D&D 5E Decoupling Smite from spell slots?

[Stormonu]

Something I'd been considering recently - do you think it would be overpowered if the Paladin's smite became a fixed damage value usable PB number of times per short/long rest and didn't eat into their spell usage? Would recharge be better after a short rest or only after a long rest if this was done?

If this change was made, would altering or removing the various smite spells be advisable to do as well?

Any other factors that might need to be considered?

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Paladins need a nerf more than anything, so unless you start taking away more than you're giving...

 

[Stormonu]

Forgot to add the proposed Smite damage:

2nd-4th level: 1d8 radiant damage (2x/rest)
5th-8th level: 2d8 radiant damage (3x/rest)
9th-12th level: 3d8 radiant damage (4x/rest) <-- Too much? maybe 2d8 (4x/rest)?
13th-16th level: 4d8 radiant damage (5x/rest) <-- Too much? maybe 3d8 (5x/rest)?
17th+ level: 5d8 radiant damage (6x/rest) <-- Too much? maybe 3d8 (6x/rest)?

 

[James Gasik]

I would prefer Paladins who had reasons to cast their spells, but this is a valid point- Smite has to take up some kind of resource. Honestly with the Smite line of spells (Burning Smite, et. al.), I'd be happy trading Smite away for Con save proficiency just so I can throw out a Shield of Faith and not lose it the first time I get hit, lol.

 

[Cadence]

A5e has it decoupled from spells. Damage goes to 2d8 at 5th, 3d8 at 9th, 4d8 at 13th, 5d8 at 17th, and 6d8 at 19th. Empowered smite at 4th level and greater empowered smite at 8th add extra effects.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

What do they give up for this? Like, this is workable if they get no spells. Otherwise its just lavishing more goodies on the S tier class that makes a joke out of saving throw "Bounded accuracy".

 

[Stormonu]

What do they give up for this? Like, this is workable if they get no spells. Otherwise its just lavishing more goodies on the S tier class that makes a joke out of saving throw "Bounded accuracy".

That's what I'm trying to discern. Doing a little math, this severely cuts into smite damage possible overall, but the trade-off would be the paladin can use his spells for other things. Are those "other things" unbalanced?

 

[toucanbuzz]

trade-off would be the paladin can use his spells for other things.

We're going to give A5E a spin once my books come in, but it's been a reality at my table that every paladin player has saved their spell slots for smiting. I can't recall the last time one actually used anything from their list.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

That's what I'm trying to discern. Doing a little math, this severely cuts into smite damage possible overall, but the trade-off would be the paladin can use his spells for other things. Are those "other things" unbalanced?

Getting free spells on an already overpowered class? Yes.

Can fighters get 5 levels of spells if they promise not to use them for direct damage?

 

[NotAYakk]

I'm doing a bit of 'brew where every 5e class is adjusted upwards. Some more than others.

This leaves people who want to use a online build alone.

In general, I'm focusing on making sub-optimal choices better, like Rangers, solving the back-10 problem for a bunch of classes, and splitting full casters 50-50.

In doing so, one thing I did was give Paladins an ability to get a free smite after casting a spell. This encouraged the use of Paladin spells, (especially bonus action ones as it happens) in combat instead of saving it for smite-fuel.

A side benefit, as it is restricted to Paladin spells, is that it boosts the pure Paladin more than the Paladin dip who uses non-Paladin levels to fuel smite.