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.

 

[Oofta]

I'm reminded of the blind men trying to describe an elephant with some of these conversation. One of the blind men walks up to the elephant, runs into a leg and declares "It's a tree." Another finds the tail and says "It's a rope." Another walks into the side "It's a wall." The last one's scream is cut off because the elephant is tired of being poked and prodded by all these idiots and steps on him.

Point is that A) I like bad jokes and B) we just don't know exactly how everything is going to fit together.

 

[Scribe]

I'm reminded of the blind men trying to describe an elephant with some of these conversation. One of the blind men walks up to the elephant, runs into a leg and declares "It's a tree." Another finds the tail and says "It's a rope." Another walks into the side "It's a wall." The last one's scream is cut off because the elephant is tired of being poked and prodded by all these idiots and steps on him.

Point is that A) I like bad jokes and B) we just don't know exactly how everything is going to fit together.

I just used that story to describe my Developers...

 

[Kurotowa]

Point is that A) I like bad jokes and B) we just don't know exactly how everything is going to fit together.

A good point to keep in mind. We can only evaluate these fragmentary previews in the context of the old book, and that context is very often outdated and wrong. While it's fun to get our paws on shiny new things it's easy to make a mistaken evaluation of how good or bad they are.

Though it goes against our habits, we should all try to withhold judgment on anything until we have the full books in front of us.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

that context is very often outdated and wrong.

However, that is not a reason to jump to the other extreme and assume that this is a strange mystery box that we cannot make any evaluations of. The rules are 95% the exact same as they have been for the last 10 years, and some of us have been playing with the playtest materials since last year.

 

[Kurotowa]

However, that is not a reason to jump to the other extreme and assume that this is a strange mystery box that we cannot make any evaluations of. The rules are 95% the exact same as they have been for the last 10 years, and some of us have been playing with the playtest materials since last year.

True to a degree. But if we look at something and immediately say, "What were the devs thinking, this is obviously under/over powered as heck!" then it's a sign we may be missing important context. Not always, certainly, but my experience is that the most wild examples in both directions turn out to be mitigated by other changes. It's the little things that slip through, not the big ones.

 

[EthanSental]

About 3.4K watching the barbarian video live on YouTube right now…and I get to get on a work call in 3 minutes….dang it!

 

[Chaosmancer]

Ah my mistake, I thought it had shifted with the update here.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1749-2024-paladin-vs-2014-paladin-whats-new

No problem

 

[Chaosmancer]

Because this is a continuing trend of 5e: turn things that would be simpler, easier, and better as individual class features into spells, forcing them to dance to the rules of spellcasting regardless of how it fits.

Because it means that the game leans EVEN MORE into "everyone must be a spellcaster to have cool features" problem that already frustrates a number of fans, so every new feature that gets turned into a spell just aggravates it that much more.

Because there's really no need for it to be a spell, and if it's a spell, it reduces the class's internal synergy and combo potential, which some fans like. (I'm ambivalent about this one, but I get why folks would be annoyed.)

I think that about covers the bases, even if I've missed something. And the thing is, there are a number of people who only care about one of these things (or some other thing I've neglected), but all roads lead to Rome. It doesn't matter whether you want a lower-magic game or hate the idea of offloading damn near every class feature into spells or are annoyed by the removal of combo potential. Whatever gets you there. With many of these reasons being heavily non-overlapping, there's a lot of pathways for very different people to come to the same conclusion.

Sure.

But some of us aren't looking at this as "one feature becoming a spell". Some of us are looking at this as "There were 8 spells, and one feature related to those spells and balanced against those spells, but not a spell. Now there are 9 spells."

Sure, WotC could have taken the time to make 8 abilities, scaling across levels and requiring different leveled spell slots, all so that everything was "spend spell slot on hit, no verbal component", but if the goal is to balance the options, turning 8 spells into 8 abilities across multiple levels is far far more work than turning 1 ability into a single spell.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I don't mean it's messy in terms of complexity, I mean it's messy in that it interrupts the regular/usual flow of how the character uses his weapon. A fighter can pull a maneuver on any attack, such that if they are a TWF type they don't forgo their shtick if they chose to do a maneuver earlier in the round (nor do they have to forgo a maneuver if their offhand bonus attack is the only attack they hit with in the round). A free action, done once a turn, to choose to use a smite spell is both easy and wouldn't interfere with any weapon uses.

By this same argument Rage or Holy Nova should be free. Or potion use. Or a species ability like the Goblin's Cunning Action. And you have a bit of a weird order of operations here. You are assuming that the Divine Smite interrupts the polearm mastery.... but you will be smiting at level 1, and you absolutely cannot under any circumstances or ways get Polearm Master before level 4 in the new books.

It doesn't seem to me like the feat you get later is "messy" because an ability you got before it is using a bonus action. It isn't like we've said Rage or Second Wind is "messy" because of how it interacts with Polearm Master. It is just a choice that can be made.

Sure, and they could have made all the smite spells operate in that same way (free action, once per turn) to keep it in the clear.

Sure, but that is changing 8 things, instead of changing 1 thing. It just makes more sense to me to change fewer things.

 

[Chaosmancer]

So Polearm Mastery is pretty much a trap for Paladins at this point. Same for TWF. You want to keep your bonus action for your smite so you can't take options that give you more of those because you won't be using them as often as someone who doesn't have smite so it's pretty much a subpar option.

Nick means that TWF doesn't take a bonus action

The thing with Polearm Mastery is that you can attack different targets. Especially before you get your second attack. But now, if you do that, you can't use one of your main class feature.

Are you really smiting on every single attack you ever make? Really, what it does is give you a choice. You can deal more, guaranteed damage on this enemy for a resource, or not spend a resource and make an extra attack which may hit to deal damage.

Is it less single turn DPR than when you could blow three smites on the same target with all three attacks? Obviously. But that doesn't make it a trap option to have a resource-free extra attack for when you don't want to smite.

BIG NUMBERS are fun.

And it's a Class Feature: you're supposed to use it! If you don't use it, why are you that specific class then? You pick a class to do the things the class does, not to sit on it and pretend to be something else.

Why is using Wrathful Smite and causing fear less of what the class does than divine smite and just dealing damage and nothing else? Sure, big numbers are fun, but effects are fun too. And paladin's smite, that doesn't mean that they should only have one smite option because all the other smite options are terrible in comparison.