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

[Stalker0]

People were up in arms over every 4e character 'being a Wizard' but when everybody uses Spell Slots for everything, apparently that's fine? Because the FIGHTER doesn't get any? Is that it?

It is exactly that. A paladin is a spellcaster, them getting spells is fine. Rangers are spellcaster (I respect a lot of people want a spell-less ranger but its just not happening).

If rogues or fighters start getting class features as spells, yes people would be upset. But spellcasting classes getting more of their features through spells....I mean that's just same old same old.

 

[Undrave]

Its surprising that Second Wind and Indomitable weren't just made spells by this point.

Don't give them ideas.

 

[Undrave]

It is exactly that. A paladin is a spellcaster, them getting spells is fine. Rangers are spellcaster (I respect a lot of people want a spell-less ranger but its just not happening).

If rogues or fighters start getting class features as spells, yes people would be upset. But spellcasting classes getting more of their features through spells....I mean that's just same old same old.

But it's still all the same system! The spell slot system. The bad one!

I thought everything using the same system 'made them all the same' but I guess that was a lie?!

 

[Emberashh]

But it's still all the same system! The spell slot system. The bad one!

I thought everything using the same system 'made them all the same' but I guess that was a lie?!

Lots of things make sense when you look at 4e and scratch out "Powers" and write in "Spells".

Im still a firm believer that 5e is just 4e with the serial numbers filed off. Its why people keep reinventing 4e everytime they try to fix it.

 

[Vael]

Smites can no longer be used with ranged weapons, which everyone expected. However it's interesting that the casting time description for the smite spells is:

In other words, it's not based on the type of attack, but on the type of weapon. That is, if you throw a spear, that's a ranged attack with a melee weapon. (Just like you can make a melee attack with a ranged weapon such as a bow by hitting someone with it.)

So you can still smite at range, but only with thrown weapons.

Which ironically, means if I hit someone with a ranged weapon in melee (stab them with a dart or something like that) ... I can't smite with that? Can't smite pistol whip someone? Guess that might make it an improvised weapon.

 

[mellored]

this.

the whole "everything has to be a spell mentality" is getting real old, real fast.

It's the "everyone has spell slots" mentality that had been old for a really long time.

Can't really complain about a class using their resources.

 

[Stalker0]

But it's still all the same system! The spell slot system. The bad one!

I thought everything using the same system 'made them all the same' but I guess that was a lie?!

In 4e, every class got the same progress of at-will, encounter, and daily powers. From the most martial fighter to the most spell casty wizard.

In 5e, a martial fighter gets 0 spells (this has not changed one bit). A paladin gets spells but not at the same progression and power of a full caster. and then full casters get more spells.

So there are differences in the level of "spell-ness" a class is. Whether that is too much or too enough is a matter of perspective, but it not the same level of "sameness" that the 4e power system was.

 

[mellored]

In 5e, a martial fighter gets 0 spells (this has not changed one bit). A paladin gets spells but not at the same progression and power of a full caster. and then full casters get more spells
So there are differences in the level of "spell-ness" a class is. Whether that is too much or too enough is a matter of perspective, but it not the same level of "sameness" that the 4e power system was.

Definitely less sameness.
But still somewhat sameness.

 

[Undrave]

So there are differences in the level of "spell-ness" a class is. Whether that is too much or too enough is a matter of perspective, but it not the same level of "sameness" that the 4e power system was.

Definitely less sameness.
But still somewhat sameness.

And more sameness than baseline 5e.

I'm all in for the 4e model of everything on the same frame. But I'm also equally on board for a wide differentiation. Somehow, half measures just feel bad to me. You have this one corner that are all the same and this one corner with this wide variety of systems. it feels half-hearted, like they couldn't come up with good systems for the rest.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

This post is relevant for the Paladin class too. ...

These new "class spells" no longer participate in the balancing mechanism of spell slot levels. They are intentionally broken.

Any class spell (Paladin Divine Smite, Bard Vicious Mockery, Warlock Eldritch Blast, Ranger Hunters Mark, etcetera) needs to be removed from the list of spell descriptions and added to the class features descriptions instead.

It is extremely important to balance spells mechanically, especially in order to balance gameplay at the highest tiers and to balance between spell caster classes and non caster classes.

Because class spells are intentionally overpowered because they are borrowing from the class design space, they are no longer participating in the spell design space. It is extremely important to regulate the spell design space.

Disagree. All spells should be in the spell design space. They follow the rules for spells, and should be in the chapter that includes the rules for spells. That is the only logical place to look them up. It wasn't a problem for the 2014 Vicious Mockery to be in the Spell chapter when only the Bard could use it. It won't be a problem in 2024.