New Design & Development: Paladin Smites!

[Bishmon]

It's a means of balance and flavor. It makes being a Paladin interesting and fun to the people that want to be a defender: Heal and Protect without wasting a whole standard action not hitting things.

Then why not let the paladin heal and protect things as swift actions?

 

[Sir Brennen]

Then why not let the paladin heal and protect things as swift actions?

Perhaps because that would return his magical abilities to the realm of "watered-down cleric"?

 

[frankthedm]

I thought we were assured that they tried and discarded MMO-style aggro mechanics for Defenders? That 27th level smite sounds like aggro to me.

One foe, one round, at late epic. It is Aggro control, but it is nothing like the 3E Knight had and it is not like the foe does not have other options. He basicly has Tunnel vision with the paladin at the end of the tunnel.

 

[Bishmon]

I love it. The golden wyvern thread talks about how Wizards should strip everything down to the bare bones so it's universally applicable to all settings, and then this one where the cry goes out that by not sufficiently describing how smites work, something which could vary from setting to setting, Wizards has rendered their effects inconceivable. Entertaining stuff.

This doesn't even make sense. No one here is complaining that the paladin smite isn't called "shining steed strike". Some people aren't happy that the smite doesn't make sense in terms of the basis of how it would work, not whether or not it has some meaningless name that's supposed to evoke flavor.

In your efforts to imply that a number of people here are either idiots or hypocrites and put yourself in a holier-than-thou position, you didn't even bother to wait for a good argument to push your point. Instead you just came off as lazy, disingenuous, and disrespectful. It's just bad form, and it contributes absolutely nothing productive to the discussion.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

I love it. The golden wyvern thread talks about how Wizards should strip everything down to the bare bones so it's universally applicable to all settings, and then this one where the cry goes out that by not sufficiently describing how smites work, something which could vary from setting to setting, Wizards has rendered their effects inconceivable. Entertaining stuff.

You're exaggerating a little (just a little), but yeah. Again my problem is not so much in the description, but (IMO) the pairing of unlike abilities. I think that other people are having similar issues, though they may not be able to articulate it as well.

 

[Betote]

The first actual crunch I see from 4E, and it has to be an awful gamist design. If I ever run 4E, now I know I'm banning or dratically altering the paladin class. If the other ones are equally nonsense, I'm afraid I'll pass

 

[TwinBahamut]

Then why not let the paladin heal and protect things as swift actions?

Maybe the paladin can heal and protect things as swift actions, in addition to using smites as a standard action. Smites are per-encounter abilities that will eventually run out, so it makes some sense that Paladins should have Defender abilities available at will in order to function in their role when their per-encounter abilities are worn out. These are probably swift actions that function in addition to normal movement and normal attacks.

 

[Mouseferatu]

People can't accept a spell-casting holy warrior with a single prayer that says both "Lord, aid me in smiting my foes, and guard my friends against harm"?

Really?

 

[JohnSnow]

I think that's a pretty good guess. I also would bet that, like SWSE, those will overlap, but not stack. And the kickers are probably in the range of +0 to +3. That would mean they matter, but don't overrun the system...

Now, where's that spined devil card?

Okay, pulled up the WotC forum post with the Spined Devil stats...

SPINED DEVIL
Medium Immortal Humanoid (Devil)
LEVEL 6 SKIRMISHER

INIT +5 SPD 5 FLY 7
Senses: nethersight. Perception +5
Resist fire 20
ATTACKS: Melee 2 claws +9 vs AC each: 2d4+4
Spine Rain Standard; ranged 10; +9 Dex vs. Ref; 1d6+2 + 2d6 fire AND Poisoned 5, Slowed while Poisoned
SKILLS: Spot +10

AC 20
FORT 18
REF 18
WILL 18
HP/Bloodied 47/23

Str +7 (19) Con +5 (14) Dex +5 (15) Int +5 (15) Wis +5 (14) Cha +5 (15)

Taking the theory that BAB increases at +1 per 2 levels, Spiney here should have a BAB of +3. His melee attacks have a +6 to hit and +4 to damage (same as what a 19 strength would give). Possibile explanations for the +6 to hit:

- +4 from Str bonus, +2 kicker from being a skirmisher.

His Spine Rain is a +9 Dex attack that does 1d6 + 2 (plus fire & poison) damage. Interestingly, his 3e Dex bonus would be +2. Coincidence? As for the +9 to hit, again, taking out the +3 from level, we have to hit +6. My speculation:

+2 from Dex bonus, +4 kicker from being a skirmisher.

It's possible there's a to-hit penalty from fighting with two weapons, but I don't think so. What do people think of the notion that a "Dex attack" uses the Dex bonus for damage? Plausible? Cheesy?

Any other observations based on revisiting these stats?

 

[Counterspin]

Why does magic become suddenly incomprehensible when it does two divergent things at once? It's magic. The possibilities of what it can do are literally boundless.

Bishmon -
The point is that Wizards is screwed either way. When people see things stripped of their trappings, such as the smites, their response is that it doesn't make any sense and that it's gamist. When they see things with their trappings, ala Golden Wyvern Adept, they say that Wizards is impinging on their creativity. As for saying people are hypocrites and idiots, I never suggested that the people in this thread are the people on that thread, so I don't grokk that conclusion.