D&D (2024) Alternative Paladin Smite

[Xeviat]

Over the years, I've seen players start their attack with "I smite!", saying it before their attack. Older editions had smite declared before the attack. So it got me thinking of a variant way to do the smite spells. What do you think?

Divine Smite (variant)
Level 1 Evocation (Paladin)
Casting Time: Action
Range: Self
Component: V
Duration: Instantaneous
As part of the Action to cast this spell, take the Attack action with a melee weapon or an unarmed strike. Until the end of your turn, all attacks are made with advantage, and the first attack that hits deals and additional +?d8 radiant damage.

The idea here is that your smite guides the attack, but now has a chance of missing. I'd have to run the numbers on the math and see what damage bonus is balanced, since the increased hit chance will improve damage on its own, but converting the smites to this structure may fit the fiction better.

What do you think?

 

[mellored]

All attacks in a turn?

So I can action surge and haste and bonus action attack and get +d8 on all of them?

 

[Charlaquin]

I like the idea of deciding to smite before attacking, but I’d prefer it still just affect one attack, and maybe you get the spell slot back if you miss.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Over the years, I've seen players start their attack with "I smite!", saying it before their attack. Older editions had smite declared before the attack. So it got me thinking of a variant way to do the smite spells. What do you think?

Divine Smite (variant)
Level 1 Evocation (Paladin)
Casting Time: Action
Range: Self
Component: V
Duration: Instantaneous
As part of the Action to cast this spell, take the Attack action with a melee weapon or an unarmed strike. Until the end of your turn, all attacks are made with advantage, and the first attack that hits deals and additional +?d8 radiant damage.

The idea here is that your smite guides the attack, but now has a chance of missing. I'd have to run the numbers on the math and see what damage bonus is balanced, since the increased hit chance will improve damage on its own, but converting the smites to this structure may fit the fiction better.

What do you think?

Unless +?d8 is like, +3d8 or maybe more, my feeling is that this is going to compete fairly poorly with the smites in 2024 PHB. If you lose the spell slot on a miss you might need to go as high as +5d8 or something to balance it (probably with like +2d8 per spell level). It would sure make for spectacular smites that way.

You have to somewhat devalue Advantage when when doing the math on how much this is worth, too, because Advantage on Attack Rolls is increasingly easy to get, especially as you go up in levels, and doesn't stack with other sources of Advantage, nor negates Disadvantage (if you have both, it's a normal roll, period, no matter how many more Advantages you have).

What you gain is not using a Bonus Action, but that's a hard value to calculate.

 

[ECMO3]

All attacks in a turn?

So I can action surge and haste and bonus action attack and get +d8 on all of them?

From what he said all attacks have advantage, only the first one gets the damage.

If it is 1d8 I think it is generally worse than the standard smite. If it is 2d8 it is generally better because it does not take your bonus. Depending on build though it could be better or worse based on specifics.

 

[ECMO3]

What you gain is not using a Bonus Action, but that's a hard value to calculate.

This is why I think it is build dependant at 2d8. Bonus action and advantage with possible waste of the slot vs knowing you get the damage but losing this source of advantage and the bonus.

 

[Xeviat]

All attacks in a turn?

So I can action surge and haste and bonus action attack and get +d8 on all of them?

The bonus damage is only on the first hit.

Probably limit the advantage to attacks with the action.

 

[Xeviat]

Removing the bonus action requirement is part of it for me, since the paladin gets plenty of bonus action features. A bonus action spell that needs to be paired with an attack action is just kind of weird design for me.

 

[ECMO3]

Removing the bonus action requirement is part of it for me, since the paladin gets plenty of bonus action features. A bonus action spell that needs to be paired with an attack action is just kind of weird design for me.

I agree about the wierd design. They could turn it into a single attack, but they would need to up the damage a lot, to something like 4d8. This would make it a really powerful 1st level spell, but any lower and you would not cover the loss to extra attack.

 

[Xeviat]

I agree about the wierd design. They could turn it into a single attack, but they would need to up the damage a lot, to something like 4d8. This would make it a really powerful 1st level spell, but any lower and you would not cover the loss to extra attack.

A first level spell wouldn't need to do that much damage, as it would be stacking on top of the weapon's damage and ability bonus. Spells that don't deal damage on a miss are usually bumped up in power. As long as Extra Attack still works with it, it could probably work as a single attack.