encounter rate 3-4 per day?

I would think that depens on who is renning the adventure, some would go more some would go less. but even at this rate if a barbarian has 2 extra rages at least one would go unused quite often

 

[Solange]

I would think that depens on who is renning the adventure, some would go more some would go less. but even at this rate if a barbarian has 2 extra rages at least one would go unused quite often

That's just what the DMG and challenge ratings assume from what I know.

 

[Wik]

See, now, I don't really get this. It's mechanically balanced, and what I can do with it in-character would help out my character (he is, after all, a fairly aggressive fighter).

Why new feats need to be flavourful to me seems a bit backward - it really just prevents players from constructing PCs they want to make. If I made this feat as "halina's strike", or something like that, but it was mechanically the same... it really prevents others from taking it (unless they happen to be a paladin of Halina, which seems - unlikely).

So, I guess it's not a big deal, but for the record, I think the logic here is a little skewed.

 

[orsal]

All things considered, this seems reasonable to me. Yes.

 

[Rystil Arden]

See, now, I don't really get this. It's mechanically balanced, and what I can do with it in-character would help out my character (he is, after all, a fairly aggressive fighter).

Why new feats need to be flavourful to me seems a bit backward - it really just prevents players from constructing PCs they want to make. If I made this feat as "halina's strike", or something like that, but it was mechanically the same... it really prevents others from taking it (unless they happen to be a paladin of Halina, which seems - unlikely).

So, I guess it's not a big deal, but for the record, I think the logic here is a little skewed.

I'm halfway with you here (I don't think making things with flavour is worse like you do, but I do agree that flavourless but useful mechanical feats are OK). When I suggested making a different feat with more flavour, it was as an idea to help you get it passed the other judges (since it will be hard to pass it with 2 NOs--not impossible, but very hard).

 

[Patlin]

Extra Smite
You can smite your enemies more often per day.
Prerequisites: Smite Attack
Benefit: You can use any 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.

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.

Otherwise, I vote YES.

 

[Patlin]

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.

One of the methods we use for handling rule disputes in LEW is to seek a consensus in the rules forum. 94.12% is a pretty good consensus, so absent a direct proposal to the contrary it seems to me that the thread is pretty good authority here in LEW.