Goodbye CHA to Divine Grace and Smite Evil, we'll miss you...


Prerelease Discussion

1 to 50 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

As per the Monk Blog:

Monk Blog wrote:
“Second, adding more than a single ability modifier to a check or DC now really distorts the game.”

So from this statement we can infer that both Divine Grace and 2e Smite Evil (now named Blade of Justice) have been changed to balance the game. Let's look at them individually...

Divine Grace:
Paladin Blog wrote:
“And we can't forget potent additional reactions like Divine Grace, granting you a saving throw boost at 2nd level...”

This one is the easiest to tackle because it is simple, and we know more about it than just this blog. Notice it doesn't say anything about CHA. Easy enough, this blog is just a preview not a detailed explanation. But we also have info from the GCP Crypt of the Everflame Podcast. When Jason was handing out the two Class feat choices to the Paladin he mentioned a +2 to saves, not CHA to saves. Which makes a lot of sense now that we have the quote from the Monk blog above. Personally I'm fine with this as it as long as it scales. Every 4 levels sounds good to me...

Blade of Justice:
Hail the Gauntlet blog wrote:
“The first major blade righteous ally feat is Blade of Justice, which is parallel to the Pathfinder First Edition paladin's smite evil—you declare a target to face judgment and deal extra damage to evil foes. Although Blade of Justice deals less damage than smite evil, it can be used as many times as you like as long as you have the actions for it. And the real kicker is that this extra damage is good damage, which means that creatures like fiends that are weak against good abilities are going to take a lot more damage.”

Here is where I have issues, and I'm hoping for more clarifications... Smite Evil in 1e did more than just declaring a target to face judgement and then doing righteous damage to an evil opponent. The Paladin's attacks and defences we're bolstered as well. And what was the mechanic that achieved that? CHA to Attack and AC. See the problem?... So the question is: does Blade of Justice get an attack and/or AC boost?

I also found some interesting similarities between Blade to 2e Rage: The designers tossed the Rage/day cap for the "3/1 but can Rage all day mechanic". The other big difference is that Barbarians don't get an attack bonus while Raging. Which makes a lot of sense thematically. Similarly, the Blade of Justice loses Smite Evil's Smite/day cap for the "spend an action/round but can Smite all day mechanic". And as far as we know, the Paladin's damage is boosted but that's it. So is Blade of Justice just Rage rehashed? I hope not.

To the Designers: I've heard it said that you designers are hesitant to SERIOUSLY nerf iconic class abilities, for which I'm glad. So how have you kept the core of the ability and/or expanded on it? You guys have been very generous on revealing the details of abilities you've previewed. Could you shed some light on Blade of Justice? Is there a boost to attack and/or AC against Bladed(?!) enemies? Or is it just damage?

Side note: I'm also taking for granted that the Good damage is equal to the double damage on the big Evil 3. Furthermore I'm taking for granted that Blade of Justice bypasses Resistances... Am I wrong?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's what I am hoping for each ability:
Level 2 Paladin Feat
Divine Grace: Reaction. +2 to all Saving Throws. Add a +1 for every 4 Paladin levels beyond level 2. (to a maximum of +6 at Level 18)

Level 4 Paladin Feat
Blade of Justice: 1 Action. Call Justice upon a target within sight. If the target is evil, the Paladin adds +2 to each attack against the foe. The attack bonus goes up +1 every four Paladin levels beyond Level 4. (to a maximum of +6 at Level 20) In addition, the Paladin adds half her level (rounded down) to all her damage rolls against her target. This damage is Good aligned and regardless of the target, the Blade of Justice Attacks bypasses all Resistances the creature might possess.

Making Divine Grace a static number is a smart way of preventing dipping into Paladin just for the ability. I just seriously hope it scales...
I'm making a few educated guesses in the Blade of Justice bit. Righteous Ally comes online at Level 3, and we know that Blade of Justice is the first major Blade Ally feat. Therefore, level 4... I also like the idea of attack bonus slowly scaling up along the same line as Divine Grace (DG= 2,6,10,14,18; BoJ=4,8,12,16,20) Also, the blog doesn't specify how much damage the Blade of Justice does, so I just went with half. Lastly, you'll notice I did not add any bonuses to AC. The Paladin is already an AC Boss, so by adding another bonus would make them nigh invincible. (AC wise) I also inferred a few things from Mark's comments from the Monk's blog:

Mark Seifter wrote:
“My Strength monk was the party's best defended, including the paladin (two-handed Ragathiel paladin) against pretty much everything, while also having our best direct offense (this last was due to factors of opposition and itemization; the paladin could have been equal or better at offense in other situations)”

The two handed Paladin had less AC than the Monk, so that would probably include times when they fought an evil creature. How do I know that they fought Evil creatures together? There were times when the Paladin did more damage than the Monk. Blade of Justice anyone?... Though I definitely could be wrong.

I would be so very excited if these are roughly how the feats turn up in the Playtest... =^D


While Cha to a save is pretty profound under the new edition's math, it's not necessarily broken if it's applied as a reaction and costs a spell point, so can't be done forever. I wouldn't actually say that DG doesn't add Cha anymore, either, because as I recall didn't that character have Cha 14? Meaning a +2 bonus, meaning the GM saying "add +2" is technically correct.

Liberty's Edge

There's no evidence Divine Grace costs any Spell Points. It does cost your Reaction.

I think Divine Grace adding Charisma to one Save as a Reaction remains plausible. Reactions can do all sorts of cool stuff, after all.

It's definitely gone from everything ongoing, however.


Fuzzypaws wrote:
While Cha to a save is pretty profound under the new edition's math, it's not necessarily broken if it's applied as a reaction and costs a spell point, so can't be done forever. I wouldn't actually say that DG doesn't add Cha anymore, either, because as I recall didn't that character have Cha 14? Meaning a +2 bonus, meaning the GM saying "add +2" is technically correct.

You are absolutely correct. I thought it was +CHA as well. But I changed my mind after reading the Monk blog. Also there's no info on DG involving Spell Points... At least not that I have heard.


Deadmanwalking wrote:

There's no evidence Divine Grace costs any Spell Points. It does cost your Reaction.

I think Divine Grace adding Charisma to one as a Reaction Save remains plausible. Reactions can do all sorts of cool stuff, after all.

It's definitely gone from everything ongoing, however.

It's a possibility, but as I said, by making it a flat number prevents the Sorcerer from dipping into the class so that they can get +4-7 to saves. But then again it being a reaction could be preventative as well...


Putting a cap on the bonus equal to your levels in Paladin is a good way to discourage the Divine Grace Dip:
"As a reaction action a paladin may add 1 point of Charisma bonus (if any) per paladin class level as a Sacred bonus to a saving throw."

They used similar language in the past on the duelist's Canny Defense ability to avoid wizards dipping it gaining INT to AC.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Smite Evil becomes less mathy and a bit more interactive in its own right.


Kudaku wrote:

Putting a cap on the bonus equal to your levels in Paladin is a good way to discourage the Divine Grace Dip:

"As a reaction action a paladin may add 1 point of Charisma bonus (if any) per paladin class level as a Sacred bonus to a saving throw."

They used similar language in the past on the duelist's Canny Defense ability to avoid wizards dipping it gaining INT to AC.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Smite Evil becomes less mathy and a bit more interactive in its own right.

Could be, could be. But I honestly don't think that the devs will say "we don't do this because it distorts the game" then go ahead and do it in this particular circumstance. Though I'm down with it, my Paladin will have a +3 in Cha. But I'm just saying...

I'd like to hear about what a less mathy, more interactive Smite Evil would be like...


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Divine grace is a narrative annoyance. Good riddance to it.

Which is not to say that paladins should eat an overall nerf, just that I'd be glad to see them rebalanced to get more stuff rather than have one particularly bothersome ability make or break the class. My annoyance with PF1 Paladins is largely that they're balanced around making the GM be a jerk to them; the code tells the GM to effectively destroy their character if they step too far out of line, and Divine Grace means that the best, most effective, and easiest way to deal with a paladin is to just kill them even if you didn't really want to. As a man said about a completely different game: Death is the best status effect.

Having it as a reaction is nice. Having it at +1 every 4 levels would still amount to a pretty hefty save bonus.

PERSONALLY, to soapbox for a moment, I think the concept of a paladin falling should get dumped completely (unless it's a plot thing where they want to change to antipaladin or something). While I'm sure it must have happened somewhere some time, I have never seen holding that over a player have any sort of positive result. Plus having the paladin motivated to do good because heavenly administrators are watching them and tabulating their every action is bleeeeeh. I'd rather see something like the Unconquered Sun in Exalted, where his powers are governed by his virtues, and when he denies a virtue, the powers tied to it temporarily go away. THAT can lead to interesting sorts of dilemmas.


i wont miss them


What part of flatter maths makes you think +hit scaling is going happen? It seems highly unlikely. There may be a + to hit, but it seems likely that it will be small and flat.

In terms of good damage. It is just a damage type like any other: slashing, fire, cold iron etc.

Some creature have resistances, like DR or resistances the PFe1 where it takes a flat number off the damage. But now there are also vulnerabilities that adds a flat number on to the damage.

So a devil may have vulnerability good 5, so when the paladin hits them with an attack that does good damage, they take 5 additional points of damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm less fond of it being a Reaction, but only because it interferes with an iconic style of play.

What's more iconic than a paladin reaching out to save someone? Be it the old Paladin's Sacrifice spell or some of the shield tricks we've read about in PF2e, such acts will take Reactions. This makes sense--the paladin's Reacting to a friend in danger.

What does this mean, though?

It means that before, the paladin could reach out and defend someone--and would do so because of their code, because their faith helped them withstand it. This combination made this type of play survivable and desirable. This filled a niche and was stylistically amazing to play!

I understand the wont for balance, but this looks like it would destroy that iconic style.

I'll be looking at: How can we address this? I'm afraid it might mean adding 'add-on' lines to different Paladin Sacrifice/Reactive abilities that say, 'these other things activate.' That seems messy, but I just don't know.

Second, AC in PF1 was one of the worst defenses in terms of surviving at upper levels. That's what made Paladin healing, and UnBarb's temporary HP so fantastic. ...I guess barring seeing how AC works in PF2, I'm a little concerned for the armor.

Fighters and rogues were the ones sucking up healing resources in PF1, in the upper levels.

All classes need options. It's more that "just AC as a defense" was kinda bad.

Anyhow, sorry for this coming across as grumpy. It's been a really bad month.

Scarab Sages

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Given that Paladins are going to get baseline legendary proficiency in Armor, it seems as though they will have solid defenses built into their base class, instead of it being dependent on smiting. This means that smite doesn't have to cover all of a paladin's bases, which is a good thing. In Pathfinder 1, Smite doing all of that made it so that the Paladin was just okay most of the time, but when smiting they were unstoppable juggernauts. Now, they're tough and sturdy all the time, with extra effectiveness against evil opponents. That's a net improvement from a gameplay perspective, imo.

Shadow Lodge

Another thing to remember is that if you had a Ring of Protection your Smite did less. 14 Cha? Ring of Protection +2 gives you the same Deflection bonus as Smite does. Ring can go all the way to +5, and I've never personally had a Paladin with a Charisma of 22 or more.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Davor wrote:
Given that Paladins are going to get baseline legendary proficiency in Armor, it seems as though they will have solid defenses built into their base class, instead of it being dependent on smiting. This means that smite doesn't have to cover all of a paladin's bases, which is a good thing. In Pathfinder 1, Smite doing all of that made it so that the Paladin was just okay most of the time, but when smiting they were unstoppable juggernauts. Now, they're tough and sturdy all the time, with extra effectiveness against evil opponents. That's a net improvement from a gameplay perspective, imo.

Eh. Paladin did better than all right without smite, if they stuck to a low feat combat style like two handing. They weren't dramatically behind the fighter in offense while being much sturdier. Two good saves, divine graces, lay on hands, and a host of immunities it can share with the party... Paladins were really good without smite, and when smiting they were kinda God mode.

That said, I think your larger point that making the Paladin have less of a sheer spike in its power is on the money. Divine Grace needed to be reined in, but a weaker but at will smite sounds like a good idea.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I remember my archer Paladin in PF1 locking the door after his teammates escaped through it. Not because he was suicidal or glory-hounding but because he had the best saves by far and thus some hope of keeping the monster at bay for a few precious rounds

Thankfully the party's Cleric quickly succeeded on a save and proceeded to cure the rest of them while my Paladin endured

I hope PF2 Paladin's defenses will allow this


Given that paladins get legendary armor I am not surprised with a flat +2 to saves from divine grace. The change from smite evil to blade of justice seems fine also. There are a lot of detail we just don't know yet. I have been speculating about how a 20 level paladin will look like and amazed at what I imagine a holy avenger will look like. A legendary +5 holy cold iron long sword doing 6d8 + 2d6 + 5 +str damage before we add in blade of justice. A high level paladin will not be a whimp especially when fighting evil foes.


The Raven Black wrote:

I remember my archer Paladin in PF1 locking the door after his teammates escaped through it. Not because he was suicidal or glory-hounding but because he had the best saves by far and thus some hope of keeping the monster at bay for a few precious rounds

Thankfully the party's Cleric quickly succeeded on a save and proceeded to cure the rest of them while my Paladin endured

I hope PF2 Paladin's defenses will allow this

^This. 2e Paladin's are to defend their friends, I want to be able to do this. Divine Grace is the most logical vehicle to do this. Having a +5-7 to saves as a Reaction, is not overpowered imo.


The Raven Black wrote:

I remember my archer Paladin in PF1 locking the door after his teammates escaped through it. Not because he was suicidal or glory-hounding but because he had the best saves by far and thus some hope of keeping the monster at bay for a few precious rounds

Thankfully the party's Cleric quickly succeeded on a save and proceeded to cure the rest of them while my Paladin endured

I hope PF2 Paladin's defenses will allow this

I hope the game is balanced in a way that everyone can do this, in a different fashion.


Saint Bernard wrote:
Given that paladins get legendary armor I am not surprised with a flat +2 to saves from divine grace. The change from smite evil to blade of justice seems fine also. There are a lot of detail we just don't know yet. I have been speculating about how a 20 level paladin will look like and amazed at what I imagine a holy avenger will look like. A legendary +5 holy cold iron long sword doing 6d8 + 2d6 + 5 +str damage before we add in blade of justice. A high level paladin will not be a whimp especially when fighting evil foes.

Thanks for the perspective Bernard. Yeah, they're no slouch. I'd prefer for Mechanical and Thematical reasons that Blade of Justice give a bonus to attack. But if it doesn't then, that's fine by me. They probably have a good reason.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Saint Bernard wrote:
Given that paladins get legendary armor I am not surprised with a flat +2 to saves from divine grace. The change from smite evil to blade of justice seems fine also. There are a lot of detail we just don't know yet. I have been speculating about how a 20 level paladin will look like and amazed at what I imagine a holy avenger will look like. A legendary +5 holy cold iron long sword doing 6d8 + 2d6 + 5 +str damage before we add in blade of justice. A high level paladin will not be a whimp especially when fighting evil foes.

We actually saw the holy avenger on the page in the Paizocon banquet.

Holy Avenger, Level 14, 4500 gp
Divine, Evocation, Good
Method of Use: held, 1 hand; Bulk 1; [[A]] Command Activation
+3 cold iron longsword. When you activate it, you can spend a separate Interact to point it at someone you can see, you learn if they are evil. Acts as a 2nd-level divination and detection spell.
Non-good attempting to wield this is enfeebled 2, which can't be removed except by removing the item.
Paladin using this also gains:
- Critting an evil creature causes slowed 1 and enfeebled 2 for 1 round.
- Hitting a creature lets you spend your next action to activate the sword to cast dispel magic at the same level as your champion powers (so paladin level, presumably). Can only target an illusion created by the creature or a mental effect created by it affecting you or an ally. 1/day you can alternately use it to target a spell cast on the target or an item they wear/carry.
Craft requirements are LG paladin with detect alignment and dispel magic, also 250 gp of cold iron included in the raw materials.


I'm going to play that Water-Dancer Monk using Osyluth's Guile and Crane Style to add CHA to AC 3 times (dodge bonuses stack) for the final AP,just to highlight the end of this kind of thing.

Shadow Lodge

Two times? Crane Style isn't ability score based.


Dragonborn3 wrote:
Two times? Crane Style isn't ability score based.

Water-Dancer gets 2x Charisma to AC, with a level cap on some of that to weaken a dip.

Shadow Lodge

Ah, I see. Thank you. :)


Cyouni wrote:
Saint Bernard wrote:
Given that paladins get legendary armor I am not surprised with a flat +2 to saves from divine grace. The change from smite evil to blade of justice seems fine also. There are a lot of detail we just don't know yet. I have been speculating about how a 20 level paladin will look like and amazed at what I imagine a holy avenger will look like. A legendary +5 holy cold iron long sword doing 6d8 + 2d6 + 5 +str damage before we add in blade of justice. A high level paladin will not be a whimp especially when fighting evil foes.

We actually saw the holy avenger on the page in the Paizocon banquet.

Holy Avenger, Level 14, 4500 gp
Divine, Evocation, Good
Method of Use: held, 1 hand; Bulk 1; [[A]] Command Activation
+3 cold iron longsword. When you activate it, you can spend a separate Interact to point it at someone you can see, you learn if they are evil. Acts as a 2nd-level divination and detection spell.
Non-good attempting to wield this is enfeebled 2, which can't be removed except by removing the item.
Paladin using this also gains:
- Critting an evil creature causes slowed 1 and enfeebled 2 for 1 round.
- Hitting a creature lets you spend your next action to activate the sword to cast dispel magic at the same level as your champion powers (so paladin level, presumably). Can only target an illusion created by the creature or a mental effect created by it affecting you or an ally. 1/day you can alternately use it to target a spell cast on the target or an item they wear/carry.
Craft requirements are LG paladin with detect alignment and dispel magic, also 250 gp of cold iron included in the raw materials.

So the Holy Avenger got nerfed? Or am I missing something? I can see them changing the dispel magic aspect of the 1e Avenger, but what happened to all that damage?...


Well, a +3 longsword does more damage now than a +5 longsword did in PF1- 4d8 vs. 1d8 +5.

Paizo Employee Designer

5 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Well, a +3 longsword does more damage now than a +5 longsword did in PF1- 4d8 vs. 1d8 +5.

You can also upgrade a specific weapon's potency and get +5.


Mark Seifter wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Well, a +3 longsword does more damage now than a +5 longsword did in PF1- 4d8 vs. 1d8 +5.
You can also upgrade a specific weapon's potency and get +5.

Very true. Does that include adding Righteous Ally Runes? Or can you add elemental runes or the like?

Also Mark, any chance that you can answer whether Blade of Justice gets an attack bonus? =D


Also, I do understand that you guys want to flavour the magical items more, and make less "this it THE Paladin weapon you must get!" The Holy Avenger allows Good creatures to Detect Evil, (which cost a Resonance point of course), potentially taking away an evil creature's action and some of its damage for a round, then combating spells created by foes. Pretty sweet weapon now that I think of it...

Honestly, I'm just concerned about the Paladin's damage output, especially when it comes to fighting evil creatures. (where they should excel) And the PF1e Holy Avenger helped in that regards...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Iron_Matt17 wrote:

Also, I do understand that you guys want to flavour the magical items more, and make less "this it THE Paladin weapon you must get!" The Holy Avenger allows Good creatures to Detect Evil, (which cost a Resonance point of course), potentially taking away an evil creature's action and some of its damage for a round, then combating spells created by foes. Pretty sweet weapon now that I think of it...

Honestly, I'm just concerned about the Paladin's damage output, especially when it comes to fighting evil creatures. (where they should excel) And the PF1e Holy Avenger helped in that regards...

I don't really share this concern. I think we have heard about more damage boosting feats for the Paladin than anything except maybe the Barbarian. Also, it sounds like they will really wreck any enemy weak to good, if not all evil enemies. Which seems consistent with a lot if PF2 stuff. Evil enemies might as well be "all enemies" and PF2 encounters seem designed to swap between strategies and characters that can really rock them in a much more varied manner.

I know Raven's example of the Paladin holding off the hoards solo is epic, but from a game play perspective it isn't a great look that the party was better off letting the Paladin fight solo because she was just that much tougher than the rest of them.

The PF2 paladin seems like the consummate team player. She's gonna defend her friend's by fighting alongside them. Her most basic reaction is to punish enemies for attacking her allies, she can get AoO to keep them sticking to her, and she can probably take shield feats that let block for allies as well.

And then there are these auras, which don't just boost defenses anymore. There are auras to add good damage to ally strikes, and stuff to let allies trigger Retributive Strikes alongside your own. In other words, the Paladin is no longer going to be the lone beacon of justice in the dark. She's gonna be the shining example that inspires her allies to be better, too.


Mark Seifter wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Well, a +3 longsword does more damage now than a +5 longsword did in PF1- 4d8 vs. 1d8 +5.
You can also upgrade a specific weapon's potency and get +5.

Doesn't the long sword need to be legend quality to upgrade to a potency of +5?


Malthraz wrote:
What part of flatter maths makes you think +hit scaling is going happen? It seems highly unlikely. There may be a + to hit, but it seems likely that it will be small and flat.

What do you mean? I thought Pathfinder would not have flatter maths? +¼ level or similar?


Saint Bernard wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Well, a +3 longsword does more damage now than a +5 longsword did in PF1- 4d8 vs. 1d8 +5.
You can also upgrade a specific weapon's potency and get +5.
Doesn't the long sword need to be legend quality to upgrade to a potency of +5?

A Holy Avenger sounds pretty Legendary to me... ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Good riddance, those abilities were pretty broken and frontloaded, and most people would dip just for those abilities. (It wouldn't have been bad if it had the "Charisma up to class level" clause like you see in other abilities, but it didn't have that, making it broken for dipping without it being viable for full-classed Paladins.)

Remember that Divine Grace can be used as a Reaction with no limit of usage, so having it scale as high as +6 when the Paladin already has some solid saves across the board will make them almost invincible to save-based effects due to the <10> system whenever they want (and I imagine they can get extra reactions to use for this too). Also, enhanced armor now increases Saves as well, making them viable to work with.

Blade of Justice might simply add your class level as Good damage against Evil enemies, but even that might be too much, especially in the lower levels. (Maybe half your level, minimum 1?) Smite Evil was pretty broken in PF1, where you used it on an enemy, and could have used stuff like Magic Missiles, where each missile would deal 1D4+1+Charisma in damage, or heaven forbid a ranged Paladin with abilities like Manyshot, Rapid Shot, etc., and maximized Smite damage. Or even Splash weapons on Large or Larger enemies. Instead of an Alchemist's Fire or Acid Flask doing 1D6 with 1 splash damage, it now deals 1D6+Charisma with 1+Charisma splash affecting the enemy multiple times. That's busted beyond belief, and is supported by RAW (and technically RAI), so I'm glad it's changed to this, though I wish they would change it to apply once per attack similar to how Sneak Attack works to prevent shenanigans like the above.

The increased AC is resimulated with Lay On Hands now granting an AC bonus when used on himself or an ally. On top of that, Paladins get Legendary Armor proficiency, sooner than any other class (and perhaps is the only class sans Monk to have Legendary Armor proficiency), so they're still going to have a bolstered AC; it's just spread out between proficiency and Lay On Hands instead of Smite Evil (meaning it works on more than just Evil enemies).


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Good riddance, those abilities were pretty broken and frontloaded, and most people would dip just for those abilities. (It wouldn't have been bad if it had the "Charisma up to class level" clause like you see in other abilities, but it didn't have that, making it broken for dipping without it being viable for full-classed Paladins.)

Remember that Divine Grace can be used as a Reaction with no limit of usage, so having it scale as high as +6 when the Paladin already has some solid saves across the board will make them almost invincible to save-based effects due to the <10> system whenever they want (and I imagine they can get extra reactions to use for this too). Also, enhanced armor now increases Saves as well, making them viable to work with.

Blade of Justice might simply add your class level as Good damage against Evil enemies, but even that might be too much, especially in the lower levels. (Maybe half your level, minimum 1?) Smite Evil was pretty broken in PF1, where you used it on an enemy, and could have used stuff like Magic Missiles, where each missile would deal 1D4+1+Charisma in damage, or heaven forbid a ranged Paladin with abilities like Manyshot, Rapid Shot, etc., and maximized Smite damage. Or even Splash weapons on Large or Larger enemies. Instead of an Alchemist's Fire or Acid Flask doing 1D6 with 1 splash damage, it now deals 1D6+Charisma with 1+Charisma splash affecting the enemy multiple times. That's busted beyond belief, and is supported by RAW (and technically RAI), so I'm glad it's changed to this, though I wish they would change it to apply once per attack similar to how Sneak Attack works to prevent shenanigans like the above.

The increased AC is resimulated with Lay On Hands now granting an AC bonus when used on himself or an ally. On top of that, Paladins get Legendary Armor proficiency, sooner than any other class (and perhaps is the only class sans Monk to have Legendary Armor proficiency), so they're still going to have a bolstered AC; it's just spread out between proficiency and Lay On Hands instead of Smite Evil (meaning it works on more than just Evil enemies).

By making Divine Grace into a Reaction, the designers are already limiting its usage. Divine Grace competes with things like Retributive Strike, (this is the big one) Attacks of Opportunities, and probably other cool abilities like raising your shield, or shielding allies, etc... Which I'm sure there will be ways to get more reactions, but it should be very limited. Having more than two reactions a turn would clutter and slow down the game. So having a +6 at level 20 is not that overpowered IMO. Especially since you'll probably use it 1-2 times a turn, but that means the Paladin can't use things like the Retributive Strike chain reaction from Aura of Justice or the like.

Of all the things I do know about Blade of Justice, this I do know: it won't be class level to damage. That was explicitly stated in the in the blog. That's why I chose the half class level approach that I did. I could even see Blade adding an extra d6 of Good damage every few levels... Also the shenanigans have been toned down a tad while still making the ability cool. The ability now costs 1 of your precious actions per round. So that leaves the Paladin with two actions to use. Very limited indeed. Which is, of course, balanced.
And yes, I agree that the class does not need more AC. I'm just curious about the attack. When the Paladin has only two actions left, it'd be nice to know that he's more likely to hit. I think that'd be fair. I imagine the Paladin calling out his foe, honing in on its weak points and then meting out Justice with each swing...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So one thing I like about Divine Grace being a reaction is that it changes the Paladin's immunity to everything from a thing that is just always on to a thing which requires vigilance, which is very appropriate for Paladins.


PossibleCabbage wrote:
So one thing I like about Divine Grace being a reaction is that it changes the Paladin's immunity to everything from a thing that is just always on to a thing which requires vigilance, which is very appropriate for Paladins.

Agreed, though I'm somewhat worried that if there are too many options for reactions, but only 1 reaction a turn, that reaction abilities will be kind of meh. In 1e there weren't usually a ton of things competing for your Immediate actions, but it seems that in 2e there will be. Maybe they could do a partial 1e 'immediate actions take up your swift action next turn' thing, where you can get a second reaction at the cost of an action next turn. If that's too powerful, they could gate it behind a feat, possible with level requirements, but I'd like a more reaction-based style to be possible, if we're making more and more interesting reactions.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Tholomyes wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
So one thing I like about Divine Grace being a reaction is that it changes the Paladin's immunity to everything from a thing that is just always on to a thing which requires vigilance, which is very appropriate for Paladins.
Agreed, though I'm somewhat worried that if there are too many options for reactions, but only 1 reaction a turn, that reaction abilities will be kind of meh. In 1e there weren't usually a ton of things competing for your Immediate actions, but it seems that in 2e there will be. Maybe they could do a partial 1e 'immediate actions take up your swift action next turn' thing, where you can get a second reaction at the cost of an action next turn. If that's too powerful, they could gate it behind a feat, possible with level requirements, but I'd like a more reaction-based style to be possible, if we're making more and more interesting reactions.

Eh, the thing about reactions is something has to actually trigger them. Odds are that the same enemy wouldn't trigger Retributive Strike and AoO in the same turn, for example. I see it normally working like this:

Round 1

Paladin strides up and strikes enemy, using last action to raise shield.

Enemy tries to full attack paladin, very little effect because of shield. Reaction spent to block.

Cleric moves up, strikes twice at enemy.

Wizard casts acid splash while maintain healthy distance.

Round 2

Paladin strikes twice, raises shield.

Enemy realizes slapping at the Paladin doesn't work, strikes cleric. Triggers Retributive Strike Reaction. Enemy realizes he doesn't want to trade blows anywhere near the Paladin, moves towards wizard.

Cleric pursues.

Wizard moves away.

Round 3

Paladin moves up and strikes again.

Enemy tries to flee paladin, to pursue wizard, gets cut down by AoO.

Even in that scenario, there at rounds you'd wish you could take more than one reaction, but each reaction is still a new option that only applies in specific scenarios.


Tholomyes wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
So one thing I like about Divine Grace being a reaction is that it changes the Paladin's immunity to everything from a thing that is just always on to a thing which requires vigilance, which is very appropriate for Paladins.
Agreed, though I'm somewhat worried that if there are too many options for reactions, but only 1 reaction a turn, that reaction abilities will be kind of meh. In 1e there weren't usually a ton of things competing for your Immediate actions, but it seems that in 2e there will be. Maybe they could do a partial 1e 'immediate actions take up your swift action next turn' thing, where you can get a second reaction at the cost of an action next turn. If that's too powerful, they could gate it behind a feat, possible with level requirements, but I'd like a more reaction-based style to be possible, if we're making more and more interesting reactions.

Yes, I'm expecting to find a "Combat Reflexes" like feat in the General Feats selection. Or perhaps the feats themselves "upgrade" at higher levels to more reactions or the like. I'd like more options from the General Feat list other than the Skill related feats.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Tholomyes wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
So one thing I like about Divine Grace being a reaction is that it changes the Paladin's immunity to everything from a thing that is just always on to a thing which requires vigilance, which is very appropriate for Paladins.
Agreed, though I'm somewhat worried that if there are too many options for reactions, but only 1 reaction a turn, that reaction abilities will be kind of meh. In 1e there weren't usually a ton of things competing for your Immediate actions, but it seems that in 2e there will be. Maybe they could do a partial 1e 'immediate actions take up your swift action next turn' thing, where you can get a second reaction at the cost of an action next turn. If that's too powerful, they could gate it behind a feat, possible with level requirements, but I'd like a more reaction-based style to be possible, if we're making more and more interesting reactions.

Eh, the thing about reactions is something has to actually trigger them. Odds are that the same enemy wouldn't trigger Retributive Strike and AoO in the same turn, for example. I see it normally working like this:

Round 1

Paladin strides up and strikes enemy, using last action to raise shield.

Enemy tries to full attack paladin, very little effect because of shield. Reaction spent to block.

Cleric moves up, strikes twice at enemy.

Wizard casts acid splash while maintain healthy distance.

Round 2

Paladin strikes twice, raises shield.

Enemy realizes slapping at the Paladin doesn't work, strikes cleric. Triggers Retributive Strike Reaction. Enemy realizes he doesn't want to trade blows anywhere near the Paladin, moves towards wizard.

Cleric pursues.

Wizard moves away.

Round 3

Paladin moves up and strikes again.

Enemy tries to flee paladin, to pursue wizard, gets cut down by AoO.

Even in that scenario, there at rounds you'd wish you could take more than one reaction, but each reaction is still a new option that only applies in specific scenarios.

Yes, that makes sense. But again we have to remember that the Paladin had to CHOOSE to have AoO and Divine Grace. Their will be a lot of other good choices competing with these two...

Which brings up another question to mind... Can you use Divine Grace outside combat? I don't see why not myself. Or what about while unconscious, like say during the dying condition. I'd like to be able to, but I doubt it there.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Iron_Matt17 wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Tholomyes wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
So one thing I like about Divine Grace being a reaction is that it changes the Paladin's immunity to everything from a thing that is just always on to a thing which requires vigilance, which is very appropriate for Paladins.
Agreed, though I'm somewhat worried that if there are too many options for reactions, but only 1 reaction a turn, that reaction abilities will be kind of meh. In 1e there weren't usually a ton of things competing for your Immediate actions, but it seems that in 2e there will be. Maybe they could do a partial 1e 'immediate actions take up your swift action next turn' thing, where you can get a second reaction at the cost of an action next turn. If that's too powerful, they could gate it behind a feat, possible with level requirements, but I'd like a more reaction-based style to be possible, if we're making more and more interesting reactions.

Eh, the thing about reactions is something has to actually trigger them. Odds are that the same enemy wouldn't trigger Retributive Strike and AoO in the same turn, for example. I see it normally working like this:

Round 1

Paladin strides up and strikes enemy, using last action to raise shield.

Enemy tries to full attack paladin, very little effect because of shield. Reaction spent to block.

Cleric moves up, strikes twice at enemy.

Wizard casts acid splash while maintain healthy distance.

Round 2

Paladin strikes twice, raises shield.

Enemy realizes slapping at the Paladin doesn't work, strikes cleric. Triggers Retributive Strike Reaction. Enemy realizes he doesn't want to trade blows anywhere near the Paladin, moves towards wizard.

Cleric pursues.

Wizard moves away.

Round 3

Paladin moves up and strikes again.

Enemy tries to flee paladin, to pursue wizard, gets cut down by AoO.

Even in that scenario, there at rounds you'd wish you could take more than one reaction, but each reaction is still a new

...

You are absolutely right. The Paladin will have lots of good choices competing for AoO and Divine Grace. That strikes me as a good thing, compared to having a few OP built in options, a few OP choices, and then a lot of bad options. If you find yourself worried about reaction glut, you don't need to spend feats on more reactions. Divine Grace and Retributive Strike on a two handed build seems pretty solid if you are the only front line combatant, where as you may want AoO if you have ranged allies you need to block access to.

I would think you can use Divine Grace out of combat, yes. Then again, I was a little perplexed when Joe couldn't have raised his shield before combat despite saying he did it before opening the door. (Personally, I am somewhat inclined to think that might have been a wrong call in the moment from Jason rather than the rules as intended.)


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Captain Morgan, I think that the ability to take Actions in exploration mode will be limited, so Jason was correct in making Joe spend an action to raise once the encounter started. It seems the solution in this case would have been to start the encounter with the door closed - roll initiative, raise shields, open door all “on the clock” so to speak.


Iron_Matt17 wrote:

By making Divine Grace into a Reaction, the designers are already limiting its usage. Divine Grace competes with things like Retributive Strike, (this is the big one) Attacks of Opportunities, and probably other cool abilities like raising your shield, or shielding allies, etc... Which I'm sure there will be ways to get more reactions, but it should be very limited. Having more than two reactions a turn would clutter and slow down the game. So having a +6 at level 20 is not that overpowered IMO. Especially since you'll probably use it 1-2 times a turn, but that means the Paladin can't use things like the Retributive Strike chain reaction from Aura of Justice or the like.

Of all the things I do know about Blade of Justice, this I do know: it won't be class level to damage. That was explicitly stated in the in the blog. That's why I chose the half class level approach that I did. I could even see Blade adding an extra d6 of Good damage every few levels... Also the shenanigans have been toned down a tad while still making the ability cool. The ability now costs 1 of your precious actions per round. So that leaves the Paladin with two actions to use. Very limited indeed. Which is, of course, balanced.
And yes, I agree that the class does not need more AC. I'm just curious about the attack. When the Paladin has only two actions left, it'd be nice to know that he's more likely to hit. I think that'd be fair. I imagine the Paladin calling out his foe, honing in on its weak points and then meting out Justice with each swing...

They have and they haven't.

Retributive Strike requires an ally being critically hit while you are threatening the bad guy who caused it. (It's also unknown if this can trigger off of Critical Failures on Saving Throws as well, but I'll say no until further clarification.) It's a fairly niche ability that triggers on a worst case scenario. In other words, you're preparing for failure, which isn't really a positive or worthwhile way to think or plan for. Sure, it's nice to have for those moments where it happens (and they do), but it should be rare enough that the Paladin can't expect to use it every fight, or even every other fight. On top of that, there may be feats where he can get an additional reaction just for Divine Grace or Retributive Strike (especially the latter, since it's baked into the class).

Compared to when you know you're being hit with a big bad spell coming up, the Paladin having the option to boost his saves against that spell (or whatever effect it may be) can save his bacon so he can properly meet out more Justice than if he critically failed that Dominate Person, or that Fireball of Death. Sure, it's only a +2, but we don't know if it scales (it might), and we know that additional bonuses to a given statistic matter much more now than before due to the <10> system.


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Iron_Matt17 wrote:

By making Divine Grace into a Reaction, the designers are already limiting its usage. Divine Grace competes with things like Retributive Strike, (this is the big one) Attacks of Opportunities, and probably other cool abilities like raising your shield, or shielding allies, etc... Which I'm sure there will be ways to get more reactions, but it should be very limited. Having more than two reactions a turn would clutter and slow down the game. So having a +6 at level 20 is not that overpowered IMO. Especially since you'll probably use it 1-2 times a turn, but that means the Paladin can't use things like the Retributive Strike chain reaction from Aura of Justice or the like.

Of all the things I do know about Blade of Justice, this I do know: it won't be class level to damage. That was explicitly stated in the in the blog. That's why I chose the half class level approach that I did. I could even see Blade adding an extra d6 of Good damage every few levels... Also the shenanigans have been toned down a tad while still making the ability cool. The ability now costs 1 of your precious actions per round. So that leaves the Paladin with two actions to use. Very limited indeed. Which is, of course, balanced.
And yes, I agree that the class does not need more AC. I'm just curious about the attack. When the Paladin has only two actions left, it'd be nice to know that he's more likely to hit. I think that'd be fair. I imagine the Paladin calling out his foe, honing in on its weak points and then meting out Justice with each swing...

They have and they haven't.

Retributive Strike requires an ally being critically hit while you are threatening the bad guy who caused it. (It's also unknown if this can trigger off of Critical Failures on Saving Throws as well, but I'll say no until further clarification.) It's a fairly niche ability that triggers on a worst case scenario. In other words, you're preparing for failure, which isn't really a positive or worthwhile way to think or plan for....

Retributive Strike triggers off any hit against an ally, not just a critical hit. Only the Antipaladin's version triggers off a critical, and that's a critical against the Antipaladin himself.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

They have and they haven't.

Retributive Strike requires an ally being critically hit while you are threatening the bad guy who caused it. (It's also unknown if this can trigger off of Critical Failures on Saving Throws as well, but I'll say no until further clarification.) It's a fairly niche ability that triggers on a worst case scenario. In other words, you're preparing for failure, which isn't really a positive or worthwhile way to think or plan for. Sure, it's nice to have for those moments where it happens (and they do), but it should be rare enough that the Paladin can't expect to use it every fight, or even every other fight. On top of that, there may be feats where he can get an additional reaction just for Divine Grace or Retributive Strike (especially the latter, since it's baked into the class).

Compared to when you know you're being hit with a big bad spell coming up, the Paladin having the option to boost his saves against that spell (or whatever effect it may be) can save his bacon so he can properly meet out more Justice than if he critically failed that Dominate Person, or that Fireball of Death. Sure, it's only a +2, but we don't know if it scales (it might), and we know that additional bonuses to a given statistic matter much more now than before due to the <10> system.

I thought Retributive strike was on any hit, not just a critical hit, based on people who've playtested it.

And also the more I think about it, the weirder it seems. A sword and Shield paladin now has (at least) three things competing for their reaction (and it's not like sword and shield paladins aren't common; they're literally Iconic). While they might not always be relevant, I think one reaction is severely limiting. My previous thought on extra reactions by taking up future actions seems all the more necessary now. Sure, you're limited on your turn, but if you want to Shield block, you have to wonder whether you might want to use Retributive strike or Divine grace later in the turn (or any other permutation), whereas if you have the option to sacrifice actions past the first reaction, all you have to as is, "Is this worth an action on my next turn?" which I'd feel a lot better with.

Edit: Partial Ninja.


Tholomyes wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

They have and they haven't.

Retributive Strike requires an ally being critically hit while you are threatening the bad guy who caused it. (It's also unknown if this can trigger off of Critical Failures on Saving Throws as well, but I'll say no until further clarification.) It's a fairly niche ability that triggers on a worst case scenario. In other words, you're preparing for failure, which isn't really a positive or worthwhile way to think or plan for. Sure, it's nice to have for those moments where it happens (and they do), but it should be rare enough that the Paladin can't expect to use it every fight, or even every other fight. On top of that, there may be feats where he can get an additional reaction just for Divine Grace or Retributive Strike (especially the latter, since it's baked into the class).

Compared to when you know you're being hit with a big bad spell coming up, the Paladin having the option to boost his saves against that spell (or whatever effect it may be) can save his bacon so he can properly meet out more Justice than if he critically failed that Dominate Person, or that Fireball of Death. Sure, it's only a +2, but we don't know if it scales (it might), and we know that additional bonuses to a given statistic matter much more now than before due to the <10> system.

I thought Retributive strike was on any hit, not just a critical hit, based on people who've playtested it.

And also the more I think about it, the weirder it seems. A sword and Shield paladin now has (at least) three things competing for their reaction (and it's not like sword and shield paladins aren't common; they're literally Iconic). While they might not always be relevant, I think one reaction is severely limiting. My previous thought on extra reactions by taking up future actions seems all the more necessary now. Sure, you're limited on your turn, but if you want to Shield block, you have to wonder whether you might want to use Retributive strike or Divine grace later in the turn (or any other permutation), whereas if you have the option to sacrifice actions past the first reaction, all you have to as is, "Is this worth an action on my next turn?" which I'd feel a lot better with.

We already know there is a feat to get a bonus reaction every turn which is only used for Shield Block. I would honestly expect similar feats for most reaction-based abilities, with Combat Reflexes being the version for Attack of Opportunity, "Immediate Retribution" or whatever being the version for Retributive Strike, and so on. That way, if you are really keen on always being able to do Reaction X, you just take the feat that ensures you are always able to do so.


Fuzzypaws wrote:
We already know there is a feat to get a bonus reaction every turn which is only used for Shield Block. I would honestly expect similar feats for most reaction-based abilities, with Combat Reflexes being the version for Attack of Opportunity, "Immediate Retribution" or whatever being the version for Retributive Strike, and so on. That way, if you are really keen on always being able to do Reaction X, you just take the feat that ensures you are always able to do so.

Yeah, I'm hoping they progress naturally if you already spent a feat into it. But spending another is fine by me if you're really into it. "Immediate Retribution" would be its own feat of course. I like the sound of it. But it'd also be nice to have a General Feat to give more reactions in general. I'd like more options from that Feat pool. All I know about it is Skill feats, and toughness feats.


I dont like DG as a reaction...... that might just be me..
then again it might end up like the spell list something that I will forget that is even there....


Steelfiredragon wrote:

I dont like DG as a reaction...... that might just be me..

then again it might end up like the spell list something that I will forget that is even there....

If you're willing to spend a feat into taking it, then I'd hope you'd remember to use it. Otherwise skip over it and find other feats that interest you/fit your PC. Spells for the Paladin were something tossed to you for free that you had to work to keep track of. If you weren't interested then I could see you forgetting those... (Personally I tended to forget/ignore them or flat out trade them out with an archetype. I knew they were cool, but I didn't want to spend the effort to prepare and choose them. Too much of a hassle for me personally. Which is why I'm curious as to whether Litanies are a feat or a class feature in 2e...)

1 to 50 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Goodbye CHA to Divine Grace and Smite Evil, we'll miss you... All Messageboards