If at first you don't succeed...
Yeah, yeah, I'm looking at more crazy options for an eidolon that's also an evil outsider. Hey, smites are scary! But in any case, I think Smiting Reversal is good enough (and not 'evil-only' enough) to be added back in to the Additional Resources for ::sigh:: the Agents of Evil book.
Smiting Reversal: Three times per day after being targeted by the smite attack of an enemy, you can immediately make an attack of opportunity against the target. You gain a bonus on this attack roll equal to your Charisma bonus. If this attack of opportunity hits, you gain a bonus on the damage roll equal to your character level. This attack of opportunity ignores all damage reduction the creature possesses.
So, you can smite back someone who's trying to smite you. That's kind of neat! It feels a bit Calistrian in a way.
1) This feat would be useful for anyone (good) who gets into a fight with an antipaladin or a fiendish animal. It doesn't have an 'evil only' requirement, and it could actually be useful to other pathfinders.
There are other ways to stuff a smite anyway that are allowed by the resources. None of them have quite that verve that Smiting Reversal has, though.
2) The warding armor enchantment.
3) The spell unholy ward. Now this is an interesting one, because it's also from Agents of Evil, and it really is only for bad guys.
So, that's what I have for reasons to add the feat back in: it's interesting, it does something unique, and there are already some anti-smite items and spells on the books. What do you think?
I think the issue is more in the mechanics of how the adjudication of the feat's mechanics and how it is written, namely "smite" doesn't generate any real discernible effects, nor does it specify that the enemy who smote you is your target. This would also trigger on destruction domain ability, possibly a channel smite, and might have even stranger adjudication for situations where someone can trigger a "smite" effect for someone else (is it the wielder of the weapon or the originator of the smite effect?)
I think it would be fine if the feat's wording was cleaned up a bit, but can see why it's not legal as-is.
nor does it specify that the enemy who smote you is your target.
Three times per day after being targeted by the smite attack of an enemy, you can immediately make an attack of opportunity against the target.
That kind of says you're making it against the enemy that tried to smite you, to me...
|Philippe Lam Venture-Agent, France—Paris|
TimD wrote:nor does it specify that the enemy who smote you is your target.
Uhh...Smiting Reversal wrote:Three times per day after being targeted by the smite attack of an enemy, you can immediately make an attack of opportunity against the target.That kind of says you're making it against the enemy that tried to smite you, to me...
Sure. So when you've specified you are attacking the creature in melee with you and the Destruction Domain archer with Greater Invisibility hits you with an arrow from 25 feet away, where does your attack go? - to your "target" that you are in melee with or the person who destruction domain-smote you with an arrow that you have no way to know that it used a smite and probably don't know where it is?