Easiest way to achieve the flavor of Ranged Paladin?

[AstralFire]

Can be a build path (though I find that unlikely, I'm all ears) or a homebrew option. I'm guessing that putting "ranged weapon" on the list of things smite can apply to is gonna be a big no-no. Would like it to be Charisma-based rather than Wisdom-based.

[Mr.Moron]

Can be a build path (though I find that unlikely, I'm all ears) or a homebrew option. I'm guessing that putting "ranged weapon" on the list of things smite can apply to is gonna be a big no-no. Would like it to be Charisma-based rather than Wisdom-based.

Don't see why you couldn't make smites ranged, so long as you confined them to attacks made at normal rather extreme ranges. If balance is an issue knock the hit die down to d8 or just reduce smite progress to starting at 1 die and needing 5th levels for full power.

If you just dislike the idea of ranged smites, maybe the paladin can use ranged attacks to grant buffs "painting" targets, or creating wards and barriers where their arrows land.

[AstralFire]

Don't see why you couldn't make smites ranged, so long as you confined them to attacks made at normal rather extreme ranges. If balance is an issue knock the hit die down to d8 or just reduce smite progress to starting at 1 die and needing 5th levels for full power.

If you just dislike the idea of ranged smites, maybe the paladin can use ranged attacks to grant buffs "painting" targets, or creating wards and barriers where their arrows land.

I actually really like the idea of ranged smites, but I've seen very convincing arguments that it's just too powerful to grant like that, and I'm not experienced enough with 5E to feel comfortable making a big change like that without getting some very thought-out second opinions on the subject. (And thank you for yours.)

[Doof]

I think restricting paladin abilities to mostly melee-focused is silly.

They made the change in 5e to make Paladin available to all people of oaths (and oathbreakers, if that's allowed). But why can't people take vengeance upon wrongdoings... with their bows??

It's like the Joker meme: 'you break your holiest of oath, everyone says congrats you're an Oathbreaker it's really good; but when you try to smite that Rakshasa with your holy longbow, everyone loses their minds!'

[Mr.Moron]

I actually really like the idea of ranged smites, but I've seen very convincing arguments that it's just too powerful to grant like that, and I'm not experienced enough with 5E to feel comfortable making a big change like that without getting some very thought-out second opinions on the subject. (And thank you for yours.)

From a broad encounter design space it seems like a small change. If I have ranged and melee characters in a party I'm already going to have situationsome where they can both attack. Since the paladin would already get to be attacking anyway total party output remains constant even if they're allowed range.

The get to be pickier about their targets but target selection has rarely felt the key to good/bad play experiences.

If the issue is that they're now "The Best" at ranged, that's trivial imo. This isn't a competitive tournament or a mmo raid, who tops the damage meters is largely irrelevant so long as everyone feels like they're contributing and it doesn't unduly restrict design space for encouters.

What's important is positive play experiences at the table and class parity matters only so far as it contributes to that for your table.

[sophontteks]

It'd be helpful if you provided more information about your character. Why do you feel that using a ranged paladin is the only option available?

[Kryx]

I'd be curious to see the arguments of not allowing ranged smite. I can't see why not.

[Yorrin]

To address the opening post without jumping immediately to homebrew, I see two major options here. For a Cha based ranged weapons user you're looking at a Valor Bard, poaching Paladin/Ranger spells when available. Alternatively for a pre-packaged "divine" flavor on a ranged weapons user Cleric can cover the role admirably. War Domain would obviously be most supportive of a weapons build, but you can make it work with just about any domain.

[Dimolyth]

I'd be curious to see the arguments of not allowing ranged smite. I can't see why not.

Outlass all other ranged builds pehaps?

[MrStabby]

Maybe take a class with Call lightening? To me call lightening feels like a ranged smite attack.

If you want homebrew and that feels right - give tempest domain to a paladin instead of oath spells?

Elemental Evil gives thinks like fire arrows that are magically augmented ranged attacks - a refluffed ranger might get the feel you want?

[Kryx]

Outlass all other ranged builds pehaps?
Allowing a Paladin to use smite on ranged attacks (not improved divine smite) would by no means make them even competitive in terms of DPR. They'd still be very behind.

[Mara]

Yo branding smite works for ranged weapons. Just use that.

[Human Paragon 3]

I'm playing a ranged paladin right now and it works great even without ranged smites.

I am a Vengeance Paladin, which gives me Hunter's Mark and Haste for bonus damage and extra attacks when needed. Vow of Enmity gives me advantage on all attacks vs. one enemy, so I can use sharpshooter and still hit most of the time, so in boss fights, you're looking at haste (3 attacks) at +15 damage each. Nothing to sneeze at.

If you want to smite at range, you can use Branding Smite and Banishing Smite, which apply to any attack, not just melee.

My backup weapon is a shortsword, which I can smite with, and then misty step to range.

2 levels of fighter (or more) improve the build.

[charcoalninja]

Thrown weapons are still melee weapons and I thought you could amite with thrown. Your ranged dude just uses javelins.

[Kryx]

Thrown weapons are melee weapons, but not melee attacks. Therefore smite doesn't work with them as it is a "melee weapon attack".
I believe that to be the RAW case.

Tough I would allow smite on melee, thrown, and ranged.

[Doof]

Outlass all other ranged builds pehaps?

idk, does the paladin outclass all other melee builds because it can smite in melee range?

[Tenmujiin]

I'd offer to give away something to get ranged smites, say d8 HD, smite starting at a single die or smite being a die size down (d6 instead of d8). Not being able to use improved divine smite is probably more than enough anyway but the point is to convince your DM that you don't just want free power.

I want to stress that I'm not saying that ranged paladin is OP but that giving something up will help convince your DM that you are after flavor not power.

[Ardantis]

idk, does the paladin outclass all other melee builds because it can smite in melee range?

Kinda yeah.

[Madeiner]

I'd be curious to see the arguments of not allowing ranged smite. I can't see why not.

I think the intention was to reinforce the idea of the "holy knight" with the paladin class.
In common fantasy, holy warriors are melee. Archery is not associated with being a holy knight.

Also, i firmly believe melee combat should output more damage than ranged (physical) attacks.
As it is now, ranged is far, far superior to melee (and dex is superior to str), and damage output is still 1dX+stat. Monsters are usually a lot scarier in melee and some are easily kiteable, with some having absolutely no recourse against ranged attacks even at high level.

So no, i would not want ranged smite the same as i don't like ranged DPR being the same as way-riskier-melee DPR.

[Kryx]

Kinda yeah.
Fighter and Barbarian do about 10% more at 11+ and more at 16+

That's assuming Paladin uses most of his spells for smiting (85%)




I think the intention was to reinforce the idea of the "holy knight" with the paladin class.
Sure, I can see the fluff argument that people want to limit it to melee. I was talking balance.


As it is now, ranged is far, far superior to melee
In general Polearm does much more than hand crossbows. GWM likely tied with hand crossbows and better than longbow/heavy crossbow.

In this specific case a Paladin does much much more as melee even if you allow smite on ranged (not improved divine smite).

[Human Paragon 3]

I just want to mention again that I didn't need to use any home brew to make a really flavorful and effective character using a ranged paladin. There's plenty there to stay competitive.

[bid]

If you want to smite at range, you can use Branding Smite and Banishing Smite, which apply to any attack, not just melee.
Concentration. As soon as you get extra attack, HM does better in a single round.

[Mechaviking]

I'm playing a ranged paladin right now and it works great even without ranged smites.

I am a Vengeance Paladin, which gives me Hunter's Mark and Haste for bonus damage and extra attacks when needed. Vow of Enmity gives me advantage on all attacks vs. one enemy, so I can use sharpshooter and still hit most of the time, so in boss fights, you're looking at haste (3 attacks) at +15 damage each. Nothing to sneeze at.

If you want to smite at range, you can use Branding Smite and Banishing Smite, which apply to any attack, not just melee.

My backup weapon is a shortsword, which I can smite with, and then misty step to range.

2 levels of fighter (or more) improve the build.


This is what I do, but I went Holydin for the Cha to all attacks, with my bow, that said I got a magical bow that adds my casting stat to damage rolls at ranged but does 2 damage to me each time I hit as the thorns on the bow grow larger, in melee the bow counts as a short sword and gains a damage bonus of 2 for each of my hits at range[OP right].

I use the bow at range and just switch it up to cc when they get to me.

Also I went splash sorcerer for the con saving throws and 13+dexterity base ac(plus shield), for fighting style I went mariner for climb speed, swim speed and +1 ac so base ac 17 naked shield when I need it so yeah ranged paladins work.

I´d also argue that singleclassed paladins can rock without strength, go Dex/Cha, use a rapier and a shield, once you hit Dex 20 you´ll be just as offensively viable as another sword and board paladin.

You don´t have to smite at range but if your dm is ok with it then rock on.

[MadBear]

Fighter and Barbarian do about 10% more at 11+ and more at 16+

That's assuming Paladin uses most of his spells for smiting (85%)


As someone who played a vengeance paladin all the way to 16, with a fighter in the party, I think I can see why there's the perception that the Paladin does more damage.

Simply put, the Paladin has the advantage of being able to ramp up and put his damage down whenever he really think's he needs it. For example, in a typical encounter against mooks, I just did basic damage that was competent, dealing a little less then the fighter. However, when the Dragon popped up, I was flying (magic item), swinging with advantage, dealing max smite level hits. It just felt bigger compared to what the fighter could do.

(in other words, the 10% less damage on average is balanced by the fact that the Paladin has a simply amazing nova strike when needed).

[Safety Sword]

I think that allowing ranged smites would lead to Ranger/Paladin extreme ranged death to everything builds.

I haven't done a deep analysis or anything, but there are some pretty good ranger spells that don't need extra radiant damage dumped into the mix.

[MadBear]

I think that allowing ranged smites would lead to Ranger/Paladin extreme ranged death to everything builds.

I haven't done a deep analysis or anything, but there are some pretty good ranger spells that don't need extra radiant damage dumped into the mix.

sure, but now you're talking about competing for spell slots that a 2 half casters don't have a lot of. (although the potential nova would be scary, you just better hope that you're done for the day when it goes off).

[Safety Sword]

sure, but now you're talking about competing for spell slots that a 2 half casters don't have a lot of. (although the potential nova would be scary, you just better hope that you're done for the day when it goes off).

I think that Paladin/Rangers would be better than straight Ranger at certain levels. That shouldn't be the case when "Ranged Damage" is the Ranger staple.

[MadBear]

I think that Paladin/Rangers would be better than straight Ranger at certain levels. That shouldn't be the case when "Ranged Damage" is the Ranger staple.

when though? I'm just not seeing a scenario when the Paladin/Ranger would be better at ranged compared to the straight Ranger, with the exception of having the ability to Nova. The MC would have both of their abilities severely delayed (or one would come way late), both would lose their higher level spell slots.

The main difference would be that the MC Ranger/Paladin could throw on smite damage to increase their single round DPR.

[Safety Sword]

when though? I'm just not seeing a scenario when the Paladin/Ranger would be better at ranged compared to the straight Ranger, with the exception of having the ability to Nova. The MC would have both of their abilities severely delayed (or one would come way late), both would lose their higher level spell slots.

The main difference would be that the MC Ranger/Paladin could throw on smite damage to increase their single round DPR.

Well, that's when it counts. If they're destroying encounters in a round compared to rangers who have to work a bit harder, I don't think that's ideal.

Let Rangers have something that's just theirs. Otherwise they're just grubby fighters in terrible armour that hang out with animals. :smallamused:

[Kane0]

Can be a build path (though I find that unlikely, I'm all ears) or a homebrew option.

*Rolls up sleeves* Aight, lets get crackin'

Hit dice: d8s
Armor Profs: Light, Medium, Shields
Weapon Profs: Simple, Martial
Save Profs: Dexterity, Charisma
Skill Profs: As paladin
Starting Equipment: As ranger

Class Ability Changes:
Divine Smite: Usable with weapon attacks.
Fighting Style: Choose from Archery, Defense, Dueling, Mariner

Spellcasting: Remains unchanged. Some smites remain melee only.

Give that a go, see how it turns out.

EDIT: Even simpler, change smite so it works on all weapon attacks, but is only usable once per turn.

[MadBear]

Well, that's when it counts. If they're destroying encounters in a round compared to rangers who have to work a bit harder, I don't think that's ideal.

Let Rangers have something that's just theirs. Otherwise they're just grubby fighters in terrible armour that hang out with animals. :smallamused:

That's just it though. The pure ranger would shine the rest of the day. Paladin's do less damage per round then you're average martial. They make up for it by having good single round DPR. That doesn't last though. So sure during the 6-8 encounters per long rest, the Paladin would dominate 1-2, but for the others, they'd just be bad fighters, without the spell support from either the paladin or ranger class.

[Tenmujiin]

Honestly, the bigest reason I've seen not to allow ranged smites is that a dex paladin with a bow and misty step sounds REALLY fun. I'm biased towards anything that uses lightning or teleportation though.

[Kryx]

So sure during the 6-8 encounters per long rest, the Paladin would dominate 1-2, but for the others, they'd just be bad fighters, without the spell support from either the paladin or ranger class.
The Paladin has plenty of spells to last the whole adventuring day to keep up in DPR. Their DPR only drops off if you play above that, which very few groups do (based on ENworld poll).

[MadBear]

The Paladin has plenty of spells to last the whole adventuring day to keep up in DPR. Their DPR only drops off if you play above that, which very few groups do (based on ENworld poll).

Hold on. You're taking me out of context here. I was specifically talking about having a Paladin nova a single target down in 1-2 encounters. In that specific instance you'd be spending at least 2 spells per round, and absolutely wouldn't have as many spells for the rest of the day.

I do agree that if you space your spells out, you have plenty of way's to keep up in average DPR with other classes. I'm not convinced that a pure Ranger would do less DPR then a Paladin/Ranger MC over a whole adventuring day is my only point.

[Kryx]

Hold on. You're taking me out of context here. I was specifically talking about having a Paladin nova a single target down in 1-2 encounters. In that specific instance you'd be spending at least 2 spells per round, and absolutely wouldn't have as many spells for the rest of the day.

I do agree that if you space your spells out, you have plenty of way's to keep up in average DPR with other classes. I'm not convinced that a pure Ranger would do less DPR then a Paladin/Ranger MC over a whole adventuring day is my only point.
My apologies then. We both agree Paladin can keep up in DPR or burst.

Ranger does less DPR 11+ - they have nothing going for them to compete with smite spells scaling and improved divine smite, but that has been discussed in other topics so I won't argue it more here. Check my DPR of Classes to see the numbers I made.

[Mara]

Beast master with a flying snake gets pretty good damage. At 11 the snake alone is doing 40 damage. Then add the ranger attack damage. At 15 they share buff spells, so that's 3 CCs or hunters mark for 3d6 more.

[Kryx]

At 11 the snake alone is doing 40 damage.
Can you explain this? I assume it's pure max damage, but can't see how a flying snake gets that high. Maybe I missed something in the complex errata though.

[Mara]

Can you explain this? I assume it's pure max damage, but can't see how a flying snake gets that high. Maybe I missed something in the complex errata though.

You add the ranger proficiency to damage rolls. The flying snake does 1 piercing and 3d4(7) poison (no save) damage. Prof adds to both meaning the flying snake eventually does 7 piercing and 13 poison per attack. A reasonable nerf would be only increasing the piercing damage but that is not what the rules actually say.

[AstralFire]

Woah, and here I thought my topic was dead. Thanks for all the input, apologies that I won't be responding to every post individually!


It'd be helpful if you provided more information about your character. Why do you feel that using a ranged paladin is the only option available?

Because part of the concept for this character that I'm looking at up-converting from an older edition imbues holy power into her arrows, such that the order she's part of has an epithet based around the concept. This character is very charismatic and very intelligent, but has no attention span or focus for intellectually uninteresting questions, so low wisdom. Flipping a switch on a Cleric stat is a possibility, though.


To address the opening post without jumping immediately to homebrew, I see two major options here. For a Cha based ranged weapons user you're looking at a Valor Bard, poaching Paladin/Ranger spells when available. Alternatively for a pre-packaged "divine" flavor on a ranged weapons user Cleric can cover the role admirably. War Domain would obviously be most supportive of a weapons build, but you can make it work with just about any domain.

I thought only Lore bards could poach spells from others? Sorry, AFB right now, am I misremembering?


I'm playing a ranged paladin right now and it works great even without ranged smites.

I am a Vengeance Paladin, which gives me Hunter's Mark and Haste for bonus damage and extra attacks when needed. Vow of Enmity gives me advantage on all attacks vs. one enemy, so I can use sharpshooter and still hit most of the time, so in boss fights, you're looking at haste (3 attacks) at +15 damage each. Nothing to sneeze at.

If you want to smite at range, you can use Branding Smite and Banishing Smite, which apply to any attack, not just melee.

My backup weapon is a shortsword, which I can smite with, and then misty step to range.

2 levels of fighter (or more) improve the build.

This is interesting. Good to know, thank you.


Maybe take a class with Call lightening? To me call lightening feels like a ranged smite attack.

If you want homebrew and that feels right - give tempest domain to a paladin instead of oath spells?

Elemental Evil gives thinks like fire arrows that are magically augmented ranged attacks - a refluffed ranger might get the feel you want?

I'm more fire than lightning, but that's an easy change to make. I don't know about using spell attacks, though, would feel a bit odd.


*Rolls up sleeves* Aight, lets get crackin'

Hit dice: d8s
Armor Profs: Light, Medium, Shields
Weapon Profs: Simple, Martial
Save Profs: Dexterity, Charisma
Skill Profs: As paladin
Starting Equipment: As ranger

Class Ability Changes:
Divine Smite: Usable with weapon attacks.
Fighting Style: Choose from Archery, Defense, Dueling, Mariner

Spellcasting: Remains unchanged. Some smites remain melee only.

Give that a go, see how it turns out.

EDIT: Even simpler, change smite so it works on all weapon attacks, but is only usable once per turn.

Similar to Mr. Moron's suggestion's then. May just go this route, thank you.

[Kryx]

You add the ranger proficiency to damage rolls. The flying snake does 1 piercing and 3d4(7) poison (no save) damage. Prof adds to both meaning the flying snake eventually does 7 piercing and 13 poison per attack. A reasonable nerf would be only increasing the piercing damage but that is not what the rules actually say.
1 isn't a damage roll. It's just damage, so it likely shouldn't apply.

1+10.5+7 = 18.5 damage if it hits and they fail. Or more realistically .6*(18.5)*2 = 22.2 DPR. Add in hex and a bonus attack because your GM is nice and lets you use it even though you didn't attack and we're talking ~33. Not good.

[ruy343]

I agree with what others have said thus far: vengeance paladin is the way to go. The reason why is due to the domain spells that they get, particularly Hunter's Mark. That'll grant you an additional d6 for every attack roll in combat, and your class abilities often deal with mobility, allowing you to catch up.

To make things work better, ask your DM if taking the Sharpshooter feat would allow you to treat your bow as a melee attack for the purposes of opportunity attacks. That will allow some of the other features to work.

Also, some of the smite spells (as opposed to the smites you get for conversions) do allow you to use ranged attacks, but you have to declare the spell before the attack (I think, AFB). However, those can be pumped by higher spell levels just as well, making you reasonably competent in damage.

At low levels (one attack), with hunter's mark activated and no smites, you could take a -5 to attack rolls (sharpshooter feat) and deal 1d8+1d6+10+dex, which isn't all that bad. Hunter's mark could actually be thought of as better than a level 1 smite (2d8) if the combat goes longer than 2 rounds (at which point, you'd get a total of 3d6 bonus damage). Granted, you don't get to choose to use smites after you've already critical'd, but it's still nothing to be disappointed about, methinks.

[bid]

Hunter's mark could actually be thought of as better than a level 1 smite (2d8) if the combat goes longer than 2 rounds (at which point, you'd get a total of 3d6 bonus damage).
It would be true if all your attacks hit, but you'd need 4-5 attacks to actually get 3d6 from hunter's mark.

[ruy343]

It would be true if all your attacks hit, but you'd need 4-5 attacks to actually get 3d6 from hunter's mark.

Not with archery fighting style granting you a +2 to attack rolls, and a halfway decent dexterity bonus...

[Sigreid]

To answer the thread's title, play a ranger with the code and virtues of a paladin. Not everything has to be their fluff.

[Belac93]

I would say just switch out some stuff for other stuff. Remove heavy armor, put hit dice down to 1d8, or smite damage down to d6s, and you have yourself a ranged. Easy to do this with classes.

[Crusher]

Not with archery fighting style granting you a +2 to attack rolls, and a halfway decent dexterity bonus...

Eh, not with Sharpshooter running its not. At, say, level 4 you're still at +2 proficiency bonus and probably have a 16 DEX for another +3, plus +2 for archery fighting for a total of +7. Then -5 for Sharpshooter and you're looking at a total of +2. Anything higher than AC13 and you're missing over half the time. Sharpshooter and Hunter's Mark don't actually play terribly well together in that regard. Hunter's Mark wants you to crank out as many hits as possible while Sharpshooter is badly denting your accuracy in return for hitting really hard when you do land a blow. They're both good and worth using, but they don't complement each other very well.

[bid]

Not with archery fighting style granting you a +2 to attack rolls, and a halfway decent dexterity bonus...
Is this just a belief or do you have hard numbers to support your assertion?

[djreynolds]

Vengeance Paladins have misty step, haste, and dimension door. That's your ranged attack right there. Hold person and monster. This paladin has the ability to close the distance. Now divine might was cool in 3.5, but you have options and can multiclass easily with fighter or ranger to pick up archery style, or multiclass warlock or even sorcerer for cantrips

[Citan]

Hi!

Others have suggested Vengeance Paladin, and it's a great way to go. With that said, Devotion Paladin is a good alternative.

Vengeance Benefits
+ short-rest advantage against a single enemy
+ additional damage with Hunter's Mark (1d6).
+ only way without multiclassing to get Haste which is great.
+ high CHA is not strictly necessary since you will mainly use buffs.
- you won't have great accuracy against other enemies, so lesser chance to use Sharpshooter.
- Hunter's Mark requires you to be in medium range at max (60 feet).
- other Avenger abilities are unusable for a ranged build (unless DM houserule).
- in fact, even the OoE is a true pain to use for a ranged build (requires you to be within 10 feet).
>>> Really single-enemy focused, meaning that you won't be able to use Sharpshooter benefit on a basis against any creature.

It will be difficult to activate any abilities of this build...
- Either you stick to ranged attacks whatever happens, making Crossbow Expert a nearly mandatory feat since you will have to come close to enemies in every encounter to activate abilities.
- Or you spend two turns preparing: first turn, you close in within 10 feet, cast OoE then use Dash action to fall back. Next turn, you cast Hunter's Mark then unleash your first attacks while you move further away.
Basically, if you want to play "pure ranged" it will be a bit painful and dangerous to play. The only great thing of this Oath is that, since you won't be using smiting often, your spell slots can be used on Haste nearly every encounter.

However, if you play it more like "I shoot arrows while closing in then I switch melee" then it's instead a perfect build, although not especially "ranged build".


Devotion benefits
+5 to hit every short rest (against any enemy, meaning consistent use of Sharpshooter), can be applied in any situation and from any range.
+ 1d4 bonus damage (Divine Favor) which is not far from Hunter's Mark but works on any enemy.
+ the other CD, when usable, can be great as an alternative to keep enemies at range while you're raining arrows on them.
- no Misty Step, but you shouldn't have to come close to enemies anyways so not such a loss.
- no Haste, which is the big loss in comparison to Vengeance, but Paladin already offers other good things to use Concentration on: you will be more keen on using ranged smite spells than if you were Vengeance (tough decision to drop Haste, much lesser to drop Bless or Divine Favor if needed).
- directly dependent on CHA.

Not considering fluff...
- If you want to be a striker, Vengeance is by far the best choice.
- If you think someone in your party can help offset your Sharpshooter malus against any enemy, go Vengeance.
- If you want a more balanced character, go Devotion.
- If you don't have great stats, Vengeance is easier to play.

EDIT: Totally forgot about activation range of OoE and Hunter's Mark. For that reason, my new recommendation would be...
- If you have passable stats (especially in CHA), Vengeance is still the best bet.
- If you really want to be a striker, Vengeance is still the best bet, but it makes Crossbow Expert a nearly mandatory feat, since you will have to come close to enemies in every encounter. Or you'll have to spend one turn closing in, casting OoE then use Dash action to fall back, then on next turn cast Hunter's Mark while you move further away. Basically, if you want to play "pure ranged" it will be a bit painful. If you play it more like "I shoot arrows while closing in then I switch melee" then it's instead a perfect build.
- In any other case Devotion will be easier to play and will feel much more as a real ranged build.

Imo the best build would be a multiclass anyways but you want single-class IIRC so... :)

At least, you know now that you have two options to choose from, depending on your play and your fluff. :) Have fun !