the Jester
Legend
I run it like c.
AoO and Smite Ability
- Thread starter Cyri'kazzen the Drow
- Start date
Lela
First Post
Who'd have thunk it? I'm actually agreeing with AGGEMAN. 
I'd never have bothered to Smite beyond 10th level if it was a standard action. Just wouldn't be worth the loss of my other attacks (which can very well hit). Same with NPC Paladins and Blackguards. Not worth the effort.
IMO it is (and was meant to be) a normal attack. And, like tripping and disarming, can be used as an AoO.*
*Unless that changed in 3.5.
I'd never have bothered to Smite beyond 10th level if it was a standard action. Just wouldn't be worth the loss of my other attacks (which can very well hit). Same with NPC Paladins and Blackguards. Not worth the effort.
IMO it is (and was meant to be) a normal attack. And, like tripping and disarming, can be used as an AoO.*
*Unless that changed in 3.5.
AGGEMAM
First Post
Lela said:Who'd have thunk it? I'm actually agreeing with AGGEMAN.
LOL
*sad voice* But I'm such a lovable guy, why don't you like me?
Anyways, I have considered this a bit more. And think I might have discovered the intent of the rules.
This seems to rule out the possibility that Smiting is 'not an action' and can be used on an AoO. So what is it then? Well, since using the ability is either a standard action or a full round action but the ability doesn't say which. I think that it might actually be both.
The only restriction mentioned in the Smite Evil description is that it has to be done with a 'normal melee attack'. A 'normal melee attack' is IMO the opposite of an extra attack whether that be gained from iterative, cleaving or what have you attacks.
So there is no reason in my mind that you couldn't use Smite Evil with a full attack action as long as the attack with smiting is the first attack in the sequence.
Quasqueton
First Post
I was looking into more clarity for this thread:
http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=86174
. . . where I lament the fact that the Extra Smiting feat has a +4 BAB requirement, when I found this thread.
Combining the two threads made me think of this:
With a +4 BAB, paladins can't take the feat until 6th level. At 6th level, a paladin gets a second attack (+6/+1 BAB).
So, if the smite evil ability is a non-action to activate, and can be used as one (or more) attack in a full attack action, then why not let a paladin take ES at low level? The +4 BAB prerequisite really doesn' t mean too much.
But if the smite evil ability is a standard action (as most Su abilities are), then using it when you have the option of making multiple attacks is a real decision. In this situation, the +4 BAB means the paladin has to consider whether to use the one attack for extra bonuses, or use two attacks.
So, I wonder if the designer(s) put the prerequisite for ES such that a paladin can only take it at 6th level is evidence that they considered smite evil a standard action allowing only one attack in place of a full attack action with multiple attacks?
Quasqueton
http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=86174
. . . where I lament the fact that the Extra Smiting feat has a +4 BAB requirement, when I found this thread.
Combining the two threads made me think of this:
With a +4 BAB, paladins can't take the feat until 6th level. At 6th level, a paladin gets a second attack (+6/+1 BAB).
So, if the smite evil ability is a non-action to activate, and can be used as one (or more) attack in a full attack action, then why not let a paladin take ES at low level? The +4 BAB prerequisite really doesn' t mean too much.
But if the smite evil ability is a standard action (as most Su abilities are), then using it when you have the option of making multiple attacks is a real decision. In this situation, the +4 BAB means the paladin has to consider whether to use the one attack for extra bonuses, or use two attacks.
So, I wonder if the designer(s) put the prerequisite for ES such that a paladin can only take it at 6th level is evidence that they considered smite evil a standard action allowing only one attack in place of a full attack action with multiple attacks?
Quasqueton
borc killer
First Post
Philip said:
We did the same. Has been working wounderfully. I would recommend everyone to try it out.
Borc Killer
It won't come as a big surprise that I don't agree with that answer.
rushlight
Roll for Initiative!
Personally, I was allowing this before I sent them an email - and I haven't really found it unbalancing. A paladin only gets a handful of Smites a day, and using one for an AoO is just about the same as using one during his round.
And as for the definition of a "normal melee attack" - I think people can get a bit too narrowly focused. It seems that a "normal melee attack" is your standard attempt to thwack someone with your heavy/sharp/pointy/metal stick. By contrast, a melee attack that isn't normal would be an attempt to sunder, or trip, or... come to think of it, any of the special melee attacks covered on PHB page 154 and after. Those are "special melee attacks". No Smite there.
Seems simple.
And as for the definition of a "normal melee attack" - I think people can get a bit too narrowly focused. It seems that a "normal melee attack" is your standard attempt to thwack someone with your heavy/sharp/pointy/metal stick. By contrast, a melee attack that isn't normal would be an attempt to sunder, or trip, or... come to think of it, any of the special melee attacks covered on PHB page 154 and after. Those are "special melee attacks". No Smite there.
Seems simple.
Tarril Wolfeye
First Post
Philip said:
We use a modified version: you can only use special attacks, etc. on an AoO if you normally would not provoke an AoO in return. This means Disarm/Grapple/Trip/ only if you've got Improved Disarm/Grapple/Trip.borc killer said:
Similar Threads
