D&D 5E Removing Concentration From Smite Spells, Including Spells like Ensnaring Strike?

[Xeviat]

It would have the exact opposite effect.

A Paladin could dump a smite (and a smite spell) on a hit, greatly increasing the paladins nova.

At 5th level a Paladin could Smite (twice) for an extra 6d8 radiant and easily apply a 1st level slot for an extra 2d6 damage and knockback with a 1st level slot.

Removing concentration also encourages an active Hunters Mark or Divine Favour for an extra 2d6/ 2d4 damage as well. God help you when Holy Weapon comes online at higher levels.

'Bonus action on a hit' would encourage nova strikes and burning spell slots, not discourage it.

But if Smite and smite spells both cost a bonus action, you couldn't do both.

 

[Xeviat]

What does that mean for those smite spells that apply a duration effect though? If the frightened effect from Wrathful Smite (for instance) lasts the full duration of the spell without consuming a concentration slot or risking disruption from a failed concentration check, it's a pretty big power boost. There's not many persistent debuffs in the game that don't require concentration.

The ones with a duration would need concentration, yeah.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

What does that mean for those smite spells that apply a duration effect though? If the frightened effect from Wrathful Smite (for instance) lasts the full duration of the spell without consuming a concentration slot or risking disruption from a failed concentration check, it's a pretty big power boost. There's not many persistent debuffs in the game that don't require concentration.

The spell already lets them save. That's good enough for me. IMO it was a design mistake to make these spells both give saves every round and be concentration.

That said, I'm fine with those spells still having concentration, while being cast as a bonus action when you hit. Although I'd add a clause that you can choose not to concentrate on the spell when you cast it, in which case you don't lose concentration on anything else, and the debuff only lasts until the end of their next turn. Or they have advantage on the saves.

Perhaps, "The target has advantage on saving throws against the continuing effects of this spell, unless you choose to COncentrate on this spell. If you do, the target makes saving throws as normal, and the spell follows the rules for Concentration as normal."

 

[humble minion]

The ones with a duration would need concentration, yeah.

I think the only one that doesn't have a duration is Thunderous Smite.

 

[Flamestrike]

How would this do that? You'd, I guess, be able to run Divine Favor and also use the smite spells, as a paladin, but that's it. And hey, cool, that spell will get used sometimes!

Not just divine favour, but also Holy Weapon, Hunters Mark (Veng), Bless, Elemental weapon and Spirit guardians to name a few.

The Paladin is a top tier damage dealer as is. Letting it stack Smite spells on top of any of those spells AND on top of Divine Smite is a bad idea for mine.

 

[Xeviat]

The spell already lets them save. That's good enough for me. IMO it was a design mistake to make these spells both give saves every round and be concentration.

That's definitely a conversation to be had.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That's definitely a conversation to be had.

Probably a separate one.

 

[Xeviat]

Not just divine favour, but also Holy Weapon, Hunters Mark (Veng), Bless, Elemental weapon and Spirit guardians to name a few.

The Paladin is a top tier damage dealer as is. Letting it stack Smite spells on top of any of those spells AND on top of Divine Smite is a bad idea for mine.

But a paladin can already stack those spells and divine smite! A few of us are suggesting making this change to the smite spells and then going in and adding a nerf to base divine smite. If someone wants to spend a lot of time charging up spells like that, so be it?

A paladin can already Divine Favor+Smite, or Bless+Smite, or Hunters Mark+Smite ...

 

[Flamestrike]

But if Smite and smite spells both cost a bonus action, you couldn't do both.

You would never see those Smite spells in use if there was a competing action economy for both aside from in extremely niche cases, and even when those cases arose, few paladins would have those Smite spells prepared.

Limit Divine Smite to 1/ turn and those Smite spells now have a nova function, and see a lot more use. Paladin damage slightly drops, but they get the rider effects of those Smite spells as a benefit.

 

[Flamestrike]

But a paladin can already stack those spells and divine smite!

Which is why I suggested limiting Divine smite to 1/ turn.

I limit Superiority dice to 2/ turn for Battlemasters (1/turn for Martial adepts) and I limit GWM/SS to the same 1/turn limit as well.