So, compared with the Druid, which saw a huge overhaul to Wild Shape, Paladins are looking pretty similar - getting changes that I think are roughly on par with the Rogue, i.e. slight tweaks. Paladins are, of course, already a very popular and well-designed class.
Some of the changes are really semantic ones - you now only have a single Aura of Protection, but features that would grant you other auras like Aura of Courage or Aura of Devotion now simply add that functionality to Aura of Protection, which basically winds up meaning to real change (though it allows for simpler templating on things like Holy Avenger weapons).
I think we can also talk about how the Paladin now has spellcasting at 1st level and access to cantrips. Without things like Green-Flame Blade, though, I think Cantrips are unlikely to be super impactful (though the new Spare the Dying could replace the old "1 hit point of Lay on Hands to pop you up").
In theory, this is meant to make Spellcasting a more prominent feature for the Paladin, but I honestly think that other changes are more likely to make the difference, which we'll get to.
Let's get to the meat of it, though: Divine Smite has seen some changes. For existing Paladins, this will take the form of a nerf, but it's a light enough nerf that the core fun of the mechanic is not diminished.
The new version of Divine Smite now lets you expend a spell slot when you hit with any attack roll while using a weapon or an unarmed strike (as a note, grappling and shoving with an unarmed strike no longer involves an attack roll, so you can't put this damage on those functionalities). You deal additional radiant damage to the target, getting 2d8 for a 1st-level slot, and adding 1d8 for each spell level higher than 1st. You can do this no more than once per turn, and you can't use it on the same turn you cast a spell.
So, let's break down how that's different:
The nerf here is the limit to once a turn, and being unable to use this on the same turn as a spell. You can thus almost imagine that Divine Smite is like a spell itself. The other nerf is that you no longer get a bonus d8 for hitting an undead or fiendish target. This one makes me a little sad, but I also think would be the least broken to revert, so we'll see how this evolves.
However, the buff here is that you can now Smite on Unarmed strikes as well as on ranged attacks. Previously, Paladins were limited, like Barbarians and Monks, to being melee combatants. With the changes to many Smite spells with the introduction of the Battle Smith Artificer, the possibility of a ranged paladin started to get a little more viable, but Divine Smite really held them back. With this change, there is nothing, as far as I can tell, that prevents you from making a Dex-based, ranged Paladin. You also get access to all the Warrior Fighting Styles, so there's nothing preventing you taking something like Archery. Radiant Strikes, the renamed Improved Divine Smite, only cares that you attack with a Simple or Martial weapon to get your bonus d8 of radiant damage, so there's really nothing here preventing you from building the Paladin this way.
Also, there's no limit to how high the Divine Smite damage can go. If you are a pure caster who puts two levels into Paladin, you could potentially toss a 9th level spell slot to do 10d8 radiant damage when you hit (probably only if you crit, which, at 20d8, comes out to an average of 90 freaking damage).
Also, if you do a Monk/Paladin multiclass or otherwise build around Unarmed Strikes, you can now smite on those too, which I think is more niche, but still cool.
Another note here is that the way that "Smite Spells" have changed is that they no longer require you to pre-cast them. You can cast Searing Smite after you know you've hit. As such, these spells now have that great benefit of being able to choose when to use them when it's most advantageous. Now that the opportunity to cast these spells is exactly the same as the Divine Smite feature (sort of - they do technically take a bonus action still, so if you've used some other feature that takes a bonus action, such as Oath of Devotion's Sacred Weapon, you'll only be able to do Divine Smite) you'll now be making a tactical decision of whether the utility of the spell is worth losing the damage of the Divine Smite.
For example: Glimmering Smite is a 2nd level spell that causes your attack to deal 2d6 extra radiant damage and then dispels invisibility and causes the target to glow for a minute and gives attack rolls advantage against it. So, we're talking 3d8 versus 2d6 - meaning about 13.5 on average versus 7 - but then potentially a minute of advantage against it. Unlike Faerie Fire, you already know this has hit, so you can count on this effect being applied. The loss of 6.5 damage to start might be worth it if you're now giving your party a much better chance to hit the thing (especially if it likes to go invisible).
Now, this definitely means that you'll not be able to nova as hard as you can currently. You can't burn two 2nd level spell slots on a turn to put in 6d8 extra damage. This also means that if you burn a smite on a normal hit with your first attack, you run the risk of wasting a crit without smiting on your second attack. Essentially, I think this is going to push Paladins to be a bit more conservative with their Smites.
That is, honestly, probably by design. Paladins unleash nova damage like no one else (except maybe Rogues, but that's the whole basis of their combat strategy). This doesn't ultimately reduce the Paladin's damage output per day, even if it does nerf their damage output in early rounds of combat.
Actually, one little nuance worth considering: you can't Smite on a turn you've cast any spell, not just "of 1st level or higher," so this does potentially kill some sort of Booming Blade/Smite combo? Well, yes - though interestingly, you could still do a Booming Blade/Thunderous Smite combo (the target still needs to willingly move to get the punishment damage on Booming Blade, but they probably will if they want to stand up from prone - obviously, Booming Blade is not a Divine spell, but if you get it somehow like via magic initiate, you're gold).
Personally, I'm not upset about this, even if it is a nerf (and let's be clear: nerfs are necessary for game design or everything goes into full power creep mode, which is less fun). Yes, you won't be able to front-load a ton of damage here, and the once-per-turn might make you a little more trigger-shy, but Paladins are still probably going to be one of the best classes out there, and one that will bring some major pain to their foes.
Now, let's talk about the positive changes:
Even if you're still going with a Strength-based classic Paladin (which I suspect will remain the most popular build,) being able to smite on thrown weapons will give a bit of ranged versatility. Divine Smite, Smite Spells, and Radiant Strikes will all work on these. which is not the case with the current rules.
But this also frees you up to build a full ranged-based Paladin. You can pick up the Archery Fighting Style and fight with a bow (or, as I'm really picturing it, a gun - it remains to be seen whether firearms will be a prominent choice in One D&D or if they'll still be stuck in the DMG). Your Aura will still be up, though likely protecting other ranged characters instead of melee. Basically, all of your class features can work just as well at range as they do in melee, thanks to these changes.
Interestingly, the primary abilities are still Strength and Charisma meaning you need at least 13 Strength to multiclass into Paladin - which is odd given that you could easily make a level 1 Paladin with a negative to Strength if you want to go this route, but that's actually the same as current (I've seen finesse paladins who use medium armor and a rapier).
Again, I see far less need for further iteration here than on the Druid. There will surely be outcry, but I think the nerf to Divine Smite again is not a huge one, and is probably warranted.
No comments:
Post a Comment