D&D (2024) I love the new changes to Paladin

[Horwath]

Smite nerf went overboard.

having 5 smites per round was insane and it needed to go, but requiring Bonus action for a simple smite is too much.

Simpler fix could have been: Once on your turn you can use Smite.
Also not needed to make it a spell.

 

[Daztur]

Did you ever play with the old conjuration spells?

These are better.

They were powerful but they weren't so bad if you followed the official ruling that the DM chose what specific critters were summoned. The new ones allow for some crazy naughty word with scorching ray etc.

 

[ECMO3]

Did you ever play with the old conjuration spells?

These are better.

more powerful maybe, not more fun imo. summon mirtful fey on a fey wanderer ranger is the most fun i have gad i think

 

[Valetudo]

The one problem with the change isn't the limiting of smites once per round(I think they could have fixed this with the new casting rules), kits the fact that you can't polearm master because of the bonus action usage.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Smite nerf went overboard.

having 5 smites per round was insane and it needed to go, but requiring Bonus action for a simple smite is too much.

Simpler fix could have been: Once on your turn you can use Smite.
Also not needed to make it a spell.

As if they wanted to limit the power of halfcasters somehow...

 

[Horwath]

As if they wanted to limit the power of halfcasters somehow...

they wanted to limit smite, and I agree with that, but they overdid it a little.

we all saw that dreaded Assassin3/Fighter2/Gloomstalker3+/Paladin2+...go with either paladin or ranger to 5th level and over.

 

[Xeviat]

Smite nerf went overboard.

having 5 smites per round was insane and it needed to go, but requiring Bonus action for a simple smite is too much.

Simpler fix could have been: Once on your turn you can use Smite.
Also not needed to make it a spell.

That's how Eldritch Smite works

 

[Clint_L]

Does this mean that 5.5 widens the gap between combat optimizers and casual players?

I think it's too soon to tell. Every class got new stuff, and the outlier classes got buffed (e.g. monks, sorcerers). Also, the class explanations are now easier to understand. So I think it will be harder for casual players to pick outright bad options because they don't know what they are doing. In that sense, the gap may have narrowed.

However, the combat side of the game got a bit more complex, as a whole, and that usually favours optimizers who enjoy digging into the rules and finding the best possible combinations. So I suspect that, for those outliers, the gap may have widened.

Which...seems like kind of a win-win, to me. In general, I think the game is more balanced, but there is definitely opportunity for those who want to go hard on optimization.

 

[Oxlar]

Paladin is now dead to me. I don't mind limiting Ds to 1/turn, but making it a spell and costing a BA destroys so much versatility with their core class defining ability.

 

[ECMO3]

Paladin is now dead to me. I don't mind limiting Ds to 1/turn, but making it a spell and costing a BA destroys so much versatility with their core class defining ability.

I don't mind this change at all, I think players using DS elminated a lot of Paladin versatility IMO.

Spells are powerful in 5E and not using them made Paladins less versatile in play then they could have been in general IMO.