D&D 5E Decoupling Smite from spell slots?

[Thunder Brother]

We're going to give A5E a spin once my books come in, but it's been a reality at my table that every paladin player has saved their spell slots for smiting. I can't recall the last time one actually used anything from their list.

You should meet my current paladin player. Dude almost refuses to use smite.

 

[Helldritch]

If you follow the 5 to 6 encounters per day, the paladins will lack spell slots very fast. Also, a paladin should declare his intention to smite before smiting. If he misses, then a spell slots is wasted.

In addition, make certain that fights lasts longer than 4 or 5 rounds (my average is around 7 with some fight lasting some 15 to 20 rounds!). This way, smite spells start to have a true appeal.

A lot of 5ed being easily abused is the fact that so much is hidden in plainsight. The 5 to 6 encounters per day might stink for some, but they can easily be incorporated into the narrative with simple explanations and narrations. The noise of the fights attract the next set of enemies or a patrol just happens to be returning exactly at the same time the last enemi of the previous encounter falls. If fights lasts longer and these fights are a bit more numerous, I guarantee that paladins will think to use their smite spells a lot more more instead of burning spell slots for a temporary spike in damage.

YMMV, but this is what is happening in my games.

 

[DND_Reborn]

How about this: just make them say they are expending the spell slots to smite before the attack roll is made.

You'll see them start casting spells more.

Also, a paladin should declare his intention to smite before smiting. If he misses, then a spell slots is wasted.

Agreed! Ninja'd.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Something I'd been considering recently - do you think it would be overpowered if the Paladin's smite became a fixed damage value usable PB number of times per short/long rest and didn't eat into their spell usage? Would recharge be better after a short rest or only after a long rest if this was done?

If this change was made, would altering or removing the various smite spells be advisable to do as well?

Any other factors that might need to be considered?

IF I did anything like this, I would probably do the following:

A. Proficiency number of uses per long rest.
B. Damage would be 1d8 for tier 1, 2d8 for tier 2, 3d8 for tier 3, and 4d8 for tier 4.
C1. Does not double on a critical (I hate when paladins lay into maximum smites because of crits...) but may be used after the attack roll, or
C2. Must be declared before the attack roll, but doubles on crits as normal.

OR

D. Smites expend the Paladin's HD.

 

[James Gasik]

That would be interesting, like the Diablo 2 paladin's sacrifice, smite does a small amount of hp damage

 

[billd91]

If you follow the 5 to 6 encounters per day, the paladins will lack spell slots very fast. Also, a paladin should declare his intention to smite before smiting. If he misses, then a spell slots is wasted.

That was largely the problem with 3e smite. It was too likely to be wasted. PF offered a better alternative of a persistent bonus that lasted multiple rounds. If you’re interested in this route, just go with them as spells that last until discharged. Then they cost the spell but aren’t wasted on a single bad roll.

 

[Helldritch]

That was largely the problem with 3e smite. It was too likely to be wasted. PF offered a better alternative of a persistent bonus that lasted multiple rounds. If you’re interested in this route, just go with them as spells that last until discharged. Then they cost the spell but aren’t wasted on a single bad roll.

You missed the point. We want paladins to use the various smite spells instead of their smite ability. We want them to waste a spell slot if they miss. A nerf yes. But no pain no gain.

 

[Umbran]

You missed the point. We want paladins to use the various smite spells instead of their smite ability.

Why give them the ability, then? If the point is to make them not use the ability, don't give them the ability!

Edit to add - generally, the Smite spells are of the form "the next time you hit a target before the spell ends". When the spell lasts for a minute, it is rather unlikely for it to be wasted. But, you want the Paladin's native ability to be easily wasted and use a spell slot?

That seems inconsistent, and seems to make a signature class ability to be worse than a spell.

 

[Stormonu]

You missed the point. We want paladins to use the various smite spells instead of their smite ability. We want them to waste a spell slot if they miss. A nerf yes. But no pain no gain.

That might be your goal, but it's not mine. I'd like to seperate the two abilities, so the paladin can be casting non-smite spells like shield of faith, locate object, crusader's mantle, find steed and the like without cutting (too deeply) into their ability to do combat damage. I'd personally like to remove the smite spells from existence.

 

[FrogReaver]

Something I'd been considering recently - do you think it would be overpowered if the Paladin's smite became a fixed damage value usable PB number of times per short/long rest and didn't eat into their spell usage? Would recharge be better after a short rest or only after a long rest if this was done?

If this change was made, would altering or removing the various smite spells be advisable to do as well?

Any other factors that might need to be considered?

In theory it would be fine. Paladin would probably be perceived weaker in actual play with the change despite having more daily resources. Actual play strength is much more dependent on action economy than a few more things you can do spread over the day. Of course a lot depends on exact implementation.

*Note: Paladin spells are already very strong. One could remove divine smite entirely with no additions and Paladins would still be fine.