Smite Evil.

Super_Troll

First Post
I'm SURE this has been covered, but I can't find it in the FAQ...

Is Smite Evil an attack by itself? I.E. You can't do a full attack and Smite? Or can you do it to one of your attacks during a Full Round attack? I assume that if you can do it during a Full Round attack you can still only do one SE/round. I also assume this stacks with Divine Might.

Smite Evil: Once per day, a paladin of 2nd level or higher may attempt to smite evil with one normal melee attack. She adds her Charisma modifier (if positive) to the paladin's attack roll and deals 1 extra point of damage per level. If the paladin accidentally smites a creature that is not evil, the smite has no effect but it is still used up for that day. Smite evil is a supernatural ability.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Maitre Du Donjon

First Post
Super_Troll said:

Smite Evil: Once per day, a paladin of 2nd level or higher may attempt to smite evil with one normal melee attack.

I think its pretty clear. One attack. Even if your hasted 20-th level two-weapon fighting paladin can dish out a dozen attacks a round, only ONE will be of the Smite Evil type.

Maitre D

Edit: Oh yeah, and since the damage bonus is unnamed, it would in fact stack with any other type of damage bonus
 
Last edited:

Super_Troll

First Post
Yes, it seems clear. I just want to make sure.

I'm also wondering if you can activate Smite Evil and Divine Might in the same round...you would seem to be able to.

Thanks!
 

Artoomis

First Post
Super_Troll said:
Yes, it seems clear. I just want to make sure.

I'm also wondering if you can activate Smite Evil and Divine Might in the same round...you would seem to be able to.

Thanks!

Yes. And if you do so while wearing Hide Armor and charging mounted with a lance using Spirited Charge, it can be ....

impressive.
 

Hypersmurf

Moderatarrrrh...
I'm also wondering if you can activate Smite Evil and Divine Might in the same round...you would seem to be able to.

Well, that depends if you use the Defenders of the Faith definition of Divine Might, or the FAQ definition...

-Hyp.
 

Jeremy

Explorer
I believe the intention of the FAQ was that using divine might takes no action, but activating it still takes a standard action as per DotF. I thought I saw a Sage letter on that. It meant that you don't have to use an action every round for it. Same way weapon specialization doesn't take an action to cause extra damage.

At least that's the way I understood it.

Smite Evil however, to get back on topic, can be applied in a round where in you take a full attack action. It only applies to one of your attacks, but does not stop you from taking your itinerative attacks in the round.

Where as activating divine might would. If hasted you could (or at least my understanding of the current intent of the rules says), activate divine might with your extra partial action, take a full attack action with your standard and move action to make your full number of attacks and declare one of them a Smite Evil attack. All these attacks would have the divine might bonus to damage until one round had passed for every point of charisma bonus you have.

Flame away. :)
 

Hypersmurf

Moderatarrrrh...
Flame away. :)

Actually, I agree with everything you said...

... except that I don't think the FAQ is at all clear. I can't see how anyone could read the original DotF wording to think they needed to use a standard action every round... the FAQ entry only serves to throw confusion on the issue.

-Hyp.
 

Super_Troll

First Post
It seems that from the DoF FAQ it is clear...I've never understood the controversy:

"Using Divine Might does not require an action at all. You can use the feat any time you attack, and you simply announce that you're using it and mark off a turn/rebuke use for the day."
 

Hypersmurf

Moderatarrrrh...
It seems that from the DoF FAQ it is clear...I've never understood the controversy:

The controversy is that it's not supported by anything in the text of Defenders of the Faith, and is in fact directly contradicted by that text.

It's not clarification, and it's not errata, they're simply saying "It works like this"... without addressing the fact that the book says the opposite.

-Hyp.
 

Remove ads

Top