New Design & Development: Paladin Smites!

[Kintara]

Yeah, that's rather my thought, too.

I have no problem with the paladin being able to do the activities stated. I fail to see how making those activities always connected is a bonus, either mechanically or in flavor. I would prefer to make them separate - a smite and an aura, instead of a smite that happens to have a rather arbitrary aura attached to it.

I guess I just prefer to have the character's actions and choices be more... atomic.

Well, that sounds like a Fighter/Cleric to me.

 

[neceros]

Yeah, that's rather my thought, too.

I have no problem with the paladin being able to do the activities stated. I fail to see how making those activities always connected is a bonus, either mechanically or in flavor. I would prefer to make them separate - a smite and an aura, instead of a smite that happens to have a rather arbitrary aura attached to it.

I guess I just prefer to have the character's actions and choices be more... atomic.

Personally, I wouldn't have any problems with having Paladin Auras. However, so long as I can do my defender role and still heal and hit things with a fast paced momentum, then we'll be alright.

I hated spells for that reason: They were too slow to use when in combat if you also had a sword in your hand.

 

[mhensley]

Most combat only lasts 5-6 rounds. If a paladin has 10 per-encounter smiting abilities then they would smite every time they attack, including AoO's. That would be plain silly.

But an upgraded smite that superceded the previous would be excellent. It would force the player to continue to make tactical choices about when to use the ability in every combat, even at higher levels.

I'm beginning to think that no one will ever be making a simple attack anymore. Paladins will always be Smiting. Rogues will always be Sneak Attacking. Fighters will always be Two-Fisted Monkey Attacking.

 

[Perun]

I think it's fairly clear the 4e paladin smites are actually a lot like 3e spells. All three listed in the WotC article are resolved through Charisma attacks, which means they're guided by something else than physical strength.

On second thought they could be a combination of 3.5 smite and divine feats. You channel divine energy in your attack, allowing you to deal extra damage, and you use the "excess" (or fraction of) divine energy to achieve a secondary effect. In 3.5 parlance, you make your smite attack and use a free action to channel positive energy to give your allies a boost or whatever other effect is tied to the smite.

A 3.5 paladin with Quicken Turning and Sacred Boost (both from Complete Divine, p. 84) can, for example, smite his foe and make all cure spells cast within one round on all of his allies within a 60-ft. burst maximised, and then take his move action.

I assume the actual smites in the PH will come with at least one short sentence of flavour description (similar to what they now use in spell descriptions; such descriptions were mentioned in one of the earlier preview articles).

Regards.

 

[mhensley]

However, so long as I can do my defender role and still heal and hit things with a fast paced momentum, then we'll be alright.

What's all this bs about playing a defender role? If I'm playing a Paladin, my job should be to kick evil butt and take names. If the other party members can't take care of themselves, I don't need them. D&D is not WoW. Mages are quite capable of defending themselves without a meatshield- invisibility, levitation, mirror image, flying, protection from missiles, etc., etc., etc.

 

[neceros]

What's all this bs about playing a defender role? If I'm playing a Paladin, my job should be to kick evil butt and take names. If the other party members can't take care of themselves, I don't need them. D&D is not WoW. Mages are quite capable of defending themselves without a meatshield- invisibility, levitation, mirror image, flying, protection from missiles, etc., etc., etc.

Are you sure, because I'm not.

Let me explain a bit.

Yes, if I were to play a Paladin I'd most certainly want to fight against Evil and save the weak. However, to be able to do these things sometimes you need a party. Sure, I can kill a skeleton to fulfill my personal dogma, but I can kill so many more things with a party.

Yes, mages most likely have the ability to protect themselves, but I can do it better. Being a team makes fighting much easier.

This has nothing to do with MMOs, and everything to do with balance and having fun.

 

[mrswing]

This is exactly the kind of stuff which makes me worry about 4e.

There's no link between hitting an enemy and improving the group members' ACs. There's no link between hitting an enemy and by hitting them suddenly healing your allies somewhat.

At first, 4e seemed to be very close to the kind of thing I wanted from D&D. But as time goes on, the more is revealed of the system, the more I fear that the game becomes even more of a meta-game than before. D&D used to be inspired by fantasy novels and stories, but as everyone knows it has slowly developed into its own genre. With this new edition, it seems as if the developers are really locking D&D into a world of its own completely.

And as for less complexity... Seems to me like it's all getting MORE complex by the second.

I was really looking forward to this... Now, not so much...

 

[BryonD]

True. However the Crusader from Bo9S, was the testbed for many of these abilities and he was restricted to healing through pugillation.

It could happen.

That would be bad

 

[KingCrab]

Aside from the fact that in play, this actually promises to be a lot more complicated than 3.5 (more special abilities, more complexity - duh), what bothers me is the issue of whether you'll be able to use any of these newly-acquired magical abilities outside of combat, or independently of swinging a weapon - and if not, why not? (aside from the desire to keep things "simple" from a mechanical point of view) Frankly, the thought that now you can boost AC, heal at range and exercise mind-control or compulsion magic - just as long as you're smiting something while you do it - strikes me as completely idiotic.

I think it's clear at this point that they're not doing much to support their claim that they were making combat streamlined and fast. The more we hear the clearer it is that combat will be slower than in 3.x. Imagine a bunch of smiting paladins fighting amongst some of the terrain we've learned about and already we're bogged down with a lot to keep track of (using the only crunch we have.)

All is not lost, however. It is possible that a lot of the abilities will prove to be fun and that maybe we will have a system with slow (compared to 3.x) but entertaining battles.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

This is exactly the kind of stuff which makes me worry about 4e.

There's no link between hitting an enemy and improving the group members' ACs. There's no link between hitting an enemy and by hitting them suddenly healing your allies somewhat.

In martial power source terms, pressing the attack on someone so that they're less able to attack another (giving an ally AC) seems perfectly reasonable to me.