New Design & Development: Paladin Smites!

[Skaven_13]

To be fair, the Wizards description doesnt give much fluff text at all for it. All we have is a base description 'smites allow a paladin to deliver a powerful blow with the character's weapon of choice, while layering on some divine effect' and pure game mechanics. Any fluff you're putting behind it, ATM, is all your own creation...and you've already done the job of describing a way that it'd work for you...so why not use that?

That is true. There is no fluff text provided by wizards, so I have the mechanic to go off of. That said, to me, my ability to hit someone with a weapon should not result in healing allies, so a smite that heals a paladin's allies doesn't work for me. If the smite just healed the paladin, I'm fine with that, but not others.

The paladin shouts out his god's name, calling upon him to close the wounds of his fellow warrior against darkness, and to empower his blade to smite the hell out the one before him. Heck, think of tradtional prayers...how many of them call upon a deity to do just ONE thing? Usually it's some combination of 'Make my opponents hurt a lot' with 'keep my guys from dying'

Ok. Traditional prayers are also full of honorifics, praise, asking for the saving of souls, and sometimes the request for a puppy , etc. So when does a standard smite attack start to become full round actions?

Traditional prayers aside, when does the god say 'No'? Unless the ally is of the same faith, why would the god even bother with healing a hurt ally? Is his servant not resourceful enough to handle the situation?

All this fluff aside (I think I'm just rambling now), spells for clerics and paladins are just traditional prayers that just invoke more power. There are prayers to heal, prayers to assist in combat, etc. The system works them one at a time. If you want multiple effects, that is a higher level spell.

I'll give in on healing with a smite on one condition: it's a burst effect centered on the paladin from divine energy being converted into positive energy at the point of impact. As a burst effect, it does not care about allies or enemies.

 

[Njall]

That is true. There is no fluff text provided by wizards, so I have the mechanic to go off of. That said, to me, my ability to hit someone with a weapon should not result in healing allies, so a smite that heals a paladin's allies doesn't work for me. If the smite just healed the paladin, I'm fine with that, but not others.



Ok. Traditional prayers are also full of honorifics, praise, asking for the saving of souls, and sometimes the request for a puppy , etc. So when does a standard smite attack start to become full round actions?

Traditional prayers aside, when does the god say 'No'? Unless the ally is of the same faith, why would the god even bother with healing a hurt ally? Is his servant not resourceful enough to handle the situation?

All this fluff aside (I think I'm just rambling now), spells for clerics and paladins are just traditional prayers that just invoke more power. There are prayers to heal, prayers to assist in combat, etc. The system works them one at a time. If you want multiple effects, that is a higher level spell.

I'll give in on healing with a smite on one condition: it's a burst effect centered on the paladin from divine energy being converted into positive energy at the point of impact. As a burst effect, it does not care about allies or enemies.

Just see the smite as a spell.
The somatic component is "smack the enemy".
I don't see how that is less realistic than a guy with a book learning to set things on fire throwing balls of guano bat around...

 

[Jinete]

The paladin shouts out his god's name, calling upon him to close the wounds of his fellow warrior against darkness, and to empower his blade to smite the hell out the one before him. Heck, think of tradtional prayers...how many of them call upon a deity to do just ONE thing? Usually it's some combination of 'Make my opponents hurt a lot' with 'keep my guys from dying'

HEAR ME BAHAMUT!!!. THIS ONE'S BLOOD FOR OURS!!!

Could work. Also, made me shiver.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Just see the smite as a spell.
The somatic component is "smack the enemy".
I don't see how that is less realistic than a guy with a book learning to set things on fire throwing balls of guano bat around...

Actually, I think the whole Smite is a spell. Since the attack seems to be based on Charisma, instead of Strength, you are casting a spell. The spell has two effects - dealing damage and healing/protecting/binding someone else.

 

[Stormtalon]

I'll give in on healing with a smite on one condition: it's a burst effect centered on the paladin from divine energy being converted into positive energy at the point of impact. As a burst effect, it does not care about allies or enemies.

And if the smites were based off of Strength and physical prowess, then uncontrolled bursts would make sense. However, they're not; Charisma and/or Wisdom are the relevant stats, meaning it's not just an uncontrolled burst of divine energy. The paladin is using his force of will and inner fire and devotion to take the power granted by his deity and shape it and channel it. His deity grants the power and through his martial devotion to their cause, the paladin gives it a focus and a purpose. Why is that seeming to be such a hard thing for people to accept as (within the D&D milieu) "realistic" and sensible?

 

[eleran]

Understandable. However, the PHB will say "Paladins are Lawful or Good." and leave it at that. The DMG will have rules on making the Paladins Evil or Chaotic. Paladins are meant to be good in nature, but they know people will want to stray sometimes.

How do you know this? Is there a link to some proof or other documentation?

I really liked your post other than this statement.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

How do you know this? Is there a link to some proof or other documentation?

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=212876

 

[Njall]

Actually, I think the whole Smite is a spell. Since the attack seems to be based on Charisma, instead of Strength, you are casting a spell. The spell has two effects - dealing damage and healing/protecting/binding someone else.

And I'm fine with that, as well
I was just trying to put it in such way that the two effects ( "I smite my opponent so that I please my patron" and "My patron deity grants an ally of mine the ability to avoid an opponent's attack/regain some lost strength" ) could be seen as correlated.
Frankly, until the mechanics make it impossible for me as a DM to find a flavor description for what's happenning in my game, I'm okay with just about anything they could come up with.
If it was an extraordinary ability (as opposed to the (su) it is in 3.x), I'd probably have a problem with it, but as things stand...not really.
It would also be ok with me if they decided that Paladins are only capable of manifesting divine powers when fighting...I'd just assume that clerics are the ones learning to manipulate divine power and positive/negative energy, while paladins are more similar to spontaneous casters, feeling closer to their patron deities only when fighting on their behalf.

 

[DM_Blake]

If he hit an enemy with a smite, and as a benefit could say a brief healing or protection prayer, as a swift action, I would have no problem with it. I could even almost buy allies getting temporary hitpoints from a morale boost at seeing the paladin's spectaclular hit. What you have here are two effects coming form one action that are completely disconnected. It would be like a wizard hits you with his staff, and for no reason at all, a column of fire roasts some enemies 20 ft away. No spellcasting or power words, or activating the staff. It just happens. That is ridiculous, and I can't stomach it. You have to have a bit of versimilitude even in a fanstasy game, like D&D. Prayers or spells heal or damage, melee attacks should never heal unless it's a touch attack with a healing spell.

Who said there's no spellcasting or power words in these Smite abilities.

Spells have components that complicate their use. Verbal components can be silenced. Somatic components can be interrupted by grapples, being tied up, etc. Material components can be taken away. This complicates spellcasting.

But paladin Smites have never required this stuff. In 3e, a paladin simply states he is smiting the evil monster, and he gets a damage bonus. There are no game mechanic components like with spellcasting, but surely in a roleplaying sense they are there. That paladin appeals to his god for the power to smite his foes.

That is just as much a "power word" as anything else.

So, now in 4e, his "power words", or his appeal to his god, is to not only smite the enemy in front of him, but to also allow him to protect or heal his companion.

I cannot fathom why this is so hard for you to stomach.

In 3e, the paladin asks his god for a smite and he gets it. Nobody can interrupt that or take it away. In 4e, the paladin asks his god for a smite and a little extra help, and he gets it. Nobody can interrupt that or take it away.

It's exactly the same thing, except that in 4e, the paladins have learned how to milk their gods for more than just damage.

 

[Skaven_13]

Just see the smite as a spell.
The somatic component is "smack the enemy".
I don't see how that is less realistic than a guy with a book learning to set things on fire throwing balls of guano bat around...

I'm not looking at this as realistic or not realistic. I realize I'm playing a game.

That said, there are certain things I just don't want to see combined. Healing allies and damaging others with a melee attack is one of them. Missing the to hit roll and still causing damage is another. To me, it doesn't flow well together and it feels munchkin.

Besides, I played a game system where smite was a spell. That spell did one thing: it attempted to kill my enemy with large amounts of damage.