Should the Smite spells actually require Concentration?

[jaappleton]

Would it be unbalancing to hand waive away the Concentration aspect of the Smite spells?

[Marcloure]

If the paladin can stack up smites before it attacks, then it might be a bit dangerous. If you rule that casting a smite spell ends all other smite spells readied, then I guess it's fine.

[lperkins2]

If the paladin can stack up smites before it attacks, then it might be a bit dangerous. If you rule that casting a smite spell ends all other smite spells readied, then I guess it's fine.

The thing to consider is what other concentration spells they could have going at the same time. Nothing terrible immediately comes to mind, but multi-classed there might be something.

[jaappleton]

I don’t think it’s fair to lose Concentration on Bless because Thunderous Smite requires Concentration. Or if I’m a Drow, losing Concentration on Faerie Fire, for example.

Obviously, you can only ever have one Smite spell active at a time. I’m not saying to adjust that limit.

[JakOfAllTirades]

I dunno. Should Vengeance Paladins run around stacking Smites with Hunter's Mark?

[Perlywhirly]

Wrathful Smite says hello. Non-concentration for the fear it inflicts is intensely good since the only remaining way to escape it is a Wisdom check at disadvantage using an action. I suppose something like a non-concentration Banishing Smite is pretty darn good as well to poof someone for a full minute with no risk of return.

[djreynolds]

Would it be unbalancing to hand waive away the Concentration aspect of the Smite spells?

Yes. Because they have other effects other than damage.

I feel for you, but it decreases the risk of using them. There needs to be a cost.

But its your table

[Trustypeaches]

Is your problem with the Smite effects requiring concentration, or the Smite Weapon buff requiring concentration since you cast it before you use the melee strike.

Do you want to waive concentration on the entire Smite effect, or have concentration activate when the Smite effect “triggers” on an opponent.

[Particle_Man]

Lucky the paladin can simply use spell slots to smite simplciter and not need concentration to do so.

[PeteNutButter]

The smite spells have a lot of problems. They take a bonus action, which most good builds have competition for. They require concentration, which should compete with basically every other paladin spell, and they do less damage than regular Divine Smite.

By taking away concentration, you alleviate one of those problems, but not the others. Then the ones with lasting effects become out of line with the power level of even wizard spells, as they cannot be broken by damaging the paladin.

If you were to remove concentration, I'd make one other adjustment: Reduce their durations. Staggering Smite is a great example of a spell that doesn't need to be concentration. You hit them they save or lose their next turn. Nothing fiddly there. You could rebalance the rest like that. Wrathful, Searing, and Banishing Smites would all need some love.

[Malifice]

The smite spells have a lot of problems. They take a bonus action, which most good builds have competition for. They require concentration, which should compete with basically every other paladin spell, and they do less damage than regular Divine Smite.

By taking away concentration, you alleviate one of those problems, but not the others. Then the ones with lasting effects become out of line with the power level of even wizard spells, as they cannot be broken by damaging the paladin.

If you were to remove concentration, I'd make one other adjustment: Reduce their durations. Staggering Smite is a great example of a spell that doesn't need to be concentration. You hit them they save or lose their next turn. Nothing fiddly there. You could rebalance the rest like that. Wrathful, Searing, and Banishing Smites would all need some love.

They do less damage than a 'regular' Smite but:

1) They carry good rider effects
2) They can be used along with a 'regular' Smite for [weapon] + [smite] + [smite spell and rider] damage.

I wouldn't remove concentration from those spells. Paladins are already the best Nova machines in the game, so adding to that Nova burst damage is too much.

In fact IMG I limit thinks like Smites, GWM, SS etc to a 'once per turn' limit. This makes the Smite spells a lot more attractive, and I see them used a lot more as a consequence.

[PeteNutButter]

They do less damage than a 'regular' Smite but:

1) They carry good rider effects
2) They can be used along with a 'regular' Smite for [weapon] + [smite] + [smite spell and rider] damage.

I wouldn't remove concentration from those spells. Paladins are already the best Nova machines in the game, so adding to that Nova burst damage is too much.

In fact IMG I limit thinks like Smites, GWM, SS etc to a 'once per turn' limit. This makes the Smite spells a lot more attractive, and I see them used a lot more as a consequence.

That's totally a fair point.

The only reason I'd consider buffing the smite spells specifically, is because most of them see very little play (at least in my groups).

Paladins don't need any buffs though so your method might fix that on a more roundabout way.

[mer.c]

I’m trying keeping them as-is, but casting as a reaction upon hit. Reducing the duration and removing concentration is also a good thought.

[Foxhound438]

I think it would be too strong, for some of the smite spells more than others. Wrathful smite is already really good- many people swear by it, and even then it's underrated by so many people. Having multiple instances of it active would definitely be more value than a single character should get from their level 1 spell slots. Stacking it with other strong concentration effects (ie banishment or aura of vitality) would make it even more OP. It probably would be exasperated on any sort of paladin 2/ full caster X build, but that aspect wouldn't be an issue if the person playing the paladin wasn't interested in playing a x/adin in the first place.

On a side note, if this stems from the observation that people seem to lean too heavily on divine smite as a feature, I definitely feel you- I've seen only one other person in all my time of 5e actually use real spells on a paladin, and the rest seem to just consider their spell slots to be "smite ammo" with the rare exception of saving someone on death's door with a L1 cure wounds.

[SociopathFriend]

Honestly I've played a Paladin several times and the concentration part of the smite spells has never been an issue because you typically use the spell the same turn you cast it via landing a hit.

[Chronos]

Yes, you typically use a smite spell the same round that you cast it, but if the rider effect has some lasting duration, you need to keep concentrating on it. And if you have some other concentration spell up (Bless, for example), casting a smite spell will end it.

Now, if the smite spells are the only concentration spells that you ever use on a paladin, then the concentration isn't that big a deal (though it's still relevant for the ones with lasting effects, like Blinding). But if you could combine them with Bless, or Hunter's Mark, or whatever, then they'd be more powerful.

[Trustypeaches]

Honestly I've played a Paladin several times and the concentration part of the smite spells has never been an issue because you typically use the spell the same turn you cast it via landing a hit.I don't think that's the problem with the spell OP is talking about.

I think they're annoyed your spell-smites conflict with other concentration effects.

[djreynolds]

I don't think that's the problem with the spell OP is talking about.

I think they're annoyed your spell-smites conflict with other concentration effects.

Excellent, this why you cannot do it. Otherwise it's back to 3.5 and spending 15 minutes buffing yourself with 10 spells.

Concentration has two weaknesses:

1. 1 spell at a time
2. Must maintain concentration

This provides a power balance between classes.
This makes players choose between spells, effects, etc.

It seems trivial, but it will run over into other classes and spells

[rbstr]

Hail of Thorns, Ensnaring Strike and Lightning Arrow are also relevant to this.

Anyway, most of the Smite-spells and Ensnaring Strike leave "until spell ends" effects so they should require concentration.
But the ones that don't (Thunderous smite, Hail of thorns, Lightning Arrow, Staggering Smite) shouldn't need concentration and are really hurt too much by the requirement.

[djreynolds]

Hail of Thorns, Ensnaring Strike and Lightning Arrow are also relevant to this.

Anyway, most of the Smite-spells and Ensnaring Strike leave "until spell ends" effects so they should require concentration.
But the ones that don't (Thunderous smite, Hail of thorns, Lightning Arrow, Staggering Smite) shouldn't need concentration and are really hurt too much by the requirement.

Very true.

But it adds a nuance, you have to drop shield of faith to smite.

You drop hunters mark for searing smite versus the mummy, or vulnerable types

Otherwise just make them class features

[jaappleton]

Very true.

But it adds a nuance, you have to drop shield of faith to smite.

You drop hunters mark for searing smite versus the mummy, or vulnerable types

Otherwise just make them class features

That lady bit, making them class features:

That’s the biggest knock on the Ranger. Hunter’s Mark should not be the Favored enemy damage bonus. Like the Paladin, most of their class exclusive spells require Concentration and / or bonus actions. It’s at a point where Rangers are rarely better off using a spell instead of simply attacking.

Paladins can burn a slot for Divine Smite but it doesn’t require any action. Rangers can’t do that, their action economy isn’t so lucky.

[Corran]

That's not an easy question, we would have to look at each smite spell separately. For example, making wrathful smite not require concentration would bump the value of the spell too much, where making searing smite concentration-free means that I would have reason to use it every once in a while. I think concentration handles smite spells good enough (most of them are either straight up useful or situationally useful as it is), and that removing it would create more problems than it would solve (then again this is my reflex reaction, it's not like I have given this much thought or that I can understand balance of game design well enough). I think most smite spells need a boost though, to make them more competitive with other paladin (concentration and non) options (but the average smite spell needs a smaller boost than removing the concentration limitation).

Took a quick look through the smite spells. Maybe this is me saying something dumb, but you know what, barring wrathful smite, I think removing concentration from every other smite spell would be fine. Spell slots and action economy would keep things balanced imo.

[djreynolds]

The paladin already can drop some serious damage.

Now the paladin can drop a huge radiant damage smite.
And an upcasted searing smite
And not lose their shield of faith or bless, either?

It's a big splash of damage, and with bless still running and vow of enmity throw in GWM damage.

[Chronos]

I still say that Divine Smite and smiting spells and Hunter's Mark goes a little too far.

jaappleton, my current character is a ranger, and I'm not finding it to be a problem. My typical round consists of either casting or maintaining Hunter's Mark, and shooting something twice with my bow. Sometimes, it's more useful to have Spike Growth or Pass Without Trace instead, and so I forgo the Hunter's Mark. And then at the end of the day, if I have spell slots left (I almost always do), I use them on Goodberries.

In other words, I don't always use my spells (assuming that you don't count Hunter's Mark as "using my spells"), but that's to be expected, since a ranger isn't a primary caster. But I do still use them sometimes, as appropriate. Which is pretty much how a half-caster should operate.

[djreynolds]

The tough thing is that radiant damage is usually unresisted. So I can't even see the damage type being an excuse.

If you said, I just want to drop a max smite and a max smite spell.... And see how much damage I can drop at once.... I'd say now we're talking. Of course you can.

[olskool]

This is the same problem the Wizard's Magic Weapon has. I understand that the Devs were trying to limit the power of these spells but things might have gone a bit far with some of the Spells and Class Abilities.

I wouldn't mind seeing a "middle of the road" fix that would add a "lesser Concentration" or "Minor Concentration" attribute to certain Spells in the game. The "Minor Concentration Trait" would require that the Caster remain awake, uncharmed or befuddled, and not sustain damage that is greater than his CON Score to avoid a CON Save to prevent the loss of such Spells. The Caster could control a number of such Minor Concentration Spells equal to his Proficiency Bonus (ie 2 Spells at 1st Level) and this total would ALSO INCLUDE the current type of Concentration Trait in that spell total as well. For an additional balancing feature, this could feature require the expenditure/limitation of the Caster's ability to use Reactions while using that Minor Concentration Trait.

[Chronos]

My group has houseruled a few spells to not require concentration, but it's mostly buff spells that would typically be cast on someone else. If you want to give everyone in the party Enhance Ability, for instance, go ahead and spend the spell slots on it.

[Quoz]

Hadn't thought much on these issues before, but as we're in the realm of housrules, why not combine smite spells and divine smite as a single feature. Burn a spell slot for smite damage, and may reduce damage dealt to add the rider. For on going effects after the hit add a save at end of each turn to compensate for not being able to break concentration. You must use a spell slot of the original smite spell's level.

It lowers nova potential by not stacking smite and divine smite but frees up concentration and action economy.

[Maelynn]

I don't think that's the problem with the spell OP is talking about.

I think they're annoyed your spell-smites conflict with other concentration effects.

I'll admit this is also the gripe I had with my Paladin. So many of the spells available to me are concentration spells!

I often have Bless or Shield of Faith up to help my party (which stems partly from roleplaying my protective character, whose personality states she "watches over my friends as if they were a litter of newborn pups"), but that means I can't use any smite spells. And dropping and then recasting those buff spells is too costly considering the low amount of spell slots I have.

I also found the DM started tossing us a few monsters with resistance to non-magical damage, making me feel compelled to use Magic Weapon. It felt a little unfair, because it all but blocked an important part of my class.

A few things I realised:

- my smites are also magic damage, so Magic Weapon isn't an obligation
- while my personality states that I am very protective of my friends, it shouldn't translate to smothering them with protective spells when they're not even hurt yet - I can also act it out by jumping to their defence as soon as they take a hit, for example
- just because you have several options, doesn't mean you're entitled to use them at the same time

[Chronos]

It's perfectly normal for you to be encountering monsters with resistance to nonmagical weapons-- After about level 5 or so, your DM would really need to be going out of their way to avoid them. The problem is if the DM is at the same time not giving the party any magical weapons. Yes, the rules say that magic items are unnecessary, but the rules are wrong on this point, because no magic weapons unfairly screws over the martial party members.

[Man_Over_Game]

A month or so ago, I made a thread that ended up becoming the same topic that got some attention (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?567216-For-the-Paladin-what-would-happen-if-I-traded-Divine-Smite-for-spontaneous-casting), with the goal to replace boring, spammable Divine Smites for use of Spell Smites, due to the tactical options the Spell Smites have vs. blanket damage.

The idea that most people seemed to like was to remove Divine Smites for Spell Smites, being able to cast Smite spells after confirming the hit, and removing Concentration on the Spell Smites until they activate a lasting effect. The cost is that now Paladins have to prepare a Spell Smite to utilize a smiting feature (where Divine Smite costs nothing to prepare), forcing harder decisions to be made for larger rewards than just straight damage.

An alternative solution that came up is to refund spell smites if you end your turn without landing one (so you still use it as a Bonus Action, getting the spell slot back if it's unused).

Removing Concentration as a whole made some spell smites far too strong, and making them better than the existing Divine Smites is a poor choice, as the Paladin is one of the last classes that needs special attention to stand out.

---------

There were some concerns about removing the Bonus Action requirement for spell smites, but there are other classes/builds that can utilize the alternate/generic uses for bonus actions (Two-weapon fighting, Polearm Master, Cunning Action), and causing Paladins to have to use their bonus actions for another resource (Spell Smites) is a good design choice. Paladins shouldn't be a cookie-cutter Fighter with Polearm Master/Sentinel/GWM, or at least, not comfortably, and by allowing Spell Smites to be used without a Bonus Action will devalue the classes that actually HAVE to use those feat methods (like the Fighter/Barbarian).

After all, why would you be a Fighter with PAM Bonus Action attacks, when you could be a Paladin with healing and spell casting and smites and PAM bonus action attacks?

---------

Personally, I think that Paladins already have enough options to choose from, and being required to choose between a lasting benefit (Bless, Hunter's Mark) and an immediately powerful strike requires some planning.

The goal should be to make Paladins more fun, but while not making them any stronger.

[stoutstien]

Just a random idea, what if the smite spells got rolled into the divine smite feature? It would need a complete rewrite but it could be fun project.
Off top of my head there is 7 smite spells so we could just tie a smite effect to each spell lv 1-5 that pallys get.
If the divine smite feature damage/usages was reduced but removed the spell slot cost it could turn into a fun feature. Maybe once per long rest at lv 2 and then adding additional usages and damage with paladin lvs up to 5 usages (need to math out damage if no longer costing a slot)
Then as part of the same attack they could extend a spell slot to enhance the smite. you can keep the saves and everything to save just make the duration equal to the paladin charisma modifier.
you could even tie the smite smells to each Divine oath so each subclass has a distinct flavor of smite.
I got them better to do this afternoon I might actually write this out see what happens.