|
Hello,
Question about Smite Evil dmg: Do the player knows what dmg exactly he dealt?
I attacked the monster who I guessed was evil and maybe undead or some kind of dragon <don't know, there are three monsters with x2 dmgs>
What is a problem... my game master didn't want to tell me what dmgs I dealt. He was starting shouting about that He doesn't have to do it, saying that there is nothing in the book about that etc.
What is my problem: I understand that this is my right as a player to know what dmgs I exactly dealt... especially that it worked that way in every previous sessions. For instance, it started to not. He obviously didn't want to tell me that because I would guess who the enemy is... but come on, this is how this works. Even the GM cannot control every players action...
Do I don't have any chance to do that, especially when am I playing as a paladin? I would maybe be not sure if the person is undead or dragon but I should know that he/she is one of them and is certainly evil because attack worked very well... I got angry because it looked like "You did something that GM did not predicted so you are forbidden to do that."
There are any rules which specify that?
If you want to be sure you have to detect evil. The GM is never under any obligation to tell the players that information, but most will describe the damage so the player knows.
Investing in knowledge skills is also a valid option to have a good better chance to find out what a creature's alignment might be.
|
|
If you want to be sure you have to detect evil. The GM is never under any obligation to tell the players that information, but most will describe the damage so the player knows.
Investing in knowledge skills is also a valid option to have a good better chance to find out what a creature's alignment might be.
No, He doesn't true. But I guess He is obligated to tell me what dmgs I dealt... I'm just asking about that.
It's like.. I don't know - Hiding my Hit Points in the middle of the game. I could agree or not before the game, but changing the rules in the course of game without telling anybody It's just wrong.
No.
BAM!
Informally agreed upon proceedings are to either pass an appropriate knowledge check (I as a GM would perform it, even as a fake roll, if PC does not have appropriate skill) to recognize opponent for what it is. Otherwise you spend an action on your detect evil class ability. After that you declare your smite evil. Easy as that.
Ruyan.
|
|
No.BAM!
Informally agreed upon proceedings are to either pass an appropriate knowledge check (I as a GM would perform it, even as a fake roll, if PC does not have appropriate skill) to recognize opponent for what it is. Otherwise you spend an action on your detect evil class ability. After that you declare your smite evil. Easy as that.
Ruyan.
Thats not exactly the problem I was describing. I used detect evil but the GM wanted to conceal the information AFTER I used Smite Evil and ATTACKED with it, whether it was a creature giving me double dmg or not. Is he allowed to do that?
Overtaken by concerro while typing - aren't you busy in the other threat *winks*.
Anyways. The basis for your damage is not clear (to you), so how can a GM give you a number to answer your question.
In addition, the opponent could have DR as special defense, another technical term you as PC do not understand, but could use for meta-gaming (finding out about this would be also covered by a successful knowledge check).
Ruyan.
Yes he is, there is no rule stating that he has to tell you.
Again invest in some knowledge skills.
((Most DMs will tell you, but no he does not have to))
Allowed is not the term I would use here; not obliged to fits better, IMO.
|
A PC should be able to tell how much he hurt the target of his attack, but it can be hard to say how badly the hit hurt, especially in 6 second rounds. But the DM is not obligated to tell the player that his smite damage did or did not count. No rule states what effect the smite has visually, or that the paladin instantly knows if his smite was successful.
If you want to be sure you have to detect evil. The GM is never under any obligation to tell the players that information, but most will describe the damage so the player knows.
Investing in knowledge skills is also a valid option to have a good better chance to find out what a creature's alignment might be.
No, He doesn't true. But I guess He is obligated to tell me what dmgs I dealt... I'm just asking about that.
It's like.. I don't know - Hiding my Hit Points in the middle of the game. I could agree or not before the game, but changing the rules in the course of game without telling anybody It's just wrong.
He is still not obligated to tell you. The monster might have damage reduction or he might have made the encounter to easy, and does not way to admit it. Hopefully if the 2nd part is true he can fix his errors.
Overtaken by concerro while typing - aren't you busy in the other threat *winks*.
Anyways. The basis for your damage is not clear (to you), so how can a GM give you a number to answer your question.
In addition, the opponent could have DR as special defense, another technical term you as PC do not understand, but could use for meta-gaming (finding out about this would be also covered by a successful knowledge check).Ruyan.
Stop ninja'ing me. I wanted to claim the DR statement. :)
|
The question of whether it's fair or not, really depends on whether he set any precedent for this, or not.
If every successful smite you've ever dealt came with a burst of bright light, and furthermore, a first smite against an intelligent undead causes the burst of light, plus a choir of angels singing,...
THEN it's a bad idea to suddenly start ruling that the smite attempt doesn't produce any evidence of being successful, or whether it was a super-smite.
But if the game has always been played, that smite simply gives a damage bonus, and takes off several extra 'abstract hit points', and you don't actually connect with flesh until you knock hp to zero...then every 'hit', up to the last, should be described in vague terms, such as "He dodges out of the way, and is getting out of breath.".
GMs in general, are actually more generous than they need to be in letting the players know how much 'damage' they deal, since it wouldn't be apparent, only the effects are apparent, and the effects are "Dodge, duck, weave, flesh wound, gash, gotcha!".
It's simply easier, to have all the rolls in the open, and lets the game go faster.
Doesn't mean the characters actually know "That was max damage!", or "You rolled a one! Bad luck!".
Um, if the Paladin's Smite Evil worked, DR is not a factor as Smite Evil overcomes DR.
It sounds to me, that you used Detect Evil, and determined the creature was Evil, then used Smite Evil. So you know it worked, and it overcomes DR, so you should notice that your blows are having a substantially larger effect against he creature, than your allies' blows.
True, so true about the DR while smiting, Tels, but my issue was I tried to (further) illustrate the usefulness of (knowledge) skills and the discrepancy between PC knowledge and player knowledge (or meta-gaming).
The specific question was referring to dealing double damage in case it was an evil outsider, undead or dragon, though.
Ruyan.
Interesting.
Well, you indicated you are guessing the creature's type. So your GM might have built this creature, or it might be a non-standard creature from another source. Since it may be a point of the game for you to figure out what the creature is (a story point, for instance), the GM may be withholding information because it is important to the plot. If he told you flat out, you'd be able to guess that nature, possibly ruining it for the other players.
That said, I usually let my players compute their own damage, even in cases similar to this. It's just fun for them, so I don't mess with that.
Um, if the Paladin's Smite Evil worked, DR is not a factor as Smite Evil overcomes DR.
It sounds to me, that you used Detect Evil, and determined the creature was Evil, then used Smite Evil. So you know it worked, and it overcomes DR, so you should notice that your blows are having a substantially larger effect against he creature, than your allies' blows.
I forgot that DR overcomes smite, and if you used detect evil then the smite is working. Maybe the GM has plot reasons as to why he does not want the OP to know. I would not worry about it unless it continues to happen.
So. This is not a question of having the DM telling you if your smite is affecting the target or not. You are wanting the Smite to tell you the creatures Type by if it is doing double damage or not. That's Knowledge skill territory really. He (DM) shouldn't have to say if its taking double damage or isn't.
Technically the damage being done could be factored into the total hp and expressed as a relative %.
"you strike him and smite flares, but he is lightly wounded." (double damage smite of 25 damage to a creature with 300+ hp)
"you strike him and smite flares, and the creature reels in agony from a near mortal wound" (normal damage smite of 25 damage to a creature with 30 hp)
He is still not obligated to tell you. The monster might have damage reduction or he might have made the encounter to easy, and does not way to admit it. Hopefully if the 2nd part is true he can fix his errors.If you want to be sure you have to detect evil. The GM is never under any obligation to tell the players that information, but most will describe the damage so the player knows.
Investing in knowledge skills is also a valid option to have a good better chance to find out what a creature's alignment might be.
No, He doesn't true. But I guess He is obligated to tell me what dmgs I dealt... I'm just asking about that.
It's like.. I don't know - Hiding my Hit Points in the middle of the game. I could agree or not before the game, but changing the rules in the course of game without telling anybody It's just wrong.
He should describe things properly. If I'm rolling damag and he is inmune, or have DR, he should be describing so. If I'm doing extra damage, because the monster is vulnerable to slashing weapons, or bcouse it's an outsider and smite does extra damage, it should be described properly too. You don't need to give exact info (such as "you do 30 damage", but it should be described how powerful the hit was. "The blade slash through flesh without difficulty, and the wound seems to glow with a holy light" or whatever.
I think it's just a "narrativist GM married with his loved monster hp"
Detect evil should also indicate the amount of evilness the creature has. Undead and evil outsiders have a much much stronger aura.
There's no rule for what information the DM gives you about the effects of your damage. Among the games I run and play in, the DMs give out information like:
"Not all of that damage seemed to go through" (for DR)
"Your favored enemy bonus did/didn't apply" (for rangers)
"Your smite did/didn't apply" (for paladins)
Mostly because this means less math and less hassle for everyone at the table. It's customary, but not mandatory.
All the DMs reserve the right to not tell. If you are shooting into a shadowy area, you might not be able to tell any of that. If your paladin smites a succubus in disguise, she may try to bluff that the smite damage wasn't doubled, or even didn't go through at all. She may also try to bluff that she doesn't have DR when somebody else hits her, by faking that it hurts more than it does.
For consistency, in my games, this sort of information is based on either a perception or sense motive check, and the DC is usually so low (DC 0, for melee) that we don't bother rolling. In the rare cases where there's environmental or deliberate obfuscation involved, checks can be made. This is a house rule.
I'd suggest the next time the DM balks at telling you, ask if you can make a perception or sense motive check to discern the effect of your attack. He can still say no, but it's a pretty reasonable request IMO.
|
|
I think it's just a "narrativist GM married with his loved monster hp"
I'm afraid that yes. I have seen this before a lot of times and looks always the same. Oh well.
I'd suggest the next time the DM balks at telling you, ask if you can make a perception or sense motive check to discern the effect of your attack. He can still say no, but it's a pretty reasonable request IMO.
Can get nothing because of that or another shady description which will not tell anything.
It sounds to me, and I'll be the first one to say I could be totally off-base here.
You said to youself "Screw knowledge skills, I have smite"
If that's the case then I for one side with the GM, Smite should not be the new "Monster Type-Teller 5000"
I am a personal fan of screw the rules im in love with nurse Smite.
if you gm isnt telling you your abilities are working or not he's being a jerk. Drop him and find a new game.
|
|
The impression I get is that:
- the target is some kind of creature using a disguise or a spell
- the GM don't want to divulge if it is an outsider/dragon/undead or not
- the paladin hope to discover that
To me it seem a questionable behaviour on the GM side unless the paladin is very low level and so the damage difference between Paladin level x1 and x2 is small.
Let's say our paladin is level 10. We are speaking of a difference of 10 points of damage, more that the base damage for a lot of weapons. Saying that the difference isn't noticeable is stretching it a bit.
At worst he could ask for a perception or healing check to gauge the difference between the first hit and the subsequent ones. I would not make it a matter of knowledge skills.
That said, I usually let my players compute their own damage, even in cases similar to this. It's just fun for them, so I don't mess with that.
As a GM, I usually have my players tell me the damage they do in discrete amounts. "I do 15 damage, plus 3 fire and 10 smite." or "I do 28 damage. 3 of it was fire and 10 was from my smite." Then I adjust appropriately in my head. If an atttack is entirely negated by the monster's DR or resistances, I'll tell them that. And as the fight goes on, I'll tell them not to bother separating out the damages which don't need to be separate, just to speed things up.
|
|
Yet again, I find myself agreeing with Diego. It could go something like this:
"Hey, do you think that BBEG is a lich?"
"I don't know. He looks normal, but that could be an illusion."
"He has tried to blast us a couple of times already."
"True. Maybe Bob can smite him and we'll see if that hurts him more than usual."
"Good idea."
<Bob smites, hits, and his standard 15 damage becomes a blazing 35 points of holy butt kicking. The BBEG's skin chars and crumbles, leaving smouldering patches on his clothes and body.>
"Well, I still don't know if he's a lich, but he's definitely SOMETHING nasty."
"Yeah."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd just like to point out that not everything that pings evil is smiteable, and that may be why the GM is not telling you if it's working, and if so, how much.
Example : Gnoll who's alignment is LN worshiping a LE god. He pings as Evil as sin. He's not actually evil. A smite doesn't actually work on him. But the GM can't tell you that without revealing information your character couldn't know in the middle of a fight.
I'd just like to point out that not everything that pings evil is smiteable, and that may be why the GM is not telling you if it's working, and if so, how much.
Example : Gnoll who's alignment is LN worshiping a LE god. He pings as Evil as sin. He's not actually evil. A smite doesn't actually work on him. But the GM can't tell you that without revealing information your character couldn't know in the middle of a fight.
Why wouldn't work? Smite evil works on things that are Evil (as per detect evil), not those that are of evil alignment.
Actually, as we use it, you could smite a Neutral Evil level 1 merchant that ussually cheat people, lie, and is plainly awful, and it won't work, becouse such person won't ping as Evil.
I agree with Diego. It's obvious, imho, that the DM was using some sort of veiling spell for his BBEG. Maybe Alterself+Nondetection, or whatever. Smite Evil is not fooled by that, and he got angry becouse his "loved NPC" which he was married with, got discovered. It's not a matter of Knowledge skills, since he wasn't allowed to roll the skill to start with. And Smite does not trump Knowledge skill either. He only knows it's a Undead, Dragon, or Evil Outsider. He does not know if it's a polymorphed Green Dragon, a Vampire, or a Devil. It might be a Red Dragon, a Lich or a Daemon instead. He only knows it's not what it seems to be, but something more awful. IMHO, a good DM should reward this.
I never understand DM like that. You are there to make the story advance, no to tell the story. Players tell the story as much as the DM does. It's not like you go there, read them your (not so) wonderful novel, and they just nod and aplaud. If the Players did something original that you did not prepare for, it's just fine.
|
Harsh interpretation of Smite Evil there Gustavo. But I agree with your final point about gaming being a collaborative story.
For my part I will tell my players if smite works after the first hit just like I would tell them if damage reduction had mitigated their damage.
Really though it's a ref call.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd just like to point out that not everything that pings evil is smiteable, and that may be why the GM is not telling you if it's working, and if so, how much.
Example : Gnoll who's alignment is LN worshiping a LE god. He pings as Evil as sin. He's not actually evil. A smite doesn't actually work on him. But the GM can't tell you that without revealing information your character couldn't know in the middle of a fight.
Why wouldn't work? Smite evil works on things that are Evil (as per detect evil), not those that are of evil alignment.
Actually, as we use it, you could smite a Neutral Evil level 1 merchant that ussually cheat people, lie, and is plainly awful, and it won't work, becouse such person won't ping as Evil.
They don't need to ping as Evil, they are of an Evil alignment, therefore Smite Evil works. Nothing in Smite Evil says they have to be identifiable under Detect Evil in order for Smite Evil to work. It simply says, "If this target is evil..." then Smite Evil has an effect.
A Neutral Cleric that is the spymaster of his kingdom could worship Norgorber (NE God of Secrets). He would ping as Evil per Detect Evil, but is not affected by Smite as they themselves are not Evil.
|
|
I'd just like to point out that not everything that pings evil is smiteable, and that may be why the GM is not telling you if it's working, and if so, how much.
Example : Gnoll who's alignment is LN worshiping a LE god. He pings as Evil as sin. He's not actually evil. A smite doesn't actually work on him. But the GM can't tell you that without revealing information your character couldn't know in the middle of a fight.
mdt is right, a neutral cleric of a evil deity will register as evil even if he is not evil aligned and he would not receive extra damage from a smite attempt. A character with a powerful evil item could fool the Detect evil spell (GM call for the pinpoint version of the paladin).
But again, if the paladin s of a sufficiently high level the difference is easily perceptible. Getting +0, +10 or +20 points of damage from a successful attack isn't a small difference.
There are spells that can fool this kind of test, False life for example, as the first x point of damage will not harm the target, or Shield other, as the target of the spell get only half damage, but that is resolved having the players giving the different conditional damage separately, as Bobson explained, and then giving out a description of the result that is reasonably comprehensible.
"The damage seem less than what you would expect from a successful smite attempt." could mean a protected target or a non evil one.
"Your first attack delivered a lot of damage but the following ones seem less efficient" probably mean a evil dragon/outsider/undead in disguise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Question about Smite Evil dmg: Do the player knows what dmg exactly he dealt?
He knows how much he hit for. For example, he knows that he rolled a 7, he knows he has +4 from strength, +6 from Power Attack, and either +8 or +16 from smite evil, depending on whether the creature is evil or not, and how evil.
How much the target takes is another matter. If the target isn't evil, but you thought it was, it won't take as much damage. If it has Damage Resistance, it won't take as much damage. What if it was an illusion and your character failed the save?
How will your character know? Hit points are an abstract concept - even with Smite Evil a human with 100 hit points will take less damage from your blow, relatively speaking, than one with 20 who isn't evil. In short, your character has no real way of knowing if the smite worked or not.
So why should your DM tell you?
I attacked the monster who I guessed was evil and maybe undead or some kind of dragon <don't know, there are three monsters with x2 dmgs>
So? it's 'smite evil', not 'know what the monster is by hitting it'. Your paladin has spells to help him tell what creatures are, and other abilities to detect evil. It's up to you to use them.
What is a problem... my game master didn't want to tell me what dmgs I dealt. He was starting shouting about that He doesn't have to do it, saying that there is nothing in the book about that etc.
Shouting is bad. Otherwise, yep, he can describe that you hurt the target bad, or that it was a fleshwound, or that your blow seemed to bounce off. That, after all, is what your character would know. Your character would not know precise numbers.
What is my problem: I understand that this is my right as a player to know what dmgs I exactly dealt... especially that it worked that way in every previous sessions. For instance, it started to not. He obviously didn't want to tell me that because I would guess who the enemy is... but come on, this is how this works. Even the GM cannot control every players action...
No. Your right as a player is to talk to the DM and establish how he wants to run the game, then decide if you want to take part in it.
Do I don't have any chance to do that, especially when am I playing as a paladin? I would maybe be not sure if the person is undead or dragon but I should know that he/she is one of them and is certainly evil because attack worked very well...
How? As I explained above, smite evil is not a divinatory ability. You will know if the attack worked well, not so well, or not at all. Without knowing the strength of the target beforehand, your character - and hence you - will not know anything more than that. You can judge the effect of your blow, but then how do you know how tough the being was to start?
I got angry because it looked like "You did something that GM did not predicted so you are forbidden to do that."
I don't think so, this is you trying to get more out of an ability than the rules allow. It may be that he didn't expect you to attack, he may have been thrown that you saw through his ruse and were absolutely right to smite. That doesn't mean he has to tell you.
I disagree completely with your DM shouting and getting angry with you - that was out of order, end of. But the rest? It's up to him to describe how the blow landed, and you make your own judgement on whether you think that the smite evil worked.
Does that mean you are in doubt? Yes, absolutely. You are a PALADIN, a paragon of goodness and honour. You SHOULD be reluctant to smite needlessly, you SHOULD be questioning the justification of every blow. When you make certain to strike, you strike hard and true.
Maybe it's the language barrier, but the OP just said that he "guessed" the guy was evil, and "maybe" an undead or dragon. If he didn't know the guy was evil, and started throwing around smites - as a way to identify the creature, not to bring down justice - then I wouldn't reward the metagaming behavior either.
It's hard to be certain without knowing the scenario, but it seems like the OP was trying to use a mechanic designed to aid in damage to determine what the creature was.
PALADIN: Hmmm, everytime I hit a dragon, it really hurts them, like a lot. So, if this guy is a dragon, and I stab him, then it'll like really hurt him, and I'll know that he's a dragon. Cause usually when I stab people it only kinda hurts, and it can't be that the guy is a wimp. I mean he could be an outsider, cause it extra hurts when I punch them too. So, if I just stab a guy instead of relying on my divine intuition (DETECT EVIL) or evidence and instincts, not to mention my guiding code, (LAWFUL GOOD) and he DIES then he MUST be REALLY evil!! Flawless logic.
2 things. 1) That is really the only way I see for this to play out the way it did. 2) That's how witch burnings basically worked. Were those Lawful Good? No, they were not.
Question about Smite Evil dmg: Do the player knows what dmg exactly he dealt?He knows how much he hit for. For example, he knows that he rolled a 7, he knows he has +4 from strength, +6 from Power Attack, and either +8 or +16 from smite evil, depending on whether the creature is evil or not, and how evil.
How much the target takes is another matter. If the target isn't evil, but you thought it was, it won't take as much damage. If it has Damage Resistance, it won't take as much damage. What if it was an illusion and your character failed the save?
How will your character know? Hit points are an abstract concept - even with Smite Evil a human with 100 hit points will take less damage from your blow, relatively speaking, than one with 20 who isn't evil. In short, your character has no real way of knowing if the smite worked or not.
So why should your DM tell you?
This is exactly what I was trying to get at. +1
OP might not be aware of the errata for smite, that only the first attack you inflict does double your paladin level, and the rest just do level.
|
It seems that my player failed to provide enough data to properly describe what was happening so I will clarify so we can all focus the discussion on the primary concern that we had during the game.
I DMed this session and this particular encounter started in a tight but still dark tomb chamber with an altar at the end of it. The light of the torch gave enough light to cover 4/5 of the tomb but not the altar. The previous chambers wheere infested by lesser shadows which I described as dark creatures strolling in the darkness. This one was a prison for a shadow daemon who apeard before the party as a floating veil which started forminga humanoid form with horn and wings (I omitted the claws and facial expression due to poor light). Before the combat the paladin used detect evil and I informed him that he emits a strong aura of evil, not as strong as an evil dragon which the party encountered but more than any man the paladin has ever faced.
The paladin charges, he hits, he rolls all his DMG - TH sword + Power Attack + Smite and he asks if he gets double smite dmg. I said no, and tried to describe the damage he dealt "The shadow creature seems badly hurt, the blow pushed him to the wall of the chamber..." I would probably describe more if not for the arguing, which I tried to postpone untill the game ends for the benefit of all.
I did that because I wanted to be more narrative and rid myself of this lazy flaw of describing everything in absolutes not naming the creature only describing it to give the players a higher level of immersion. A the player stated I never before conceald any of these informations from him and I didn't point out at the begining of the game that I will be doing that because I didn't see any harm in that, but this is off-topic
To sum up, the problem is whether the DM is obligated, or is it in good taste to hide this informations, about whether the paladin does extra dmg due to TYPE. Form my perspective I would never omited informations such as efffects of a DR or SR as they usually negate a lot and people can see much clearer if something is not effective, where the matter of effectivness is a different thing. Something can effective or super effective, you wont know unless you observe closely and study it up to the point when the final blow is dealt. In the case of a paladin I doubt that the sword gets longer as you plow trough the dragon scales or that the sheer force of the blow matches thors hammer and sends the foe flying. Undead don't bleed, outsiders might not bleed, dragons requier a lot of handywork to make the bleed therefore a puny sword needs something divine to make the DMG it makes. It can destabilize the link that makes the undead move, It can disturb the physicall form of an outsider working as a banish spell, as for the dragons the power of "goodness" can just hurt them more than it looks on the outside e.g. You slash him on the tail but he felt it as if it was in the head or in the heart, its just a theory tough but I would not consider thinking about smite evil as - 'lightsaber on' and double DMG as 'insert theme song'- paladins are cheesy but not on power rangers level, at least in my campaign.
And the GM shows himself. It is always strange how thing turn when both sides of the story are mentioned. Now I am going to read his long response. :)
The character has no way to know if double damage that. As long as I got the double damage, if I was supposed to, I would not care if you told me or not.
In short trust the GM unless given a reason not too.
I think the GM was trying to hide the creature's type, and did not want the player to metagame.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Although I think the extra damage would likely be clear to the paladin, a truly undefinable foe may not be within the realm of the character's experience. Thus, determining exactly how badly the enemy was wounded may not be possible. As Wraithstrike said, as long as the extra damage was applied if it was supposed to be, I would be satisfied.
However, I'd add that if your (the GM) policy up to this point has been to allow the players to know exactly what damage is being inflicted, then suddenly changing that policy in the middle of an encounter is not the best move. If you really want to move away from the numbers to a less defined, story-like game, that's fine. But you should probably tell your players first, preferrably at the beginning of the session. It is certainly within your perrogative to run the game that way if you like. Changing gears without warning and at a crucial moment seems arbitrary.
I'd advise you to use that same method (no numbers, just description) all the time, if you plan to use it at all. You asked if it is in good taste to hide some information from the players. To that I say, it is if that has been your policy all along. You should be as consistent as possible. Consistency is key to fairness, and nobody has fun in an unfair game.
And as to the player who posted originally, please try to give the full story in an unbiased manner when you post to the messageboards looking for advice. None of us can really offer any help or an informed opinion without all the facts. Now, you should probably go and try to make friends with your GM again.
I am not so sure there are any 'signs' of a succesful smite evil, it might work much like a prayer spell, taking into account that hitpoints are very abstract at best. I mean in theory even a 300 hp character can be killed by a single strike of a dagger dealing 1d4 damage, a single smite might be a very fortunate strike instead of a dramatic burst of light, having the gods smile upon the paladin as you will. I actually prefer this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I did that because I wanted to be more narrative and rid myself of this lazy flaw of describing everything in absolutes not naming the creature only describing it to give the players a higher level of immersion. A the player stated I never before conceald any of these informations from him and I didn't point out at the begining of the game that I will be doing that because I didn't see any harm in that, but this is off-topic
This is good, it really is. The only error you made was not forewarning your players that this is how you want to play in future.
Considering that Smite Evil does no damage to non-evil creatures ("If the paladin targets a creature that is not evil, the smite is wasted with no effect."), I'd think it would be pretty obvious whether the smite worked.