Don't worry, that math just shows that the Fighter (with all her class abilities) can get close to the Paladin's damage with Smite, for the purpose of illustrating Smite on its lonesome. When combined with all of the Paladin's other abilities, the Paladin still rocks. I mean, even the Cha bonus to all saves and strong base Will save (the latter of which is unique to them among all the full BAB classes) are huge--the Fighter's biggest weakness is her Will save, and when the enemy caster uses Confusion or Dominate to get the high-damage Fighter on her side, its bad. It doesn't work so well on the Paladin.
In a 15 point buy campain, a paladin gets a +2, maybe a +3 on saves due to Cha. A fighter have none but itself to blame if it doesn't sink one of it's plentiful feats into Iron Will to overcome his weakness. And still outdamage the smiting paladin in 8-9/10 cases pre-nerf. 10/10 post-nerf.
The nerf takes away the only offensive bastion the paladin really had. Flavor-wise I would rather they trimmed ANY other ability than strip the paladin of outshining others in fights against his iconic nemesis.
Sure, it is powerful, but compared to the fighter's ability to reliably deal buckets of damage against everything, all the time, I feel it is not such a big deal. And don't get me started on the TRUE damage dealers on higher levels. I am more worried about lv15 wizard dropping empowered nukes for a bucket worth of d6'es, than the paladin smiting a single undead/fiend/dragon baddie for 1d8+35-50 damage on same level.
Don't worry, that math just shows that the Fighter (with all her class abilities) can get close to the Paladin's damage with Smite, for the purpose of illustrating Smite on its lonesome. When combined with all of the Paladin's other abilities, the Paladin still rocks. I mean, even the Cha bonus to all saves and strong base Will save (the latter of which is unique to them among all the full BAB classes) are huge--the Fighter's biggest weakness is her Will save, and when the enemy caster uses Confusion or Dominate to get the high-damage Fighter on her side, its bad. It doesn't work so well on the Paladin.In a 15 point buy campain, a paladin gets a +2, maybe a +3 on saves due to Cha. A fighter have none but itself to blame if it doesn't sink one of it's plentiful feats into Iron Will to overcome his weakness. And still outdamage the smiting paladin in 8-9/10 cases pre-nerf. 10/10 post-nerf.
The nerf takes away the only offensive bastion the paladin really had. Flavor-wise I would rather they trimmed ANY other ability than strip the paladin of outshining others in fights against his iconic nemesis.
Sure, it is powerful, but compared to the fighter's ability to reliably deal buckets of damage against everything, all the time, I feel it is not such a big deal. And don't get me started on the TRUE damage dealers on higher levels. I am more worried about lv15 wizard dropping empowered nukes for a bucket worth of d6'es, than the paladin smiting a single undead/fiend/dragon baddie for 1d8+35-50 damage on same level.
Nukes on casters aren't too damaging compared to the combat classes. Casters use other spells to get their biggest advantages.
As for the Paladin's advantage on Will saves, let's say the Fighter gets Iron Will at level 5 (pretty average in my experience for when they'll grab this feat). At this point, the Paladin is going to be able to afford a +2 Charisma item, but even if she doesn't, and even if she only has 14 Charisma, she still has a base save of +4 to the Fighter's +1, for a total of 3 more on Will saves. This disparity only increases over time.
The simple way to counter the paladin's smite is to send the devils and demons at him. As soon as he smites them, they teleport to safety. Repeat as needed - he either doesn't use his smites and saves them for the BBEG, or he has to face the BBEG without his smite.
"... I know what you're thinking, Pit Fiend: Did he smite six times already today, or did he smite seven times? To tell you the truth in all the excitement I've kinda forgotten myself ... so do you feel lucky? Well ... do you, devil?"
See that seems cheesy to me. Why would a Paladin have a holy, communion with his god type bond for his back up weapon? That seems like a player trying to eke out every possible advantage not a Paladin character. YMMV.
Why on earth would his holy spirit care which weapon he was using to smite evil?
The paladin could be stabbing the demon with a toothpick, he's still smiting the hell out of it.
What, is the holy spirit a diva now? Can it only be added to weapons that stay at least to a proper amount of wealth cost, and has to provide a bowl of M&M's with the brown ones removed whenever it makes an appearance? :p
The holy spirit bond isn't attached to any one weapon, it's the paladin bringing the power of Good into his weapon for some Evil Smacking.
The simple way to counter the paladin's smite is to send the devils and demons at him. As soon as he smites them, they teleport to safety. Repeat as needed - he either doesn't use his smites and saves them for the BBEG, or he has to face the BBEG without his smite.
"... I know what you're thinking, Pit Fiend: Did he smite six times already today, or did he smite seven times? To tell you the truth in all the excitement I've kinda forgotten myself ... so do you feel lucky? Well ... do you, devil?"
As long as combat is not over I think the smite continues. Leaving the combat area does not cancel Smite. Even if the rule did work that way I doubt it would work more than twice, unless it was new player.
As long as combat is not over I think the smite continues. Leaving the combat area does not cancel Smite. Even if the rule did work that way I doubt it would work more than twice, unless it was new player.The simple way to counter the paladin's smite is to send the devils and demons at him. As soon as he smites them, they teleport to safety. Repeat as needed - he either doesn't use his smites and saves them for the BBEG, or he has to face the BBEG without his smite.
"... I know what you're thinking, Pit Fiend: Did he smite six times already today, or did he smite seven times? To tell you the truth in all the excitement I've kinda forgotten myself ... so do you feel lucky? Well ... do you, devil?"
Actually, the smite lasts until the paladin rests and regains their smites per day, so the only way that tactic would work is if it was a different demon that showed up each time.
Actually, the smite lasts until the paladin rests and regains their smites per day, so the only way that tactic would work is if it was a different demon that showed up each time.As long as combat is not over I think the smite continues. Leaving the combat area does not cancel Smite. Even if the rule did work that way I doubt it would work more than twice, unless it was new player.The simple way to counter the paladin's smite is to send the devils and demons at him. As soon as he smites them, they teleport to safety. Repeat as needed - he either doesn't use his smites and saves them for the BBEG, or he has to face the BBEG without his smite.
"... I know what you're thinking, Pit Fiend: Did he smite six times already today, or did he smite seven times? To tell you the truth in all the excitement I've kinda forgotten myself ... so do you feel lucky? Well ... do you, devil?"
... "Chaaaaaaaaaaange places!"
Actually, the smite lasts until the paladin rests and regains their smites per day, so the only way that tactic would work is if it was a different demon that showed up each time.As long as combat is not over I think the smite continues. Leaving the combat area does not cancel Smite. Even if the rule did work that way I doubt it would work more than twice, unless it was new player.The simple way to counter the paladin's smite is to send the devils and demons at him. As soon as he smites them, they teleport to safety. Repeat as needed - he either doesn't use his smites and saves them for the BBEG, or he has to face the BBEG without his smite.
"... I know what you're thinking, Pit Fiend: Did he smite six times already today, or did he smite seven times? To tell you the truth in all the excitement I've kinda forgotten myself ... so do you feel lucky? Well ... do you, devil?"
Exactly. Once he's out of smite uses per day ...
What, is the holy spirit a diva now? Can it only be added to weapons that stay at least to a proper amount of wealth cost, and has to provide a bowl of M&M's with the brown ones removed whenever it makes an appearance? :p
The holy spirit bond isn't attached to any one weapon, it's the paladin bringing the power of Good into his weapon for some Evil Smacking.
I've gotta use that someday:
Player with a weaponless paladin:
GM (me), ponders for a moment. Then says:
I really don't see a problem with a Paladin doing this with a club. If anything it's a gesture of faith in the divinity which empowers him.
"I don't need my sword to defeat you creature." Bleeding from the shards of his shattered blade, the paladin wearing his broken armor breaks off a chair leg. "All I need is the power of Heironeous empowering my righteous struggle against you. Prepare to meet your maker" *Club glows with righteous fire*
Before you rules snarkers can object.. the paladin's blade was shattered before he could call down the spirit to empower it.
I like the concept, it frees the paladin of the dependence on equipment they otherwise have. Oooh, nasty thought, monk/paladin with their unarmed strikes as their divine bond ...
I really don't see a problem with a Paladin doing this with a club. If anything it's a gesture of faith in the divinity which empowers him.
I don't either. It would be a comical and fun scenario if you have a player who likes to roleplay and likes having a bonded spirit with a personality.
GM (me), ponders for a moment. Then says:Except that a spirit who refuse to do his duty only for the sake of his own comfort isn't Lawful Good.
Can you imagine a paladin saying : "hey, I agree to rescue the innocents hostages, but not if they are imprisoned in a dirty dungeon" ?
But… but… the holy spirit didn't refuse to do its duty. It was just being an uppity snot about it.
GM (me), ponders for a moment. Then says:Except that a spirit who refuse to do his duty only for the sake of his own comfort isn't Lawful Good.
Can you imagine a paladin saying : "hey, I agree to rescue the innocents hostages, but not if they are imprisoned in a dirty dungeon" ?
It didn't refuse, it complained. Even lawful good spirits can be curmudgeons, as long as they do their duty.
Edit: curses, ninja'd!
Kinda reminds me of that talking sword in Baldur's Gate, that was always complaining about something. What was the name of that sword?
Oh yeah. He didn't refuse. He just ask 250 gp to do his duty.
"Yes, I can cure this plague victim. But I would have to touch him for that, holy crap ! I won't do this except if you give me money."
A paladin do his duty because, hey, it's his duty. If he gets a reward afterward, he probably won't refuse, but that's not what he has in mind when he's doing his duty. And things like "it's dirty", "I deserve a more shining armor to do that", "I do that only if you pay me a bath", and the likes don't cross his mind.
Relax. The whole thing has been in jest from the beginning. Heaven forbid I actually inject a little humor into my own games.
Besides, who says the paladin needs to pay 250gp? The paladin has had to deal with this uppity spirit before. He'll just dip it into the font in the local temple to Heironeous when next he visits.
"Yes, I can cure this plague victim. But I would have to touch him for that, holy crap ! I won't do this except if you give me money."
A paladin do his duty because, hey, it's his duty. If he gets a reward afterward, he probably won't refuse, but that's not what he has in mind when he's doing his duty. And things like "it's dirty", "I deserve a more shining armor to do that", "I do that only if you pay me a bath", and the likes don't cross his mind.
You are seeing issues where there are none. No-one has suggested the paladin, or the spirit, is refusing to do their duty, or demanding recompense - they are just complaining. Some people do. There is a big difference between: "I won't do this except if you give me money" before you do something, and: "I hope I'm going to get well paid for this!" as you do it. One is mercenary, the other is just grumbling.
Exactly. Once he's out of smite uses per day ...Actually, the smite lasts until the paladin rests and regains their smites per day, so the only way that tactic would work is if it was a different demon that showed up each time.As long as combat is not over I think the smite continues. Leaving the combat area does not cancel Smite. Even if the rule did work that way I doubt it would work more than twice, unless it was new player.The simple way to counter the paladin's smite is to send the devils and demons at him. As soon as he smites them, they teleport to safety. Repeat as needed - he either doesn't use his smites and saves them for the BBEG, or he has to face the BBEG without his smite.
"... I know what you're thinking, Pit Fiend: Did he smite six times already today, or did he smite seven times? To tell you the truth in all the excitement I've kinda forgotten myself ... so do you feel lucky? Well ... do you, devil?"
I dont think all demons look exactly alike. I am sure if you have maralith A, B, and C you can tell them apart. It would just cost too much to have multiple drawings of every monster in the book to illustrate that.
one thing i see a lot of people missing, is that the bonus to deflection and to hit is NOT against everything. Its against the target of the smite.
In addition, while smite evil is in effect, the paladin gains a deflection bonus equal to her Charisma modifier (if any) to her AC against attacks made by the target of the smite.
this might be why a lot of people are thinking smite evil is overpowered. Keep it mind it also doesn't stack with things like ring of protection so at higher levels your really not getting the AC bonus. (though personally i think the bonus to hit is more important)
That being said, I'm relatively okay with the change, but like many i'd have prefered aura of justice to go away instead.
Exactly. Once he's out of smite uses per day ...I dont think all demons look exactly alike. I am sure if you have maralith A, B, and C you can tell them apart. It would just cost too much to have multiple drawings of every monster in the book to illustrate that.
What's that got to do with anything we were discussing? It doesn't matter what they look like, all they have to do is show up, wave a weapon around, wait for the paladin to trigger his smite and then bug out. That's another use of his smite gone, and they just have to stay away for a day.
Kinda reminds me of that talking sword in Baldur's Gate, that was always complaining about something. What was the name of that sword?And he was not technically a 'talking sword', rather a poor fella (Lawrence Lilarcor) imprisoned into a two-handed blade shape (or thus legends say).
'Can we go kill something now, huh?'
'How about now? No?'
'Come on let's kill something NOW!'
'mmmm.... now?'
'What about now?'
'Now? Please? Pretty please?'
Besides, who says the paladin needs to pay 250gp?It's the cost of the material component to create 5 vial of holy water. And I don't think you can find a font with 250+ gp of holy water in any temple of Heironeus.
Once in a while it's nice to step outside that box labeled "The Rules" and stretch your imagination a little. You should try it sometime.
The whole Idea that the paladin can not use his weapon bond to increase an +10 item past that point makes little sense to me.
Lvl 20 Paladin has a +10 sword (without the stupid rulling) he adds +6 to it effectively making that weapon a +16.
Lvl 20 Fighter has a +10 sword, on top of that he has his weapon training (what +5 at that point?) then the weapon focus/spec tree. Effectively making that weapon +17 all the time without doing anything other than picking it up?
When you stip away all the cosmetics its about the numbers in this scenario and they should be roughly equal.
On another note, I've read a lot of people talking about the other class abilities in comparison. All of these abilities are not given point values so it is hard to compare what is worth more. I would argue that the freedom of movement a fighter gets from armor training is possibly his most powerful class ability.
Truth is if an equal level paladin and fighter face off with each other, who have had an equal amount of gear/optimization thrown their way the fighter only looses to the paladin if he is evil (which he should right?) The good fighter that somehow fought the paladin wins, and so does the neutral one.
Im just tired of the fighter/paladin debate. They are not the same class, they both have areas where they shine. The fighter does not have as many shiny little class abilities but he shines where he is supposed to. The continued comparison is growing old, they are not equal but they are balanced with each other.
These paladin "nerfs" are not coming from a balance issue they are coming from a people complaining about the paladin issue.
The whole Idea that the paladin can not use his weapon bond to increase an +10 item past that point makes little sense to me.
Lvl 20 Paladin has a +10 sword (without the stupid rulling) he adds +6 to it effectively making that weapon a +16.
Lvl 20 Fighter has a +10 sword, on top of that he has his weapon training (what +5 at that point?) then the weapon focus/spec tree. Effectively making that weapon +17 all the time without doing anything other than picking it up?
When you stip away all the cosmetics its about the numbers in this scenario and they should be roughly equal.
On another note, I've read a lot of people talking about the other class abilities in comparison. All of these abilities are not given point values so it is hard to compare what is worth more. I would argue that the freedom of movement a fighter gets from armor training is possibly his most powerful class ability.
Truth is if an equal level paladin and fighter face off with each other, who have had an equal amount of gear/optimization thrown their way the fighter only looses to the paladin if he is evil (which he should right?) The good fighter that somehow fought the paladin wins, and so does the neutral one.
Im just tired of the fighter/paladin debate. They are not the same class, they both have areas where they shine. The fighter does not have as many shiny little class abilities but he shines where he is supposed to. The continued comparison is growing old, they are not equal but they are balanced with each other.
These paladin "nerfs" are not coming from a balance issue they are coming from a people complaining about the paladin issue.
This "nerf", most certainly comes from a balance issue, as well as being a rules clarification. It doesn't only affect the paladin, it affects all instances where you can go above +10, especially the more infamous and prevalent casting of greater magic weapon to exceed the +10 limit.
This "nerf", most certainly comes from a balance issue, as well as being a rules clarification. It doesn't only affect the paladin, it affects all instances where you can go above +10, especially the more infamous and prevalent casting of greater magic weapon to exceed the +10 limit.
But what he's pointing out is it doesn't counter the NONMAGICAL bonuses that definitely still give an equivalent bonus to hit. what about the ranger or fighter with a +10 weapon that with weapon training or favored enemy bonuses now have an +15 or +14? why should they benefit from their class abilities but the paladin be denied them simply because its from a divine magical source? If its considered a balance issue, than it should be levied across the board, not aimed at just one class.
|
This "nerf", most certainly comes from a balance issue, as well as being a rules clarification. It doesn't only affect the paladin, it affects all instances where you can go above +10, especially the more infamous and prevalent casting of greater magic weapon to exceed the +10 limit.
What Michael Miller said. The Paladin is the only base class who can add enhancement bonuses to his weapon (outside of spell casting). So he's essentially the only one seriously affected by this ruling. The other melee classes add to their damage with Str boosts, and flat bonuses like Weapon Training and Favored Enemy.
If there should be an errata (and there probably should be) it should either specifically exempt the Divine Bond or specifically apply to spells and oils.
This "nerf", most certainly comes from a balance issue, as well as being a rules clarification. It doesn't only affect the paladin, it affects all instances where you can go above +10, especially the more infamous and prevalent casting of greater magic weapon to exceed the +10 limit.What Michael Miller said. The Paladin is the only base class who can add enhancement bonuses to his weapon (outside of spell casting). So he's essentially the only one seriously affected by this ruling. The other melee classes add to their damage with Str boosts, and flat bonuses like Weapon Training and Favored Enemy.
If there should be an errata (and there probably should be) it should either specifically exempt the Divine Bond or specifically apply to spells and oils.
I'm sorry, but every insane build I have every seen stacks non-enhancement maic bonuses on a weapon and assumes they will get a GMW cast on them. That is a bigger nerf IMO than Paladin.
If the problem is non enhancement bonuses, or weapon enchantments itself, then the rule needs to specify that. As it is the way its worded also includes Divine Bond. The ruling either needs to exempt class abilities from them or specifically include them. As it currently stands the paladin has been hit twice with two different errata while two classes with similar abilities have been left untouched.
If the problem is non enhancement bonuses, or weapon enchantments itself, then the rule needs to specify that. As it is the way its worded also includes Divine Bond. The ruling either needs to exempt class abilities from them or specifically include them. As it currently stands the paladin has been hit twice with two different errata while two classes with similar abilities have been left untouched.
It was specifically supposed to affect Paladin and Arcane Archer. I believe it also affects bows transfering to arrows. I wish they included how you handle that though, I think the Paladin should be able to override existing bennefits so long as the total is still under +10.
One of the orriginal posts where they commented on it is in this Divine Bond over 9000 thread.
If the problem is non enhancement bonuses, or weapon enchantments itself, then the rule needs to specify that. As it is the way its worded also includes Divine Bond. The ruling either needs to exempt class abilities from them or specifically include them. As it currently stands the paladin has been hit twice with two different errata while two classes with similar abilities have been left untouched.It was specifically supposed to affect Paladin and Arcane Archer. I believe it also affects bows transfering to arrows. I wish they included how you handle that though, I think the Paladin should be able to override existing bennefits so long as the total is still under +10.
One of the orriginal posts where they commented on it is in this Divine Bond over 9000 thread.
Hmmm.. after skimming that thread (mainly looking for the official responses rather than the bickering that almost ALWAYS results from rules questions lol) it does seem that they're specifically calling out magical bonuses. This DOES annoy me a bit since it seems they're getting rid of the main advantages of those classes.
Sounds like house rule time.
Weird. I've never see anyone cast GMW on a magic weapon.
Try it out.
12 hour duration. Turns your +1 keen ghost-touch rapier into a +3 keen ghost touch rapier.
Next you'll tell me you've never seen someone cast greater magic vestment on a shield enchanted to attack.
|
Weird. I've never see anyone cast GMW on a magic weapon.Try it out.
12 hour duration. Turns your +1 keen ghost-touch rapier into a +3 keen ghost touch rapier.
Next you'll tell me you've never seen someone cast greater magic vestment on a shield enchanted to attack.
Get out of my head!
But yeah. I thought it was a min/lvl spell. Interesting.
Weird. I've never see anyone cast GMW on a magic weapon.Try it out.
12 hour duration. Turns your +1 keen ghost-touch rapier into a +3 keen ghost touch rapier.
Next you'll tell me you've never seen someone cast greater magic vestment on a shield enchanted to attack.
Get out of my head!
But yeah. I thought it was a min/lvl spell. Interesting.
Yeah, old trick is to get a +1 flaming, keen, whatever sword, then use GMW to make it +3 to +5.
GMW and GMV are somewhat of a waste until level 12 though.
But, the paladin gets non-enhancement bonuses like the fighter and ranger too… Smite Evil. In other words, he still can "go beyond +10" as you say.
The classes "go beyond +10" when:
fighter: uses his signature weapon (and why not? That's all he's good at after all)
ranger: fights one of his favored enemies
paladin: smites evil
It's apparent to my eyes that it's a nerf to everyone, not just the paladin.
Yeah, old trick is to get a +1 flaming, keen, whatever sword, then use GMW to make it +3 to +5.
GMW and GMV are somewhat of a waste until level 12 though.
In 3.5, a Metal favored Wu-jen had a higher caster (+2) with Metal (GWM spell). That meant you could get it useful by level 10.
Those were fun times when I combined with lesser Rod of Chaining (expensive though) back when I played one.
Everyone liked getting their weapon with +1 higher attack (minimum). Only when we face that large dragon boss who area dispelled (Greater dispel) it did it suck since most had +1's with special abilities.
What's that got to do with anything we were discussing? It doesn't matter what they look like, all they have to do is show up, wave a weapon around, wait for the paladin to trigger his smite and then bug out. That's another use of his smite gone, and they just have to stay away for a day.Exactly. Once he's out of smite uses per day ...I dont think all demons look exactly alike. I am sure if you have maralith A, B, and C you can tell them apart. It would just cost too much to have multiple drawings of every monster in the book to illustrate that.
Why would the paladin continue wasting smite if he knew it was a different demon is the point. To take it further if they are mooks he probably would not smite in the first place. If they are credible threats then they would logically just gang up on the party and take them out if there were than many of them that posed a credible threats.
Mook in this instance is relative to the party's level.
Just curious, for DM's, what has their experience been DMing paladins with the pathfinder modules. Did the paladin find major encounters too easy or difficult. Was the paladin overly effective at some levels more than others? What did your players who played other classes think of the Paladin?
Just curious, for DM's, what has their experience been DMing paladins with the pathfinder modules. Did the paladin find major encounters too easy or difficult. Was the paladin overly effective at some levels more than others? What did your players who played other classes think of the Paladin?
A paladin could take a creature 2 CR's above his level single handedly if you go into straight combat with it. I used all manner of trickery such as pinning, and disarming to keep them in check. I think that for DM's that go at things head on the pally will be an issue. You have to rewire you brain as a DM, but it's definitely not broken. They saw it as a vast improvement, and the group agreed not to allow extra smiting(splat feat). I found the paladin mercies more annoying than the smites. He kept getting rid of my debuffs :(
Just curious, for DM's, what has their experience been DMing paladins with the pathfinder modules. Did the paladin find major encounters too easy or difficult. Was the paladin overly effective at some levels more than others? What did your players who played other classes think of the Paladin?A paladin could take a creature 2 CR's above his level single handedly if you go into straight combat with it. I used all manner of trickery such as pinning, and disarming to keep them in check. I think that for DM's that go at things head on the pally will be an issue. You have to rewire you brain as a DM, but it's definitely not broken. They saw it as a vast improvement, and the group agreed not to allow extra smiting(splat feat). I found the paladin mercies more annoying than the smites. He kept getting rid of my debuffs :(
At least 2 CR above. At the end of Burnt Offerings, the Paladin in my group did most of the work on the BBEG, her boyfriend, and two monsters that went away when the BBEG was defeated. I think every one of those characters was higher level than he was. He was stymied several times by trickery, as wraithstrike suggests, and by Wisdom drain monsters.
The new errata has weakened Smite significantly in regards to evil dragons, outsiders, and undead. Now you only get double smite damage against your first successful attack against such creatures, leaving all future attacks dealing normal smite damage.
I think that goes a long way towards balancing the ability.
Just curious, for DM's, what has their experience been DMing paladins with the pathfinder modules. Did the paladin find major encounters too easy or difficult. Was the paladin overly effective at some levels more than others? What did your players who played other classes think of the Paladin?
I DMed for a paladin once who was a sword and shield two-weapon-fighter. Light shield and a rapier with improved critical and bless weapon. He didn't take weapon bond to avoid overpowering his character, so he had a horse, instead.
The only time the paladin ever truly exceeded the boundaries of what I thought was acceptable was during Second Darkness, around level 11. There's a battle with a Retriever during that module, and the paladin ran forward to intercept it.
The retriever moved forward. It threw all of its claw attacks at the paladin, and almost every single one hit. It threw its ray versus the paladin (I rolled red) and it hit and he failed the save. It tore him to pieces, but he was still alive. I made the mistake of allowing it to get within full attack range of him.
He stepped up. Declared smite. Grit his teeth. Rolled his four attacks and hit every single attack on the retriever. Some were criticals, instantly confirmed.
The situation went from Retriever at 137 HP about to devour a paladin at 13 HP to retriever destroyed on the ground.
Later, I found out that retrievers weren't "demons" (chaotic evil constructs made by demons. frown) but I'm a firm believer in no-take-backsies so we moved on. Still, the proof was there-- the paladin only needed one full round to kill any dragon, demon or undead under 137 HP.
Why would the paladin continue wasting smite if he knew it was a different demon is the point. To take it further if they are mooks he probably would not smite in the first place. If they are credible threats then they would logically just gang up on the party and take them out if there were than many of them that posed a credible threats.What's that got to do with anything we were discussing? It doesn't matter what they look like, all they have to do is show up, wave a weapon around, wait for the paladin to trigger his smite and then bug out. That's another use of his smite gone, and they just have to stay away for a day.Exactly. Once he's out of smite uses per day ...I dont think all demons look exactly alike. I am sure if you have maralith A, B, and C you can tell them apart. It would just cost too much to have multiple drawings of every monster in the book to illustrate that.
That's why it has to be a credible threat. Then the paladin has to choose - smite this demon, or save it for the next one. The demon can lay out the hurt on the rest of the party if he doesn't smite, but he can end up wasting his smite if he does ...