Smite Evil: This is the most discussed paladin ability. This is the defining ability and the one that most everyone is debating on. I must give credit where credit is due and as I said above Lastknightleft and Robert Brambley talked a LOT about this with me on another thread. There were others that added to these ideas as well so please do not think that they are solely mine. If I have typed something different then what one of those people wrote, then I am sorry and I hope they speak up and correct me.
The simplest change is to give 1+charisma mod smites a day to start with. This allows the paladin to use his smites to actually help in combats rather than “saving” them for the BBEG that you may never see. I think this would be a positive change but I would go a step further. Someone else suggested that the smite itself be X 2 paladin level to damage, I agree with this. I would also add that at some point the smite damage becomes good aligned for the purposes of bypassing damage reduction (possibly lvl 7) and later on criticals are auto confirmed (possibly lvl 10). This makes the smite ability something that actually causes some effect to the game. Another big note was that it should be added that a smite is not “lost” on a miss.
The next change is the only completely new ability that I would add to the paladin. Robert Brambley and I butted heads on this one for awhile until he came up with the solution of making it a different ability. My original fix was to make smite an always on effect with +charisma mod to hit and half paladin level to damage. We found that this would cause problems with backwards comp and broken builds. So Robert said that it should not be smite but another Divine power, so I came up with this.
Lightbringer: A paladin is a destroyer of evil in all it’s forms, he tries to bring light to the world by destroying all that would do harm to it. He does not only smite the worst of the worst but any being that harbors evil in it’s heart. Thus every attack a paladin makes against an evil creature, he gains his charisma bonus to hit and half his paladin level to damage (rounded down). This ability is unaffected by any feat or ability that would modify the way the Paladin’s Smite Evil ability works. This ability can be “turned off” if the paladin is attacking a creature that is not evil. Also if the paladin uses one of his daily Smite Evil attempts this ability does not stack with that one for that attack. This ability would not be gained until level 5 to prevent level dipping. Robert has a modified version of this that he likes more but I will let him talk about that one. The point here was to keep the paladin on par with the damage output of other melee classes when fighting evil. We were concerned that the paladin would also have a heard time hitting the worst or highest CR DDD’s (Dragons, Devils and Demons). With this ability the paladin stays in the fight the whole time, not just until his smites run out. Fighters have this bonus to hit and damage all the time and with some of the new proposed rules to fighter damage this may be even BIGGER. Barbarians have it when they rage (which is a LOT), Rangers have it against their favored enemies, Rogues gain Backstab anytime they are flanking. No reason to deny the paladin the ability to fight the enemies he was MADE to fight, this ability brings the paladin’s fighting capabilities up to par with these other classes, yet only when fighting evil.
Also I think that when a Paladin is using Smite or Lightbringer he should be able to crit undead and evil outsiders (if they were immune to crits). This is his area of expertise, these are the things he was MEANT to fight. The damage a paladin deals does not come from his arm alone. It comes from his conviction and faith in what he is doing, the holy powers that guide his purpose.
Lastly there should be a penalty for attempting to smite or use Lightbringer on a creature that is NOT evil. If the paladin attempts to smite or use Lightbringer on a creature that is not evil then he looses the use of both abilities for 24 hours. Continued abuse of these powers could result in the abilities being removed for a longer period of time or being stripped of all paladin powers as you may have violated your code of conduct.
|
First of all, I think some of these ideas have some merit, while others would make the paladin way overpowered.
Smite Evil: I think it would not be a good idea to give the paladin 1 + CHA modifier number of Smites per day right from the start. Firstly, it would further underline the importance of maxing out your CHA (My player already did this, when he learned that WIS is pretty irrelevant to Paladins in Alpha). Secondly, from a purely powergaming perspective, it makes multiclassing into paladin seem better than into most classes -- with CHA 20 you would get 6 Smites per day if you a single class of paladin. Wow, that could *really* boost a LG cleric or fighter, and I thought one of the design goals was to encourage singleclassing. Besides, I think that gradual increase in the number of Smites feels better and thematically more appropriate than getting the max. number of smites at 1st level -- even though your damage would upgrade as you level up.
However, I *do* agree with you that Smite damage should be your paladin level X2. I also like the idea of automatical crits (10th level would probably be just fine) and that Smite Evil would be able to bypass DR at lower levels.
Lightbringer: This would be way too good, since most creatures in the game are Evil. I honestly think it would lead to DMs shying away from using Evil beings in their games, because the paladin would have the highest attack bonus in the group. Add power attack and the level bonus to damage on top of that, and I see a lot of room for abuse. Also note that rangers have the bonuses against a specific enemy type, while paladins would have the bonuses you've suggested against almost every damn critter in an adventure. I think that's too much, unless there are 'Faith/Smite/Divine Points' they have to spend (similar to Rage Points) to get the bonuses.
Auto-crits against Demons and Undead should, in my opinion, be separate abilities on their own, and while they could be high-level paladin class abilities, I think they would work even better as Divine Feats.
Also note that the "penalty" for smiting a non-evil creature would effectively make Lightbringer even worse than players saving their one or two Smites against BBEG. Namely, if you accidentally Smite a non-evil being, you lose the very abilities that were added to "correct" the perceived problem (which I do not agree with) of the "ineffective" paladin. Therefore, the best course of action at the beginning of *EVERY* combat would be to use 'Detect Evil' to scan every being in the fight... forcing the paladin out of action until he has determined against which creatures *not* to use his abilities. If you don't, you stand to lose your best abilities... which means that every time it happens, the group probably votes to rest for 24 hours so that the "penance time" wears off. In my eyes this makes it a worse problem than running out of Smites.
Thank you for your reply.
As for Smite, I am happy that you agree with the changes that do not involve added smites per day. What if we made it a feat that gave you a bonus of your charisma mod in smites per day? Or if you gained your charisma mod in smites per day at a later level? Then there would always be the options of just saying that you get +1 smite every odd level, I would be happy with that.
As for Lightbringer. I see the paladin as someone who uses his divine guidance and power to eliminate the enemies of his god (or god's alignment). Currently if I really want to "fight the good fight" against the enemies of my god I can do that a FEW times per day....OR I could play a fighter and pretend that my "weapon training" is actually divine guidance. A 12th lvl Fighter with the weapon focus feats and weapon training has what? a +4 to hit and +6 to damage? How would this be different from Lightbringer? Except that paladins would be limited in that they only get the bonus against evil. Yes, MANY things are evil, but MANY things are not. I do not want to make the paladin better than the fighter, I would just like to see the paladin be able to DO what his description says he can do...fight evil!
As for the penalty for smiting things that are not evil. Why not make the paladin's code play into your combat? If you are actually trying to play a paladin you will wait that round or 2 to decide which opponents you can smite or use lightbringer on before attacking....like a paladin should! This also inadvertently lowers the paladins damage...again as it should. Yes Rangers only get their favored enemy bonus against a specific type but once they realize what the specific campaign is going to be facing they will also get this bonus MOST of the time. Fighters get there bonuses against everything, barbarians get their bonuses against everything, rogues get their bonuses everytime they flank...
Just seems equal to me.
|
Secondly, from a purely powergaming perspective, it makes multiclassing into paladin seem better than into most classes -- with CHA 20 you would get 6 Smites per day if you a single class of paladin. Wow, that could *really* boost a LG cleric or fighter, and I thought one of the design goals was to encourage singleclassing.
Ah, Vult beat me to the threads; I saw that these opened a couple of hours ago and nothing on the paladin had been posted - and had to go to lunch, but figured I'd start a thread when I got back - but alas....
As for my opinions:
Level dipping was exactly one of my concerns. My idea that I proposed weeks ago was similar to something Vult was saying - but with different math and mechanics.
An alwasy active "Divine" attack/dmg bonus vs evil that I called "Divine Might"
The bonus to attacks is +1 at first level, and increases +1 every 3 levels after first (If you compare this progression to the paladin description in the BETA rules, you'll see these are the levels that the Smite Evil number per day increases. 1 at 1st, 2 at 4th, 3 at 7th, etc which would max out at +7).
Dmg is equal to half-paladin level (min 1).
This would be the equivalent in the theory to the Lightbringer Ability that Vult mentioned.
This mechanic would prevent level-dipping as it wouldn't make sense since 1st level you're only getting a +1 to hit and dmg vs evil.
As for Smite Evil.
1+cha mod at 1st level. Increases 1 per 3 levels after 3.
What smite evil does is essentially the same - gives a sudden massive boost to hit and damage for an attack against and evil creature (+ CHA mod to hit / + pal level to dmg).
Smite Evil should also do additional affects: Cause Shakened/Fear, Staggered/Stun, and other possible affects that last one round.
AS AN ALTERNATIVE:
another option for Smite Evil I suggest is that instead of affecting just ONE ATTACK, that the smite evil affects ONE TARGET. You identify or specficy one evil target like a challenge, and then for 1 round + 1 round per cha mod, all attacks made against that creature gain the smite evil damage. Its like you're calling out the BBEG and you're making a divine or knightly challenge against that creature that you're dedicated to slaying.
This idea had some support, but some felt it broke backwards compatibility with a couple of feats in a splat book that lets your Smite Evil work like a free trip attack.
Personally, I don't agree with that concern or agree that we need to accomodate every splat book in existance, but I can understand someone having that concern. I'm mentioning the opposition just to be fair and for the the purposes of full-disclosure of previous conversations.
I don't feel either version of Smite Evil - even at 1+cha mod will be all that attractive of a level dip. A LG cleric giving up one level of spellcasting so that a few attacks a round will have a +3 to hit (assuming clerics CHA are not their main stat - WIS is) just doesn't seem practical. Some will - but myself and most I believe wont. It seems less attractive than 1 level of fighter or rogue still, or the 1 level of monk for the saves....
Robert
@robert
Thanx for posting and clarifying. I still like your version of how my Lightbringer or your Divine Might, would work. I think this is truly the way to "fix" the paladin. It is not a HUGE amount of to hit or damage but it makes you FEEL like a paladin, it makes you FEEL like it is the strength of your faith instead of the strength of your arm that matters in a fight.
I like the idea of giving more of an always-on bonus, either replacing smite or adding to it. I liked the changes to barbarian that let him rage more often rather than "saving it up". I would even be OK with smaller bonuses that just always applied consistently, giving more of a linear and constant progression.
I wonder if the smite ability shouldn't be scaled similar to Holy Word and other "burst of good energy" abilities -- large effects on opposed alignments (LE,NE,CE), smaller effect on differing alignments (LN,N,CN), no effect on close alignments (NG, CG, LG). That would mean even if the GM shifted away from pure evil opponents, the paladin isn't completely nerfed. I think of a paladin as bone-headed enough that he'd want to still be able to punish Chaotic Neutral selfish people :-).
Im glad you support the always on effect! I agree, "saving it up" is a terrible thing to do and not something that paladins should be forced into!
Though I cant really agree with your idea on having abilities against chaotic foes. There is another thread about that someone just posted.
Robert said:
AS AN ALTERNATIVE:
another option for Smite Evil I suggest is that instead of affecting just ONE ATTACK, that the smite evil affects ONE TARGET. You identify or specficy one evil target like a challenge, and then for 1 round + 1 round per cha mod, all attacks made against that creature gain the smite evil damage. Its like you're calling out the BBEG and you're making a divine or knightly challenge against that creature that you're dedicated to slaying.
I really like this ability. While I was DMing the Bastion of Broken Souls my wife had to hoard her last remaining Smite Evil so it was available to use on Ashardalon. She had used the rest on the encounter with the balor. With this ability she could have challenged one of the balor and only used one Smite Evil instead of needing a couple. I also like the Lightbringer/Divine Might concept.
Doug
@DougErvin
Awesome! I am very happy that we are getting positive replies! I so want the paladin to be a capable combatant. he does the party no good if he is just the last one standing at the end of a battle...the last to die! He should have an effect on the outcome! I think with a boosted (not broken) smite evil and the addition of lightbringer or divine might (letting him do some consistent damage, like the other melee classes) he is truly what he is supposed to be!!!!
BTW, I strongly agree with the breakdown of who should "shine" at specific moments of the game. This really helps define the different roles of the various melee oriented characters.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
This is a post from one of the fighter threads.....
The point here is to ask everyone where is it that the paladin gets to shine?
Right now its not with combat..they are beaten in every aspect. The fighter and the barbarian do it better easily (they should). The ranger does it better...the Rogue can even do more damage.
They dont heal like a Cleric...and even a Druid that wanted to could heal better than a paladin..
So where I ask you does the paladin SHINE!!??
I know where they should shine, when fighting evil that is where.
These changes to smite evil and the addition of Lightbringer or Divine Might (both changes are awesome) would let the paladin do just that! With this they would shine when facing evil, people would WANT them in their parties if they knew that they were facing off against some BBEG's! Right now what I hear in my playtests are, man you would do so much more damage if you were a fighter. Or, wow we could use some heals, to bad you are not a cleric. *sigh*
This is the simple broken down truth of the matter. Paladins do not shine where they are supposed to shine.
I am of the belief that Paladins should have some kind of attack bonus vs. evil ALL THE TIME. Maybe to replace smites per day, maybe not.
I understand the opposition to this based on a GM's having to pull out non-evil creatures on occasion so that the Paladin doesn't outshine everyone. I submit the following compromise for an "always on smite," whatever form it takes:
Instead of vs. all evil, could we pick iconic evil creatures? Preferably big, nasty ones that really require something as flashy as a smite? Evil Outsiders (perhaps above a given hit die), Evil Dragons, Evil NPCs above a certain HD. This would reinforce the "slayer" image that the new divine bond weapon brings to the paladin.
An always-on smite vs. BIG evil. Think about it.
A second suggestion: Perhaps balancing the Smite power against the Barbarian's Rage power should be considered.
I am of the belief that Paladins should have some kind of attack bonus vs. evil ALL THE TIME. Maybe to replace smites per day, maybe not.
I understand the opposition to this based on a GM's having to pull out non-evil creatures on occasion so that the Paladin doesn't outshine everyone. I submit the following compromise for an "always on smite," whatever form it takes:
Instead of vs. all evil, could we pick iconic evil creatures? Preferably big, nasty ones that really require something as flashy as a smite? Evil Outsiders (perhaps above a given hit die), Evil Dragons, Evil NPCs above a certain HD. This would reinforce the "slayer" image that the new divine bond weapon brings to the paladin.
An always-on smite vs. BIG evil. Think about it.
I agree that even with this limitation it would be an improvement. But I really like the idea that paladins do not ONLY smite the worst of the worst. Evil is evil, period. I know that is not true in the real world as there are shades of gray, but I dont think there are shades of gray when it comes to paladins and their views on evil.
So while I agree with you and I am VERY happy that you would also like an always on effect I do not want to see it limited to only the WORST of the WORST.
Yet another idea in the vein of always-on ...
I always picture Smites as working something like a charged up attack in a video game. The Pally holds his sword aloft and calls out "by the power of Greyskull" or something, and whatever he hits next is in trouble...
Maybe the smite is always-on but takes a standard action to charge up? Got to ask your deity for help, right?
I think we cover that with lightbringer/divine might and still having the "smite" effect.
With lightbringer and divine might the paladin always has his extra divine (to hit and damage). Then he can use his smite for the extra boost, that does not stack with lightbringer/divine might.
I swear this change would put the paladin where he should be!
|
|
An always-on bonus shouldn't significantly outstrip the fighter's always-on bonuses (Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater versions of the same, Weapon Training), because of the generally evil nature of D&D bad guys - that means a limited bonus to hit at low levels, a very slight increase to damage at mid and high levels. It would also seriously change the paladin dynamic, which has always been an "Evil Killing Powers Activate!" kind of thing. It feels off to me, but not necessarily bad...
An always-on bonus shouldn't significantly outstrip the fighter's always-on bonuses (Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater versions of the same, Weapon Training), because of the generally evil nature of D&D bad guys - that means a limited bonus to hit at low levels, a very slight increase to damage at mid and high levels. It would also seriously change the paladin dynamic, which has always been an "Evil Killing Powers Activate!" kind of thing. It feels off to me, but not necessarily bad...
I do not think it should or would outshine the fighter abilities. The fighter does it all the time, even if most enemies are evil...there are plenty that are not. I do not feel that this steps on the fighters toes at all. This just keeps paladins in the fight instead of watching the real warriors do all the work and the paladin being more of a cheerleader.
I would love to know Jason's thoughts on this subject. Quite a few of us have been talking about it for months now.
|
|
AS AN ALTERNATIVE:another option for Smite Evil I suggest is that instead of affecting just ONE ATTACK, that the smite evil affects ONE TARGET. You identify or specficy one evil target like a challenge, and then for 1 round + 1 round per cha mod, all attacks made against that creature gain the smite evil damage. Its like you're calling out the BBEG and you're making a divine or knightly challenge against that creature that you're dedicated to slaying.
Although I see it more as channeling your deity's divine wrath rather than calling them out with a challenge.
Right. 4E calls this 'marking' your target - I've tried to avoid using that terminology for obvious reasons.
Robert
I have seen a lot of good chatter about smite evil but what about lightbringer or divine might? I really think the addition of this ability is where the "fix" can be found.
|
Well I'm already on the band wagon regarding some form of continual to hit and damage buff of some description. Roberts "Divine Might" being the form that I would suggest it taking as it was the mechanic I suggested fairly early in Last Knights thread for a possible continual Smite ability, I still believe that might be a way to go as for BC purposes (excluding feat issues) its a very simple conversion of number of times per day becomes the bonus look at an old smite stat block and look at the number, this is also the main reason I like the additional class feature working similarly.
As to smite itself, how about something that acts a little like the current domain touch powers, auto critical, damage boost or whatever lasts a number of rounds equal to charisma modifier or untill discharged.
Well I'm already on the band wagon regarding some form of continual to hit and damage buff of some description. Roberts "Divine Might" being the form that I would suggest it taking as it was the mechanic I suggested fairly early in Last Knights thread for a possible continual Smite ability, I still believe that might be a way to go as for BC purposes (excluding feat issues) its a very simple conversion of number of times per day becomes the bonus look at an old smite stat block and look at the number, this is also the main reason I like the additional class feature working similarly.
As to smite itself, how about something that acts a little like the current domain touch powers, auto critical, damage boost or whatever lasts a number of rounds equal to charisma modifier or untill discharged.
Awesome, I am glad we have another person with us on the "always on" mechanic. I honestly do not care if it is my version, Roberts or yours that makes it to the books but this is something the paladin needs.
There are a lot of good suggestions being made for Smite evil, I think it has a lot of support. I just REALLY hope this always on idea gets an honest chance.
|
|
I actually just had another thought, hows about taking a leaf from the monks book and have Smite Evil have both components within it, whilst you have uses left it provides a passive boost.
For instance int he monks case whilst they have Ki remaining their fists count as X,Y and Z for damage reduction purposes.
So whilst a Paladin has Smite uses left he has his constant bonus, this would require the Smite itself to be extremely pokey to justify using especially at low level I'm actually quite fond of auto crit myself given the limitations (limited use and only evil).
I actually just had another thought, hows about taking a leaf from the monks book and have Smite Evil have both components within it, whilst you have uses left it provides a passive boost.
For instance int he monks case whilst they have Ki remaining their fists count as X,Y and Z for damage reduction purposes.
So whilst a Paladin has Smite uses left he has his constant bonus, this would require the Smite itself to be extremely pokey to justify using especially at low level I'm actually quite fond of auto crit myself given the limitations (limited use and only evil).
yes I am fine with that, give it limitations..if the paladin burns through all of his smites then he no longer has the passive effect...yes that is fine. But give him the + to hit and damage that will allow him to keep up in the actual combats.
may be something simple such as.
light bringer:(su) A Paladin is charged with ridding the world of evil. As such any weapon she wields is charged with a small portion of the power they wield. Any time a paladin attacks a being of evil they may add 1/2 there level to the damage done by there weapon.[This damage stacks with smite]
may be something simple such as.
light bringer:(su) A Paladin is charged with ridding the world of evil. As such any weapon she wields is charged with a small portion of the power they wield. Any time a paladin attacks a being of evil they may add 1/2 there level to the damage done by there weapon.[This damage stacks with smite]
I would also add some bonus to hit...but yes this is what I am going for! :)
|
|
I would also add some bonus to hit...but yes this is what I am going for! :)may be something simple such as.
light bringer:(su) A Paladin is charged with ridding the world of evil. As such any weapon she wields is charged with a small portion of the power they wield. Any time a paladin attacks a being of evil they may add 1/2 there level to the damage done by there weapon.[This damage stacks with smite]
Commenting that "I would also add some bonus to hit....." is a mere afterthought, but thats the wrong mentality.
To be clear: I am not as worried about the amount of damage the paladin does as I am with their ability to hit their target.
In my lenghty post that compares the various classes with the paladins at certain levels, the paladin is usually about +7 to attack rolls LESS than fighters and barbarians. Doing additional damage potentially is absolutely worthless if you never can hit your enemy
The classic enemies of paladins - the epic climatic battles - are with dragons, demons, devils, evil clerics, liches and powerful undead - all of those are typically very hard to hit with very good ACs all the time.
The ability that I'm suggesting needs to be in effect to allow an "always bonus vs evil" is mostly needed towards ATTACK ROLLS (+1 at 1st level, increasing by +1 every three levels (+2 at 4th, +3 at 7th, +4 at 10th) to help them - Damage is then equal to half-paladin level. This is in addtional to the sudden smite evil attacks that are allowed that further increase attack and dmg potential (cha bonus to attack roll, paladin level to damage).
So once again, considering "some bonus to attack rolls" as an afterthought is counter to what I have been pushing for all along.
Robert
well lets try this again
A
light bringer:(su) A Paladin is charged with ridding the world of evil. As such any weapon she wields is charged with a small portion of the power they wield. Any time a paladin attacks a being of evil they may add 1/2 there level to the attack roll
or B
light bringer:(su) A Paladin is charged with ridding the world of evil. As such any weapon she wields is charged with a small portion of the power they wield. Any time a paladin attacks a being of evil they may add 1/2 there level to the damage done by there weapon.[This damage stacks with smite]
or C
light bringer:(su) A Paladin is charged with ridding the world of evil. As such any weapon she wields is charged with a small portion of the power they wield. Any time a paladin attacks a being of evil they may add 1/2 there level to there attack roll and to damage done by there weapon.[This damage stacks with smite]
may need a better name like holy wraith, or hallowing strike or something. Also we might want to add 1/2 the paladin cha mod to this to boot hitting power
|
with CHA 20 you would get 6 Smites per day if you a single class of paladin. Wow, that could *really* boost a LG cleric or fighter, and I thought one of the design goals was to encourage singleclassing. Besides, I think that gradual increase in the number of Smites feels better and thematically more appropriate than getting the max. number of smites at 1st level -- even though your damage would upgrade as you level up.
However, I *do* agree with you that Smite damage should be your paladin level X2. I also like the idea of automatical crits (10th level would probably be just fine) and that Smite Evil would be able to bypass DR at lower levels.
Um I don't understand why people would think that a 1+cha would make others multi-class into cleric. (and just for the record no the design goal is not to encourage single classing, just to make it on par with multiclassing). A) it's based of paladin level not total level. So at best with a dip a multiclass character is probably getting plus 2-4 to hit plus 1 to damage, but are loosing out on their own class features. maybe if they pump up Charisma they might have a plus 5 to hit plus one to damage, if someone is multiclassing for that, I'm gonna have to smack them upside the head for not having common sense. a cleric would be sacrificing a caster level, a fighter would be sacrificing a feat, hell, every class that could use it and have a high charisma I can show them how to get a similar benefit without multiclassing at all. In fact I could show them how to get better than that. And just out of curiosity who has built a cleric or fighter with a 20 Cha? Bards or Sorcerers I can see, but a fighter or cleric with a 20 Cha? Unless you are talking about getting a 20 cha at higher levels which once again. waste of multiclassing.
I would also add some bonus to hit...but yes this is what I am going for! :)may be something simple such as.
light bringer:(su) A Paladin is charged with ridding the world of evil. As such any weapon she wields is charged with a small portion of the power they wield. Any time a paladin attacks a being of evil they may add 1/2 there level to the damage done by there weapon.[This damage stacks with smite]
Commenting that "I would also add some bonus to hit....." is a mere afterthought, but thats the wrong mentality.
To be clear: I am not as worried about the amount of damage the paladin does as I am with their ability to hit their target.
In my lenghty post that compares the various classes with the paladins at certain levels, the paladin is usually about +7 to attack rolls LESS than fighters and barbarians. Doing additional damage potentially is absolutely worthless if you never can hit your enemy
The classic enemies of paladins - the epic climatic battles - are with dragons, demons, devils, evil clerics, liches and powerful undead - all of those are typically very hard to hit with very good ACs all the time.
The ability that I'm suggesting needs to be in effect to allow an "always bonus vs evil" is mostly needed towards ATTACK ROLLS (+1 at 1st level, increasing by +1 every three levels (+2 at 4th, +3 at 7th, +4 at 10th) to help them - Damage is then equal to half-paladin level. This is in addtional to the sudden smite evil attacks that are allowed that further increase attack and dmg potential (cha bonus to attack roll, paladin level to damage).
So once again, considering "some bonus to attack rolls" as an afterthought is counter to what I have been pushing for all along.
Robert
Yes Robert I fully agree with you. I did not mean to make it sound like that was just a side note or something. I agree with you, to hit is VERY important. I am agree completely with your assessment and I love your proposal for an always on ability as well.
I think we are starting to get some positive responses from people about it too. I have done the numbers like you have and we agree. I have also done some play testing at different levels with different characters alongside the paladin, all against different enemies. And I have to say that the lengthy breakdown you wrote up was spot on!
I just really hope that we are getting a fair look from the people who make the final decisions! :)
with CHA 20 you would get 6 Smites per day if you a single class of paladin. Wow, that could *really* boost a LG cleric or fighter, and I thought one of the design goals was to encourage singleclassing. Besides, I think that gradual increase in the number of Smites feels better and thematically more appropriate than getting the max. number of smites at 1st level -- even though your damage would upgrade as you level up.
However, I *do* agree with you that Smite damage should be your paladin level X2. I also like the idea of automatical crits (10th level would probably be just fine) and that Smite Evil would be able to bypass DR at lower levels.
Um I don't understand why people would think that a 1+cha would make others multi-class into cleric. (and just for the record no the design goal is not to encourage single classing, just to make it on par with multiclassing). A) it's based of paladin level not total level. So at best with a dip a multiclass character is probably getting plus 2-4 to hit plus 1 to damage, but are loosing out on their own class features. maybe if they pump up Charisma they might have a plus 5 to hit plus one to damage, if someone is multiclassing for that, I'm gonna have to smack them upside the head for not having common sense. a cleric would be sacrificing a caster level, a fighter would be sacrificing a feat, hell, every class that could use it and have a high charisma I can show them how to get a similar benefit without multiclassing at all. In fact I could show them how to get better than that. And just out of curiosity who has built a cleric or fighter with a 20 Cha? Bards or Sorcerers I can see, but a fighter or cleric with a 20 Cha? Unless you are talking about getting a 20 cha at higher levels which once again. waste of multiclassing.
I agree with you and I am beginning to think that this is just a very weak attempt to argue against giving paladins a boost...for some reason. I do not understand why people do not want to see them shine where they should....