D&D (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook Reveal #3: "New Paladin"

"the paladin who, if they were in a movie, would ... have impossibly white teeth".


New Paladin preview: here are some notes, focusing on what's new and changes from the playtest materials. Last time we saw the Paladin was in Playtest 6 [=PT6 below].
See also this comparison at D&D Beyond (by someone who saw the video before it was streamed!)

OVERVIEW

• spellcasting starts at level 1, specifically called out as an advantage for multiclassing. (Same for Rangers).
• Lay on Hands and Weapon mastery at 1
• Paladin's smite at 2, along with fighting style.
• NEW: Paladin fighting style restriction is removed (all are available). You may forego fighting style to learn cantrips. [The option to get cantrips was given in Tasha's. They're letting us have it, but it's not called a "fighting style". I suspect this ties to the decision that fighting styles are feats now, and this would be weaker than magic initiate (which also gives a level 1 spell).]
• Paladin's smite gives you the spell Divine smite, with one free casting.
• channel divinity [CD]: uses increase: start with 2, plus 1 on a short rest.
• divine sense in CD option (as in PT6). duration lasts 10 minutes.
• Find steed spell at level 5, cast 1/day with no slot. Redesigned so that spell can be upcast, with a unique steed statblock. [This strongly implies that it's a class-specific spell, not on others' lists. Awesome. (Will a Lore Bard be able to select it? I hope so, and the discussion of spell lists (see below) makes me think they might, since identifying class-specific spells is harder.)]
• Abjure Foes a CD option (given at 9 in PT6)
• Auras are single things, with a single radius, that gain abilities/functionality (not separate auras as in 2014).

SUBCLASSES

Oath of Devotion.

• NEW: Sacred Weapon is part of the attack action. (PT required a Bonus action).
• Smite of Protection (level 15 in PT6)
• Holy Nimbus (level 20) is a bonus action (as in PT6).

Oath of Glory ("...this for me is the paladin who, if they were in a movie, would look at the camera, have impossibly white teeth, with a little sparkle on them as they smile")

• Peerless athlete lasts an hour (as in PT6)
• NEW: Aura of Alacrity affects allies if they enter your aura on their turn (they no longer need to start there)
• Oath of Glory has a new spell at level 17: Yolan's Regal Presence. Created by the Queen of the Elves, and makes others kneel before you and take psychic damage. [It's said that others can cast this spell too -- if right, then it's a 5th level spell and Clerics (likely) will be getting this at level 9. Perhaps he misspoke, and it's a class-specific spell.]

Oath of the Ancients

• Nature's wrath range "has been extended"
• Aura of Warding as in PT6 (resistance to Necrotic, Psychic, and Radiant)
• Undying Sentinel at 15 as in PT6 (you don't return with 1hp, but [?] 3x class level.

Oath of Vengeance

• NEW: Vow of Enmity part of attack action (not Bonus action); can transfer (as in PT6)
• NEW: Level 20 Avenging Angel activated as a Bonus Action, and lasts an hour (not 10 min as in PT6)

NEW RULES

• new area of effect: it's been there since 2014, but hasn't been named. It's for AOE that emanate from a character or monster -- the Emanation.
• new approach to spell lists. Spell list is part of the class description (as we saw with the Artificer). Entries give the school, whether it needs concentration, and required components. [I presume spell descriptions will still be at the back of the book: this is referring to the lists currently on PHB 207-11.]
• oath spell lists, patron spell lists, etc. have all been vetted and updated throughout.

 

[Gladius Legis]

If Bards still get magical secrets then they can take a spell from the Paladin's list.

IF Magical Secrets still works like it did in 5e. That's a big if since they obviously tried to change how it, and Bard spellcasting in general, works. Of course that was back when you had the three general lists, so who knows what happened to it since.

(IMO, Magical Secrets should be limited to other full spellcasters' lists.)

 

[MerricB]

Here's one change that I actually think is underwhelming: Oath of Devotion has "sacred weapon" and similar lasting 10 minutes rather than 1. However, I'm old school. 10 minutes is the length of a combat or an exploration turn, so it doesn't actually extend it enough! (It only works if you rush from one combat to another -- I'm not sure how many battles are that close together in dungeons. And if they're that close, aren't they all merging into one anyway?)

Cheers,
Merric

 

[Parmandur]

Here's one change that I actually think is underwhelming: Oath of Devotion has "sacred weapon" and similar lasting 10 minutes rather than 1. However, I'm old school. 10 minutes is the length of a combat or an exploration turn, so it doesn't actually extend it enough! (It only works if you rush from one combat to another -- I'm not sure how many battles are that close together in dungeons. And if they're that close, aren't they all merging into one anyway?)

Cheers,
Merric

Well, the average combat us about 12-18 seconds, in narrative time...so you could get a few in there.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The bonus action thing is pretty obvious, but I don't think many people (including myself) were thinking about smites now being subject to Counterspell. I will need to cue up the sad trombone music the first time I get to use that on my players. Does it make tactical sense? Probably not, but it will be funny.

Most people who are complaining that Divine Smite can now be counterspelled seem to forget that Counterspell is a now a Constitution save and doesn't cost the target their spell slot.

I'm really not sure it is that much of a debuff to have a character with a +7 save cost the enemy a 3rd level spell to maybe stop them from dealing 2d8 damage.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Did Jeremy say anything about lay on hands? IIRC, in at least some of the UA packets it had became a bonus action.

Catching up, haven't seen if anyone answered this.

According to the article, it is still a bonus action.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Most people who are complaining that Divine Smite can now be counterspelled seem to forget that Counterspell is a now a Constitution save and doesn't cost the target their spell slot.

I'm really not sure it is that much of a debuff to have a character with a +7 save cost the enemy a 3rd level spell to maybe stop them from dealing 2d8 damage.

Whilst I definitely agree that counterspelling a Smite is probably the dumbest possible use of Counterspell, to the point where it might even be a good thing, given the changes, I think the objection is more of an aesthetic one - in that, stylistically, Smite is not the "sort of magic" that should be possible to counterspell. You can't counterspell just any old magic - it has to be spells - and Smite isn't really "spells" in people's minds, and that's not going to change after a decade of it literally not being a spell.

It being aesthetic doesn't mean it's invalid, either - it just means it's not a game balance concern.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This, all this. As the resident instant mage slayer with my pally, I'm totally fine with it being limited to 1/turn just like Sneak Attack (or even 1/round). Alpha striking with multiple smites per round is definitively amusing, and burns through resources, and I get that one-shot kind of ability might be a tad too much. But as the resident halberd/glaive wielder, now it messily interacts with Polearm Mastery or other features.

I mean... is it messy?

You can either use your bonus action to hit with the butt of your weapon for 1d4+5 or 7.5 damage that may miss. OR you can use your bonus action for a smite spell, which if it is Divine smite is 2d8 or 9 damage that cannot miss.

That's it. That's the entire interaction. The only other thing that MIGHT come up, is that if you hit with your glaive and decide not to smite, you could hit with the butt of your weapon and crit.. and not be able to crit smite. But you can't crit smite on any bonus action attack, so that's fine.

And I want to point out, we are talking about Divine Smite only... because no one ever used the other smite spells. They might actually get used now. You are essentially getting a guaranteed to hit bonus action attack that can carry a debuff effect by spending your bonus action smiting.

 

[Scribe]

Whilst I definitely agree that counterspelling a Smite is probably the dumbest possible use of Counterspell, to the point where it might even be a good thing, given the changes, I think the objection is more of an aesthetic one - in that, stylistically, Smite is not the "sort of magic" that should be possible to counterspell. You can't counterspell just any old magic - it has to be spells - and Smite isn't really "spells" in people's minds, and that's not going to change after a decade of it literally not being a spell.

It being aesthetic doesn't mean it's invalid, either - it just means it's not a game balance concern.

Pretty much exactly. I can see arguments for making Smite a spell, but the 'feel' is just all wrong. Its similar to why while I liked the Warlock (2014) I never REALLY liked it because enough of it rubbed me the wrong way.

Now, they have taken my steady rock, and altered it enough that it just gets a shake of my head.

Add that on top of the multitude of annoyances with everything else and its the tipping point into a gripe.

 

[Laurefindel]

Hmm, I like the idea of Divine smite getting a free cast with opt in on fueling it more via the use of using your Spell Slots.

Presumably the ranger’s hunter’s mark will have a similar treatment? I didn’t follow the UAs, any indications this will be the case?

 

[Chaosmancer]

I didnt say less, I said less interesting.

"You now have 3 bland options to choose from, enjoy sir."

And somehow that is worse from a single bland option that everyone used to the point people forgot options existed?