D&D (2024) Playtest 6: Paladin ... Divine Smite is a Spell now

[Horwath]

I mean, the majority of smites where spells from the beginning.

I have never seen one of those spells cast once in 10 years of 5E.
And we got our fair share of paladins in those years.

 

[mellored]

I have never seen one of those spells cast once in 10 years of 5E.
And we got our fair share of paladins in those years.

And now you will.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Nothing in the rules says a bonus action cannot be done in time to smite.

You can take a bonus action only when a special ability, spell, or other feature of the game states that you can do something as a bonus action. You otherwise don’t have a bonus action to take.
You can take only one bonus action on your turn, so you must choose which bonus action to use when you have more than one available.
You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action’s timing is specified

Except that usually applies to “at the end of your turn” or “after you do X”. But the BA is still its own separate thing. I can’t think of a single case where the bonus action effectively becomes part of your main action. Show me another BA that you take while you’re taking your main action.

Edit: in particular, that’s not how any bonus action spells work currently. Don’t get me wrong, I’m fine with divine spells now being a spell, but because spells require an action, the designers painted themselves into a bit of a corner trying to make them function the same as the existing Divine Smite.

I think the 2014 versions of the existing Smite spells work better: “The next time you hit a creature with a weapon attack before this spell ends, the weapon [does some smite effect].” Bonus action, duration one minute. The only thing I would change is drop Concentration from them.

 

[Horwath]

And now you will.

already have my version of spell less paladin.

only Lay on hands and smites.

 

[RoughCoronet0]

I must be the only person in existence that enjoys using the smite spells from what I’ve seen online. Honestly if I could get them all of them on an Eldritch Knight or Bladesinger, they would be the only spells I would cast with them (well them and other weapon spells like Green-Flame Blade, Booming Blade, and Steel Wind Strike).

Not saying that making Divine Smite of spell is a bad or good idea, just that I must be a rare breed.

 

[mellored]

Except that usually applies to “at the end of your turn” or “after you do X”.

Not sure why that matters.

It's an exception based rule system. Smites can be an exception.

Stick your sword in someone, shout "die heathen" and deal 2d8 extra damage (4d8 if it is stuck it in really well).

 

[mellored]

already have my version of spell less paladin.

only Lay on hands and smites.

Both as bonus actions?
And can you can trade away a smite use to cast bless or compel duel?

 

[Sir Brennen]

Not sure why that matters.

It's an exception based rule system. Smites can be an exception.

They are an exception in the playtest version, buried in the text of the spell. One that I think will cause confusion and debate like this.

 

[Maxperson]

Nothing in the rules says a bonus action cannot be done in time to smite.

You can take a bonus action only when a special ability, spell, or other feature of the game states that you can do something as a bonus action. You otherwise don’t have a bonus action to take.
You can take only one bonus action on your turn, so you must choose which bonus action to use when you have more than one available.
You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action’s timing is specified

The problem is that it's not free like drawing a blade. That means that it takes time, which would be too late if you hit first. Once you hit, the damage is done. There's no time for another action, bonus or not.

All the above rule does is say when during the turn you can or cannot use the bonus action. It doesn't allow two actions simultaneously.

 

[Stalker0]

Using a "spell" for smite instead of the old mechanic does have a few differences:

• You must now be able to speak. This could affect a paladin under water (depending on DM ruling) or a paladin in a silence effect.
• The effect can be counter spelled.
• The effect is definitely affected by anti-magic (before it was more of a DM question as to whether the radiant damage could work in a AM field, now its clear).
• It consumes your bonus action and counts as a casted spell. This means for example that a paladin can no longer smite and cast Shield of Faith on the same turn.
• (Still debatable) This version of smite doesn't have crit damage.

So yes this version of smite is a bit weaker than the old version in a few ways that might come up once in a while. Now if its assessed that you can't crit with the smite, than that will be a big weakening overall.