Hexblade smiting vs paladin smiting

[Belzique]

Paladin Divine Smite:

...The extra damage is 2d8 for a 1st-level spell slot, plus 1d8 for each spell level higher than 1st...

Hexblade smite(s):

...you can expend a spell slot to deal an additional 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level...

Both state that this damage is in addition to normal weapon damage. Both have additional features. Paladins do radiant damage while hexblades do slashing (assuming magical, since you're expending spell slots/magical energies to do it).

A bit of a number rundown:

Paladin

At 3rd level a paladin will have three first level spell slots to expend on Divine Smite. These spell slots will provide 3*9=27 damage on average. If we go through every 3rd level like this (first level and level gap picked at random) to determine the average damage Divine Smite provides:

3rd: 27 dmg
6th: 63 dmg
9th: 112,5 dmg
12th: 130,5 dmg
15th: 175,5 dmg
18th: 225 dmg

Hexblade

At 3rd level a warlock will have two second level spell slots to expend on their invocation. These spell slots will provide 2*18=36 damage on average. If we again go through every 3rd level like this to determine the average damage the invocations provide:

3rd: 36 dmg
6th: 54 dmg
9th: 90 dmg
12th: 135 dmg
15th: 135 dmg
18th: 180 dmg

So they start higher than paladins but quickly drop to equal or below in regards to smite damage. But here's my problem: This is without any short rests, during which a paladin wouldn't regain spell slots but a warlock would. With just one short rest during the day the hexblade is already smiting harder than the paladin.

I'm really just wondering how this flies because hexblades seem to just be better. It'd be wonderful if it was just that I was doing the calculations wrong but anyway, hoping for some feedback to cast light on this for me. I'd also appreciate any thoughts on how it could be rebalanced if this is indeed unbalanced. Shouldn't warlocks only be smiting for about 80% of a paladin's damage assuming two short rests in a day?

Apologies if this has already been addressed. Some search showed me that people certainly realized that the hexblade smite did seem stronger but no one seemed to talk about it as if it were an issue.

[PeteNutButter]

Short answer: It flies because UA is just broken.

A couple things you aren't considering. One of those classes can do way more burst than the other. If two PCs can do 100 damage per rest, but one has to do it over 5 rounds and the other can do it in 1 round, which is better? It's always the guy that has the capacity to through the kitchen sink. Another point for warlock.

What else aren't you considering? Both of these classes would probably multiclass into sorcerer. Suddenly that warlock can smite with potentially 9th slot for 18d8, wait for a crit and it's 36d8. Most would probably do the 5/15 split for extra attack so it's only 8th slots, but that is just ridiculous. Meanwhile the paladin gets no benefit for smithing beyond 4th level slots. 400 points for warlock.

Last point is nothing at all makes these mutually exclusive. A MC paladin warlock can smite and activate his weapon "smite." Negative 10000 points for UA balance.

[Feuerphoenix]

All these calculations were done without multi classing in mind. Still for me the pally is the smite king, simply because he is more flexible to do other things "besides smiting" with a vast amount of spells and his passive abilities.

The UA warlock did not seem to be thought over several times, or maybe he had this high damage because of his opportunity costs. Yes, your damage spikes may be comparable to the ones with a pally, but you have to build Arround that. You can't use your slots for anything else, or your calculations are becoming even more miserable. And if we consider a pally with 2-3 levels of warlock (not UA) the damage advantage is already gone. So long Story short:

Only in simple, single encounters this matters, and there your warlock is likely to take more damage, has less hp and way less flexibility than a paladin in comparison. These calculation are more "engineer's porn" than anything else ;)

[Ebon Rogue]

I would agree on the damage in that senario. Warlocks would out damage a paladin in a day long smite off. But vacuum tests rarely make it on the table.

Paladin's get heavy armor, and have d10 hit dice, they are overall less MAD and easier to optimize. Not to mention a free 1d8 damage at 11.

Hexblade has to invest into Dex 14 to get +2 AC since he has to use medium armor, generally has half-forth the spell slots available, and cant stat into Cha for spell saves/eldritch blast because he needs strength for the Greatsword(Hexblade can't use Cha on Two-Handed weapons).

It give and take. For the most part, I'd take a Paladin. Running into melee as a warlock and using my spellslots on anything that doesn't starts with "D" and ends in "arkness" seems sub-optimal. You will get more bang for you buck with the advantage from blinding, imo.

The thing that seems to make Hexblade good is the expanded spell list which give decent headroom in AoE and crowd control.

I am currently running a Hexblade in a campaign and opted for one-handed variant with max charisma. The battlefield control of darkness, the expanded spell list, and the spammable Eldritch Blast makes the build much more versatile than most and personally wouldn't use Smite Nova without Multiclassing into Shadow Sorcerer after level 5. You get Darkness casts from sorcery points and more spell slots.

Edit: Fixed erroneous use of smite spells from expanded spell list.

[RipTide]

What some people here are forgetting is that UA content is made without Multi classing in mind. So I wouldn't bring that up when considering balance.

The other thing to think about is how much of a caster each class is. The Paladin is a half caster, where as the Warlock is, if not a full caster, a primary caster. So over the course of a day a warlock should be dealing more damage through spells than a paladin. I would say the balance is as simple as that Warlocks are more focused on casting spells than Paladins so they deal more damage with spells.

Also, the higher damage per spell level is to compensate for the fact that, well a melee warlock isn't as good as one who goes full into Eldritch Blast and just sits back and casts all day. So they get extra nova to compensate for the reduced safety, EB locks get to cast form a range, Pally's get higher Hit Dice and heavy armor, and melee locks get higher nova.

single class it's actually pretty balanced, multi class though is blatantly OP though.

[Submortimer]

In my game, I'm currently playing a variation on the Hexblade which, as I have been running it, keeps the concept fun and flavorful, but without some of the glaring oversights and balance issues.

1. Access to heavy armor. I use a Maul, so my strength is decently high, and so heavy armor is a must. I still get hit all the time, but not AS often as I could.

2. Curse comes online at level 6, and is limited to affecting melee attacks only. Limits multiclassing shenannigans, and drives home the focus of the class.

3. The smite invocation is limited to Pact Magic slots only, removing the potential for Sorclock craziness while still giving me a pocket 16d8 critical when I need it. In most cases, the needed spell slots get spent on shield.

As it stands, I'm nowhere near the most powerful member of the party in terms of damage output, but it's fun, and I have a reoccurring joke of me dying in combat, only to wake up on my next turn because someone killed my cursed target (since the curse does not drop when you go unconcious).

[RipTide]

The thing that seems to make Hexblade really, really good is that they get Staggering Smite at level 7. Level 7 Hexblade using a Longsword will do 27.5(1d10+4d6+8) per attack. So 55 damage/round for 10 rounds. Paladins don't get a 4th level slot until 13.


All smite spells are once and done though aren't they? They all say on the first attack or on the next attack. So that is only 55 damage for 1 round, you would need 10 4th level slots to pull that off what your talking about.

[Ebon Rogue]

All smite spells are once and done though aren't they? They all say on the first attack or on the next attack. So that is only 55 damage for 1 round, you would need 10 4th level slots to pull that off what your talking about.

It very well might be! I and my DM have been using it as a constant effect that persists through the concentration. If you can find me a ruling on it, I'd love to see it. It doesn't say first attack. It says:

The next time you hit a creature with a melee attack during this spell's duration,...

It says nothing about the spell ending after the attack. i've done some light google searching, and its hard to find.

If you're right, I would still skip the Greatsword Evocation for darkness casts.

Edit: It is a one time use. I'll edit my first post to reflect this. Its a bit confusing(wouldn't be dnd if it wasn't). Concentration is just a weird mechanic in the smite spells. I understand its to stop smite stacking, but that could of been in the spell description.

[Belzique]

I'd like to thank everyone for their replies. They have been very helpful. I find it unlikely that any changes will be made to the smiting feature of hexblades at my table after weighing all of this.

[joaber]

Well, you sshould put 2x short rest/day in that calculation, the game was balanced for that.

Paladin shouldn't burn all spellslots for smite, is a bad choice, divine smite was made to be burned in a crit, or in the last encounter agaist bbeg. Paladin get way better uses for most slots. In fact, divine smite dhould follow the invocation damage to worth it.

And paladin looks better than hexblade while they don't be burning slots, just the aura is a better party feature than any thing that a hexblade can provide.