Paladin Smite Spells

[DracoKnight]

So...I am only just now realizing that the Paladin Smite Spells only apply to a single hit. The riders are decent, but...it still seems...weird... and underpowered. It's almost better to ignore your spells and just use Divine Smite.

Does this seem weird to anyone else?

[Icewraith]

So...I am only just now realizing that the Paladin Smite Spells only apply to a single hit. The riders are decent, but...it still seems...weird... and underpowered. It's almost better to ignore your spells and just use Divine Smite.

Does this seem weird to anyone else?

Divine Smite doesn't use a bonus action last I checked, so you can actually do both if you REALLY need to drop something this round. You also get to reroll Smite and your Spell dice on a crit, but you can't choose to cast the spell after you crit. Look for in-game plot based things like bloodstone (or whatever) where you get a wider crit range if you stand in it, and also look for ways to gain advantage. The Lucky feat can also help here.

[DracoKnight]

Divine Smite doesn't use a bonus action last I checked, so you can actually do both if you REALLY need to drop something this round. You also get to reroll Smite and your Spell dice on a crit, but you can't choose to cast the spell after you crit. Look for in-game plot based things like bloodstone (or whatever) where you get a wider crit range if you stand in it, and also look for ways to gain advantage. The Lucky feat can also help here.

Yes, I'm aware of all of those.

I was previously under the impression that you got the extra damage for 1 minute if you Concentrated. That's how my group was using them.

[Telwar]

Some of the riders seemed okay, but definitely at low levels it's more likely useful to shove the spell slot out in a smite than risk losing the spell to a miss and then a failed Concentration check after being hit.

[EvanescentHero]

Why would they last the full duration? Both divine smites and the smite spells run off the exact same resource. Spending a spell slot and getting extra damage and a rider for a full minute versus spending a spell slot and getting more extra damage for a single attack? If those spells dealt extra damage on every attack for a minute (that's twenty attacks per spell slot, compared to one), nobody would ever use the basic divine smite, because the extra damage from a basic divine smite would be totally outclassed by the spell.

[Talamare]

Why would they last the full duration? Both divine smites and the smite spells run off the exact same resource. Spending a spell slot and getting extra damage and a rider for a full minute versus spending a spell slot and getting more extra damage for a single attack? If those spells dealt extra damage on every attack for a minute (that's twenty attacks per spell slot, compared to one), nobody would ever use the basic divine smite, because the extra damage from a basic divine smite would be totally outclassed by the spell.

Because you can use both and you're spending a resource to get that different Smite. I admit they would be too strong, but currently they are too weak. When I get home, I'm going to make a house rule post suggestion in a way I think would be balanced

[lebefrei]

Because you can use both and you're spending a resource to get that different Smite.

You're spending the same resource for either attack. The difference is that the smite spell requires you to concentrate so that you may apply an addition effect onto your enemy as you smite them. It doesn't need changing. The trade off is clear. Concentrate to add another layer to the smite and use a spell slot, don't concentrate and use a spell slot to just do damage.

The risk vs reward both makes sense in world and in game. It's logically balanced and like any other spell is just another option in your tool belt for when you may need it, if ever. It shouldn't be looked at as something needing a buff so that the already massively damaging paladin can add more damage onto every attack.

[EvanescentHero]

Because you can use both and you're spending a resource to get that different Smite. I admit they would be too strong, but currently they are too weak. When I get home, I'm going to make a house rule post suggestion in a way I think would be balanced

I disagree. Something being situationally useful doesn't make it weak. Either you can spend a spell slot to get extra damage and a rider, or you can spend a spell slot for a higher amount of extra damage. It's the exact same expenditure of resources either way.

[mgshamster]

You sacrifice a little bit of damage to be able to do something else. Good for specific situations. If you want good solid damage, just stick with Divine Smite.

Also, letting that buff run for a full minute seriously ups the power of an already powerful class. Especially compared to the fighter.

[MeeposFire]

Smite spells are less efficient than using divine smite for damage but they give you a slight effect on top of damage which stacks with divine smite. Most paladins do not have a use for their bonus action in getting more damage anyway so this is a way of getting more out of their round. It is expensive but it does what it is supposed to. Remember if it is too good why would you divine smite?

[Talamare]

I disagree. Something being situationally useful doesn't make it weak. Either you can spend a spell slot to get extra damage and a rider, or you can spend a spell slot for a higher amount of extra damage. It's the exact same expenditure of resources either way.

Divine Smite spends your spell slot
Spell Smites spends your spell slot
Cost one of your very few spells
Costs your concentration
Costs your bonus action
For less damage and often a pathetic effect.

That is a bit equivalent. Most people often look at and without anyone telling them anything ask if they are crazy or are they really that weak.

[MeeposFire]

Divine Smite spends your spell slot
Spell Smites spends your spell slot
Cost one of your very few spells
Costs your concentration
For less damage and often a pathetic effect.

That is a bit equivalent. Most people often look at and without anyone telling them anything ask if they are crazy or are they really that weak.

However you cannot stack a divine smite with another divine smite. You can tack a divine smite with a smite spell and you get some sort of special effect with it. It is expensive and you may not need it all the time but if you want to maximize your nova potential and you don't have a better use for your bonus action then a smite spell is the way to do it.

[Malifice]

Divine Smite spends your spell slot
Spell Smites spends your spell slot
Cost one of your very few spells
Costs your concentration
For less damage and often a pathetic effect.

That is a bit equivalent. Most people often look at and without anyone telling them anything ask if they are crazy or are they really that weak.

Yeah but you have the option in your pocket to add both the spell AND the smite to an attack.

When you want something dead this round, and nothing else will do, they come in handy (also - the rider effects are nice).

[Talamare]

Paladin have op nova, regardless of Smite spells

[Malifice]

Paladin have op nova, regardless of Smite spells

Look at a 1st level spell like thunderous smite. In addition to damage it also knocks the target prone, granting you (and everyone else) advantage on the rest of your attacks that round until the critter stands up. Wrathful smite (also at 1st level) tacks the frightened condition over the top (increasing your defence the following round by imposing disadvantage on the critters return attacks). Branding smite at 2nd level makes an invisible target visible, in addition to a damage boost. Blinding smite deals only 1d8 less radiant damage that a smite of that level would, but also blinds your target (adv to hit, disadv to get hit) for up to 1 minute. Etc.

These are very useful riders that increase DPR taken by the target.

Like - I would rather deal an extra 3d8 damage and blind someone for a minute (granting all my allies and the rest of my attacks advantage, and impose disadvantage on the critters attacks) than deal an extra 4d8 damage. I would also rather deal 2d6 radiant damage instead of 3d8 radiant damage and make an invisible target visible for the rest of the encounter.

I also like the ability to layer both effects when needed.

[Citan]

Divine Smite spends your spell slot
Spell Smites spends your spell slot
Cost one of your very few spells
Costs your concentration
Costs your bonus action
For less damage and often a pathetic effect.

That is a bit equivalent. Most people often look at and without anyone telling them anything ask if they are crazy or are they really that weak.
Lol?
Try again...
1. Spell smites spends your spell slots - yes
2. Cost one of your very few spells - shouldn't be a problem for you since you consider that Paladin's mundane action is to Divine Smite anyways. And, you can freely change them on a long rest, so really not a problem most of the time, you usually prepare only one or maybe two smite.
3. Cost your concentration: yes, as Bless, Shield of Faith, Haste, Magic Weapon... So, ok, it means you have to plan a bit to use them so you don't have to "break" a buff on purpose just for this. But. Really. Should be manageable by any decent player.
4. Costs your bonus action: well, what other uses you get for your bonus action? Unless specific build, you don't really have a good use (or any use at all) for the first levels.
5. Less damage and a pathetic effect. This last sentence just proves you didn't ever actually try to put them to good use.
You don't seem to realize how good it is to have an auto-effect on a weapon attack, instead of having the Paladin try his luck against an enemy save as a spellcaster (which should be harder for most Paladins, since they build around melee weapon attacks).
And proning or blinding an enemy is no small bonus either especially in a team. Not even talking about Banishment.

Finally, two things make smite spells good.
1. They can stack with your divine smite, as said already several times.
2. They can stack with several multiclass or feat abilities such as Undying Light Warlock, Draconic Sorcerer, Elemental Bane, Elemental Affinity and such. Well, agreed, radiant is rarely resisted though. :)

So... Are Smite spells more difficult to put to good use? Obviously yes.
Are they, for that reason, "crappy" or "useless" spells? Certainly no.

[Talamare]

2. Cost one of your very few spells - shouldn't be a problem for you since you consider that Paladin's mundane action is to Divine Smite anyways. And, you can freely change them on a long rest, so really not a problem most of the time, you usually prepare only one or maybe two smite.
3. Cost your concentration: yes, as Bless, Shield of Faith, Haste, Magic Weapon... So, ok, it means you have to plan a bit to use them so you don't have to "break" a buff on purpose just for this. But. Really. Should be manageable by any decent player.
4. Costs your bonus action: well, what other uses you get for your bonus action? Unless specific build, you don't really have a good use (or any use at all) for the first levels.
5. Less damage and a pathetic effect. This last sentence just proves you didn't ever actually try to put them to good use.
You don't seem to realize how good it is to have an auto-effect on a weapon attack, instead of having the Paladin try his luck against an enemy save as a spellcaster (which should be harder for most Paladins, since they build around melee weapon attacks).
And proning or blinding an enemy is no small bonus either especially in a team. Not even talking about Banishment.

I'll start off by saying, Banishment one is solid.
3 - Your concentration is probably your most important thing, Why the hell would I care about a minor effect and piddly damage when I'm concentrating on...
Bless, Haste, Aura of Vitality, Crusader's Mantle, Aura of Purity, Blur, Hold Person... There isn't really 'managing it', it's a binary effect. It's either being taken by something good, or it's on your smite. Don't bother saying use Smite when something breaks your concentration, because then you usually have 2 options. Get the spell back up, or the fight is about to end and you rather save resources for the next fight.

4 - Oath of Vengeance, Aura of Vitality, Misty Step, Shield Master, GWM, PM

5 - Oh, I absolutely love auto damage when I hit. Hunter's Mark, Divine Favor, Crusader's Mantle, Quickened Elemental Weapon are all quite juicy... and repeatable. As a Paladin, I tend not to mind saving throws at all. Something about having 4+1d4 to all saves, makes me not mind it as much as a Fighter or Rogue might.



and again as a Paladin my Nova is ALREADY insane, it doesn't need to be better. Hell, the VAST majority of the time I'm holding back on my Nova. Why? Because I want to be useful all day, not be done after the first fight.

[Citan]

5 - Oh, I absolutely love auto damage when I hit. Hunter's Mark, Divine Favor, Crusader's Mantle, Quickened Elemental Weapon are all quite juicy... and repeatable. As a Paladin, I tend not to mind saving throws at all. Something about having 4+1d4 to all saves, makes me not mind it as much as a Fighter or Rogue might.

and again as a Paladin my Nova is ALREADY insane, it doesn't need to be better. Hell, the VAST majority of the time I'm holding back on my Nova. Why? Because I want to be useful all day, not be done after the first fight.
Maybe my post wasn't clear enough, in which case I'm sorry. :)
As Malifice tried to stress before me, you miss the main point of smites. It's...
- either nova damage, yes;
- but even more rider effect.

There will be many cases where you know that you cannot down one creature by yourself. A few examples:

a) Being one of the last of your party to act, you use your bonus action to cast Blinding Smite then strike a nasty enemy attacker with your Attack. With this you effectively "tank" for your whole party, because now it will attack at disadvantage during its turn.
Actually, you could even use Wrathful Smite which grants disadvantage on ability checks also.

b) You are one of the first to act in your party, you feel that there is a good chance to finish it off if all attackers in your team land their attacks. You cast Thunderous Smite and land your attack, meaning that all your melee pals get better chance at hitting without resorting to spells, shove etc.

c) You want to keep someone at bay from squishies behind you. Cast Wrathful Smite, bingo! Any melee enemy will have to make a big detour to get to them.

d) You'd like to allow your melee group to bypass an dangerous sentinel to go kill the mages behind? You'd like to be sure an enemy mage won't try to counterspell the Big One your pal will prepare on its turn? Use Staggering Smite. :)

Now you could tell, "but most effects can be saved against every turn". Sure! Otherwise, it would be outright too powerful. But even one turn can make a big difference. :)

My own regret with smites riders though is that some effects requires a failed throw even on the initial turn. I would have liked at least for these initial save throws to be made at disadvantage, but well... ^^

[choryukami]

The only smite spell I think is worth it is Banishing Smite. 5d10 for a 5th level spell I think? 5d8 is the max you'll get out of a Divine Smite for a 4th level. And you can stack the two for 2d6(orwhatever)+1d8(IDS)+5d8+5d10+Str

[coredump]

The main benefit of the smite spells is action economy.

Your main desire as a Paladin is to hit stuff.... its what you do.
But there are times when you would really like to make something visible, or knock something down, or make someone blind, or....whatever.

The Smite spells let you do both *at the same time*. You don't have to stop hitting just to cast a 'see invisible' spell or a Blindness spell, you don't have to trade your attack for a Shove/grapple. You can do those things *and* still hit them. (And even do extra damage when you do...)

It means you can have versatility without having to make choices.

It is also nice that is can stack with Divine Smite for some big damage really fast.... but that is kind of secondary.

Just last week our Paladin made short work of an encounter with Branding Smite causing the invisible poltergeist to become visible.

[coredump]

The only smite spell I think is worth it is Banishing Smite. 5d10 for a 5th level spell I think? 5d8 is the max you'll get out of a Divine Smite for a 4th level. And you can stack the two for 2d6(orwhatever)+1d8(IDS)+5d8+5d10+Str

Thats because you are only looking at the Smite spells as a way to cause damage. Paladins can already cause a lot of damage, the smite spells let them do other useful things.

Its like saying Hold Person and Hypnotic pattern are horrible spells because they don't do enough damage....

[Talamare]

Just last week our Paladin made short work of an encounter with Branding Smite causing the invisible poltergeist to become visible.
That is one of the most situational of all the smites. The fact he had that prepared at all either means you told him that he would need it or he had a useless spell prepared on the Paladins very thin list of spells just for this incredibly rare situation, which means he had other glaring gaps.

aka Issue #2 with this example

[MaxWilson]

So...I am only just now realizing that the Paladin Smite Spells only apply to a single hit. The riders are decent, but...it still seems...weird... and underpowered. It's almost better to ignore your spells and just use Divine Smite.

Wrathful Smite is amazing. It's basically a one-hit kill of a single monster--a monster which is Frightened and can't move towards you, and has to burn actions to make Wisdom checks at disadvantage to try to end the frightened condition, is a monster which is no longer a factor in the combat. 2d8 extra damage from Divine Smite doesn't begin to compare with that.

Some of the other Paladin smite spells are pretty lame, but don't use them.

[Talamare]

Wrathful Smite is amazing. It's basically a one-hit kill of a single monster--a monster which is Frightened and can't move towards you, and has to burn actions to make Wisdom checks at disadvantage to try to end the frightened condition, is a monster which is no longer a factor in the combat. 2d8 extra damage from Divine Smite doesn't begin to compare with that.

Some of the other Paladin smite spells are pretty lame, but don't use them.

It helps if you play it correctly
It does not have disadvantage on saving throws, only on ability checks. Not the same thing.
As well as it has a fair chance of succeeded its save from the start.

[MaxWilson]

It helps if you play it correctly
It does not have disadvantage on saving throws, only on ability checks. Not the same thing.
As well as it has a fair chance of succeeded its save from the start.

I do play it correctly. According to the spell description, Wrathful Smite ends only when the target spends its action to make a Wisdom check, not a save. The only chance you have to save is on initial application, after that it is all Wisdom checks at disadvantage for being frightened.

[Citan]

I do play it correctly. According to the spell description, Wrathful Smite ends only when the target spends its action to make a Wisdom check, not a save. The only chance you have to save is on initial application, after that it is all Wisdom checks at disadvantage for being frightened.
Hey, you're right, I never noticed this.
Wrathful Smite just went from "pretty good spell" to "darn awesome" spell...

Especially for a Sorladin who can heighten it (*poke* Corran XD) or extend it. :)

EDIT: Developing on a Sorladin, makes me think Branding Smite paired with See Invisibility means such a character can nullifies invisibility for a whole party. :)

Also, though about something. How would you consider the flames of a creature ignited by Searing Smite? From the description of the spell, it's the concentrated heat of the blade that create the flames, so a purely physical interaction, so non-magical.
It means you could actually work them with Control Flame: no real cheese, although using an enemy as a source of bright light in a whole area seems fun and useful to me ;)
It also means you could Pyrotechnics on the flames burning the creature, to either blind or smoke out creatures around. I very much like this idea, both in mechanics and flavour (I can imagine the panic among enemy ranks ^^).

[EvanescentHero]

Also, though about something. How would you consider the flames of a creature ignited by Searing Smite? From the description of the spell, it's the concentrated heat of the blade that create the flames, so a purely physical interaction, so non-magical.
It means you could actually work them with Control Flame: no real cheese, although using an enemy as a source of bright light in a whole area seems fun and useful to me ;)
It also means you could Pyrotechnics on the flames burning the creature, to either blind or smoke out creatures around. I very much like this idea, both in mechanics and flavour (I can imagine the panic among enemy ranks ^^).

Hmm...the flames come from a spell though, so I would probably consider them magical. Good idea though.

[Malifice]

The only smite spell I think is worth it is Banishing Smite. 5d10 for a 5th level spell I think? 5d8 is the max you'll get out of a Divine Smite for a 4th level. And you can stack the two for 2d6(orwhatever)+1d8(IDS)+5d8+5d10+Str

Things like frightening your enemyn or knocking your enemy prone etc is gold for DPR increases. The overall increase in DPR for you alone makes up for the slightly lower damage, and the overall increase to DPR for the party (assume you have a friendly Rogue and GWM fighter nearby) makes these spells better that simply using a slot to smite.

Would you rather deal +3d8 damage, or +2d6 damage and gain advantage on all your remaining attacks this round, and to those of all your allies as well?

The only downside is the use of concetration. Hunters mark and Bless want this slot so badly.

[cZak]

Wrathful smite, after the initial save, is a Wisdom ability check; no proficiency bonus.
Good vs barbarians, fighters & rogues to impose Disadvantage on attacks & ability checks.

Ensnaring strike is the same way, except it's Strength.
Good vs wizards, sorcs, & dex builds. Lock down that caster & send in the rogue.

Like Malifice says, thinking tactically vice 'I hit it with my big stick'
They're situational, but I can definitely see advantages :) to that ride along effect

[Oramac]

I do play it correctly. According to the spell description, Wrathful Smite ends only when the target spends its action to make a Wisdom check, not a save. The only chance you have to save is on initial application, after that it is all Wisdom checks at disadvantage for being frightened.

Holy Chit! I hadn't noticed that either. And I know my Paladin is going to have a major fight very first thing come Tuesday. I'm totally using that!

[visitor]

I wonder if Wrathful Smite's wording is an oversight; Blinding Smite, perhaps the most similar smite spell, is third level and uses similar wording but calls for a Constitution saving throw (rather than ability check).

[Talyn]

Wrathful Smite is my go-to anti-brute spell as a paladin. Branding Smite takes out rogues, drow, and ghosts. I prepared Blazing Smite when I knew I was going into a Troll cave, etc. etc. Thunderous Smite I admit I have never used, but that's because I knock enemies prone with a shield bash with the Shield Mastery feat.

You trade damage for utility. It's the same trade-off that every other caster takes.