New Paladin Class | 2024 Player's Handbook | D&D
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 ก.ย. 2024
- Preorder the new 2024 Core Rulebook Digital & Physical bundle on D&D Beyond dndbeyond.link/...
Preorder the new 2024 Core Rulebook Digital bundle dndbeyond.link...
Preorder the new 2024 Core Rulebook Physical bundle dndbeyond.link...
Preorder the new 2024 Player's Handbook on D&D Beyond dndbeyond.link...
Subscribe to D&D Beyond dndbeyond.link...
Introducing the 2024 Player's Handbook, the new and improved guide for fifth edition DUNGEONS & DRAGONS. Packed with endless character options, striking illustrations, and a streamlined design, every part of this 384-page book is a joy to experience.
Embark on an epic adventure 10 years in the making.
Create compelling characters with optimized rules, updated spells and equipment, and expanded player options. With an improved layout and organization, you have all the information you need right at your fingertips. Your adventure begins now!
Pre-order the 2024 Digital & Physical Core Rulebook Bundle and save $60!
All three of the 2024 Core Rulebooks are available for pre-order as a Digital & Physical bundle. Grab them today to get the interactive digital version and the beautiful hardcover version of each one upon release, as well as fully unlocking their contents on D&D BEYOND. Shipping is free for this bundle!
Pre-order the 2024 Digital & Physical Core Rulebook Bundle to receive these exclusive D&D collectibles:
Dragons of D&D digital art book
D&D BEYOND Gold Digital Dice set
50th anniversary digital Gold Dragon mini, releasing with the closed beta of the upcoming 3D virtual tabletop*
Cant do barbarian paladins now. Shame.
It would feel better if he just talked about why they nerfed it instead of trying to put all that spin on it
One free divine smite, that can be countered because you're casting a spell.
Hey if the enemy caster wants to counter my smite instead of the Wizard. I'm okay with that. Especially since I have aura of protection, and counterspell is now a CON save. If you're really worried about it, pick up the Resilent feat. Better yet, if you multiclass Sorcerer, you can subtle it and upcast to 9th level.
@@sillvvasensei Exactly, also counterspell won't be automatic for spells of 3rd level or lower and even if you fail the save you still make the weapon damage. So technically you CAN counterspell it but it would be a dumb decision.
As a newer player and my first character is paladin. I am really bummed out about the changes. My whole turn is now just one smite. No other spells since it is a cast and bonus action. I think just a once per turn would have been a better fix.
You get spellcasting at level one, and your bonus action does not take away from your normal attack action, so no, your entire turn is not "just smite." and you have more spells than just smite itself.
@ArthurRex131 Is smite not a cast and bonus action?
Again newer player I am fine with a once per turn smite but having it take up so much action economy is too much.
Divine Smite turned into a bonus action verbal spell.
can be counterspelled.
can be turned off completely for extended periods with silence spell.
can’t be used on off turn reaction attacks
access to a reliable bonus action attack is outright better than spending a bonus action AND a spell slot to divine smite.
“once per turn” was all that was needed, It’s now a trap feature. Especially when compared to all the effort put into other classes to streamline and reduce bonus action clog. Rogue out damages paladin now, not just fighter and barbarian.
No one will counterspell a smite, the new version is a saving throw and paladins are the best class at that even if you did counter it they still do the weapon damage.
Pd: It would be way better to cast shield lmao
@@kongoaurius
1. Theres little reason to not try the counterspell, even if it is against the paladin.
2. aura bonus to saves doesn’t kick in til level 6.
@@binolombardi Sure, Paladins don't get that sweet Aura of Protection until 6th level but when they do have it would be dumb to counterspell them, and think about it - is a caster really gonna waste a 3rd-level spell slot just to try and negate 3d8 radiant damage from a Paladin's Smite? Especially when the target is still gonna take the weapon damage anyway? Nah, they're way more likely to use Shield if they have it.
Pd: You are right about that single level (5th) when they have counterspell and you don't have the Aura but I still think you are giving up to easily, most of the time you'll be able to succeed saving throws, literally in the next level lol
@@kongoaurius Enemy casters with counterspell don’t have to worry about conserving resources like players do. A party will likely try to use resources at opportune times through out the day.
Enemy casters should be using all slots as quickly as possible, they only have one encounter before they’re dead. Their purpose is to impede progress by drain resources.
@@kongoaurius its they will. absolutly will. any good dm will do that. a bad dm will do that a lot of times. especialy if you want too punish the pala player.
You can repost this video as many times as you like. You still murdered Divine Smite.
That free extra smite really sucks huh?!
@@jerds9293the bonus action cast and verbal component does
Good! It needed to be nerfed. I didn't like that it ate up almost all of the power in the whole class.
This is so melodramatic 😂
@@redrumssam5888then just say “you can only smite once per turn”. There’s literally no reason to make it a bonus action.
Paladin 100% needed a nerf, with how everything was. But after seeing the changes to barbarian, fighter. I think the change is not needed. Fighter has basically lay on hands, and up to 3 legendary resistances, aka indomitable adding their class level to saves. Barbarian now can constantly keep rage going, and when they pop relentless rage heal double they're level so if proq'd 3 times it heals more then lay on hands. Perhaps smite nerf was needed, but they run out real quick, and don't return on a short rest. While eldritch knight will have basically at will smite at 11th level without the need for a bonus action.
Spot on dude.
Woot! A paladin who doesn't want to multiclass out after level 5!
*Fingers crossed*
Aura of Protection is literally the strongest Paladin feature. Paladin is one of the best designed classes in terms of not having dead levels, unlike a class like Barbarian which punishes multiclassing but also has bad features if you stay a pure Barbarian.
a paladin who multiclasses 1 level before getting aura of protection is not a smart paladin
@@floofzykitty5072So you would stop at 6 or 7 lvl?
@@kongoaurius Most 7th level oath features are almost centralising to your paladin and party's playstyle. If you're playing Redemption or Glory then you can absolutely multiclass with minimal impact after you get your Aura, but any other paladin has such a powerful oath feature that it isn't worth it.
Conquest Paladin is infamous for it's synergy with the Prone condition, Ancients and Oathbreaker need no explanation and Watchers might honestly compete with Aura of Protection for best Paladin feature for basically giving the whole party Alert.
It will almost always be better for your PERSONAL DPR and personal fight impact to dip something like Hexblade after lvl 6, but your 7th level feature is more for the party than for you and that is something that a simple DPR check can't even begin to measure.
If you went to lvl 5you went paladin lvl 6
The aura is op
These changes seem reasonable i remember it being really annoying trying to find the correct statblock for find steed
I would have liked a cavalier who gets this spell for free with some upgrades
Coming from someone who plays exclusively online, I think it's a lot easier to just have a separate tab open with the stat block than have to look at a spell's description every time you want to do something.
No one uses find steed bc youre with 4 other people, AND in a building.
I used find steed because I was playing a build that relied on the mount's speed for his attack efficiency.
I guess I'll have to see it in relation to other classes, but in relation to my experience of playing a reasonably well optimized straight-class paladin in one of my 5e games, I think the implied nerfs here to smite especially make sense. I was soloing my DM's combat encounters frequently as a lower level paladin. His presence in the party was hugely warping to play all the way from levels 1-6 to the point where I felt kind of bad like maybe I was ruining it for my DM. I offered to willingly nerf my dude more than once this character was so good. So while yeah I think these changes probably aren't the buff they're trying to make it sound like in the video, also in my experience paladins are just too powerful. And the nerfs being described are not even that severe. Maybe just enough my paladin won't completely dominate every combat encounter from now until the heat death of the universe.
Which would be cool. I want my friends to have fun too.
I agree, I think that the Paladin changes are mostly reasonable.And if you think about it there are only a few actual nerfs:
-No more smiting on every attack - This was needed to balance the class.
-Polearm Master is now suboptimal due to overlapping bonus action attacks with smites - This is a very specific interaction since it required a feat.
-Paladins can be affected by Counterspell - But this isn't a big deal since the spell's mechanics have changed, making it harder to land on Paladins.
However, the class has also received some great buffs:
-Weapon masteries like Topple and Graze are amazing new abilities
-More Channel Divinity uses, you get two and you can get up to four uses at high levels.
-Free Find Steed spell which now has some cool new teleport and fear effects
-A free origin feat at level 1, like the incredible Lucky feat or even another fighting style
-Many feats now give a +1 to an ability score, making them more viable
Overall, the Paladin used to be too strong, especially when combined with feats and multiclassing. Bur this new version feels more balanced and interesting to play, even if a few specific interactions were nerfed. I'm optimistic about the changes!
I'm fine with smiting only once per turn but turning it into casting a spell is frustrating because I can no longer use my bonus action to support my party by casting shield of faith or compelled duel
Now i cannot multiclass with barbarian. Shame.
Guys you can do what ever the f you want. These additions are optional.
Excuse me some of us follow the rules!!
What they're saying is its optional to buy the new books. Many and I mean many people aren't going to be buying this crap
@DnDSolarDragon a lot of the changes and additions are actually quite good. They just really fucked up some Paladin stuff
Im just going to be a fighter.
Oh no! Anything but this, if you will play another class with different function because of your tantrum dnd will stop existing
@user-ni7ji3fb8m Oh no! A comment mocking someone for a statement in our shared game of Pretend. Imagine being that person, what a tragedy!
@@danguhzone5130 Imagine thinking that your class choice is a "statement".
There sure already was a lot of overlap between cleric and paladin.
This is going to bring a lot more and make each feel less unique. More so than ranger and druid.
Curious to see how it feels and how much overlap there is.
Sorcerer and wizard work because they’re SO different other than spells. There’s a lot more overlap here.
Overlap isn’t the end of the world. I’d bet money that in the next edition they will be more separated and they’ll speak explicitly about wanting to make each feel more different … just gotta wait another 5-10 years.
What do you mean? I don't see how they overlap at all
@@kongoaurius I don't recall exactly what Paladin and cleric were like in first and second edition (it's been too long and I'm not going to dig up the books in storage).
In 3E and 3.5E and 4E and 5E clerics are all possible to run as martial focused characters using magic to enhance their martial capabilities. And, they obviously have magic ability. They can be tanks, they function as healers, and they can function as DPS. They have divine channeling and a strong connections to gods.
And, in those same editions ... Paladins are also those things (with less innate ability to focus on casting, but still capable of being the party healer).
Paladins and clerics are INCREDIBLY similar. They don't have 100% overlap in game mechanics. You could absolutely role play virtually ANY cleric as a paladin and visa versa.
There is more variation between the Champion fighter and the Eldritch Knight fighter ... fundamentally. Right? That Eldritch Knight had to study magic like a wizard and learn those things. Mechanically, they're very different. Role play wise they would at least have potential to be different (if you role play the arcane influence).
@@zero11010 I don't agree at all. If you go to the mechanics a Cleric will never be as good in melee combat as a Paladin and a Paladin will never be as good at casting spells ☝️🤓
@@kongoaurius Gotcha ... they don't need to be 100% equal to have clear and obvious overlap, dude.
Can you run a cleric in heavy armor with a melee focus tanking and being a physical brute? Yep. Are they effective at it? Yep.
Can you run a cleric as a healer? Yep.
Cleric as a support focused character (not just healing)? Yep.
Cleric as a ranged offensive character? Yep.
Can you run a paladin in heavy armor as a melee focused tank being a physical brute? Yep.
Can you run a paladin as a healer? Yep.
Can you run a paladin as a support focused character? This isn't a strong suite of the paladin because they have so many fewer spell options to use as utility. The ability to remove disease and poison through lay on hands help a lot. But, they're not as good at this role.
Can you run a paladin as an offensive ranged character? Now that they get access to all fighting styles it seems like you can make one archery focused. Additionally, now they can get access to cleric cantrips which would do a lot of the the heavy lifting of feeling like a ranged caster.
There is more thematic overlap between the cleric and the paladin than with ANY of the other classes in the game. The rogue and ranger have overlap, but the rogue lacks pretty much ALL of the ranger and outdoorsy stuff. The monk has overlap with ranger and rogue. Those tend to all e pretty separate though. There's overlap with the martial stuff between fighters, monks, rangers, barbarian and paladins. But ... dude, those are REALLY different. There is clear overlap between wizard and sorcerer and warlock ... but the source of their powers and things like metamatic and invocations make them very different.
meanwhile ... how would you differentiate between a cleric and a paladin who follow the same god? They're both devoted. They both have to follow the god's rules to maintain their powers. They both may have access to the same martial weapons and heavy armor. They both get divine spells and the power to heal people in their god's name. They would both want to spread the word of their god. They're practically the same ... they're almost like different subclasses for the same parent class where one focuses on slightly different mechanics than the other.
@@zero11010 Would you send your cleric to persuade someone? Probably not, but a Paladin would have no problem. Their skills aren't even similar.
Rip paladin
Divine smite has been 💯 ruined in this new format. The scale of this nerf is unmatched in any other class 😢 Making it a spell, allows it to be counter spelled, and also, any class can now access it with the magic initiate feat. So not only has it been rendered potentially useless (counterspell), it also takes away one of the main features of the Paladin class and makes it available to anyone. And, and, and.... it can only be used once a round 😪 but hey, at least paladins get a free use per day. No matter how you wrap it up, Divine Smite has been destroyed 💀
I would love to make content. I have a good spin on the new paladin smite that makes the nerf feel more like buff.
I am going to try to look over a few things but smite didnt get hit as hard as all of us paladin mains believe.
Funny how they have been making monster spells into spell like features so they can't be counterspelled and now make devine smite into a spell.
And make it once a turn and make it take a bonus action.
Just takes away all reason to bother multiclassing into paladin.
Hell makes you really think do I even want to play one at all.
Compare this to how they have changed the other martial classes and paladin might as well been taken out back and shot. Put it out of its misery 😂
Why hasn’t oathbreaker paladin been added to phb?
It was originally in the DMG, because it's an evil subclass. I don't think they'll add those to the PHB in this edition or the next.
Oathbreaker in 5e was from the Dungeon Master's Guide, so I'd assume it's a similar situation there.
@@NotEpimethean @sillvvasensei
I see no reason why if they can make evil races into hippies and weirdly racist stereotypes they couldn’t make a good version of oathbreakers in this pbh….
I dont mind that they put the brakes on Divine Smite, but I have a dual wielding zealot barbarian that I wanted to MC into paladin for story purposes, but they dont get the two weapon fighting style, which they FINALLY do now, but having to forgo the bonus action attack to use a smite just feels bad.. :(
Oh well, balancing the paladin finally
Channel divinity change is cool. But this differs from the same issue they don’t seem to have solved (I may have missed it).
No one plays with the 6-8 fights per day with 2 short rests per day.
No table I’ve played at. Not the wizards of the coast modules I’ve played. Not the D&D streamers like critical role or dimension20 or dungeon dudes or any of the others.
This will mean you get MORE uses than the original 5E stuff, but still much less than intended.
Fewer rests and fewer encounters changes the value of every single thing that recharges on short or long rest. And enemy CR is balanced based on those expected resources. So, this also dramatically changes all enemy CR.
It would be a HUGE mistake to not address this with optional rules to account for …. How everyone plays.
you and some youtubers = no one. LOL
@@МаратГабдуллин-б5ф sweet. So, you don’t know what a generalization is.
Hey, give me a rundown of what level your party is and the last 3 days worth of encounters you had?
I’m sure you’ll be able to tell me all about the 18-24 encounters you had in those 3 days of adventuring you did.
@@zero11010 i DM gritty realism only. aka 5-21 encounters per long rest. Usually 1-2 encounters/day aka short rest. With adventuring week of 5-7 days long.
That change to divine smite is interesting. They must have made it a reaction spell that triggers off of a successful melee or ranged weapon attack (since they can get any specialization they can be archery focused).
There were spells that conjured a weapon and counted as a weapon attack. That should mean a potential multiclass option would be to cast one of these spells, then divine smite as a reaction that spell.
Assuming it’s a reaction because the big thing with smite is you didn’t have to expend it until you knew you had a hit. So, this worked like 4E mechanics where a miss doesn’t consume a big ability. Removing that would make this a lot weaker (like a bonus action spell to do a melee attack where that attack could miss and still burn your bonus action and slot (or one free use). A reaction does the same thing, but cleanly and without one off rules.
In the UA it's categorized as a bonus action, but still says "when you hit with an attack" right at the start.
While that may sound like a mistake on their part, I suspect that they intentionally don't want it to use reaction just in case it's screwing you out of an opportunity attack or some other reaction you could be using.
Wouldn’t it make more sense if it just followed the format of the existing smite spell rules? Bonus action, 1 minute duration. So provided you maintain concentration you have up to 10 chances to land a hit.
@@SgtWicket The existing Smite spells were also reformated that way, where it still expends the bonus action when cast, but you don't need to hold concetration until the next attack.
At least, that's how it was formatted in the UA for all this.
@@SgtWicket Honestly, the average Paladin players aren't doing much else with their concentration, that'd probably be a fantastic idea.
Unfortunately WotC has admitted on multiple occasions that they don't want multiattack to benefit from divine smite throughout this entire UA process, and this change would certainly grind against that.
Also as I'm typing this I'm realizing that that'd potentially be a huge buff, because you'd no longer have to burn a spell slot for every use. I guarantee they don't want that.
@@SgtWicket That would be problematic. It would cost the bonus action (it needs to cost something), it would take up concentration (new and expensive, lots of paladin spells use concentration, this would cause problems with damage output).
After level 5 you have extra attack (I'm assuming), which means even more attempts per minute.
To keep this at the same power level it was at before ... they would need the same basic combinations of things to be possible. There does need to be a cost of some sort ... I think ... technically they could make it a free action. I would assume if it was free they would need to lessen. the output of it.
Reaction seems to make a lot of sense. It accomplishes a lot of the same things and doesn't need special rules.
Redo the class and bring a la carte back !!
Wait are the smite slots getting replaced with spell slots?
But even if the smite itself is counterspelled, you still have the weapon damage itself which can’t be. So while you *can* counterspell Divine Smite, it isn’t exactly a great idea to do so.
Great changes. They feel amazing and fair in playtest.
Okay warlock lol
@@BlankCanvas-hp4bf I am actually playing a warlock right now lol
But I also play a paladin. Smite on a bonus action feels natural, and the free one is very nice to have. I've played a pally in 5e to 20 before, and this feels a lot more fair compared to other classes.
Oof
BOOO, Barbarian-Paladin multiclass now RUINED, by the change to SMite its a Paladin thing dont make it a spell
✨🧿✨
I understand that they want Smite be a once per orphans thing. But putting it onto a bonusaction and making it a spell is a big L…. Now you lost a bonusaction because you doing your smites and it can now be Counterspelled…
Booooooooo
Dislike
You should change it to Smite of the Clintons. Since you guys made a paladin that looks like Hilary Clinton.
Who is still complaining about smite? I don't think nerfed the class as bad as people are reacting
Prove me wrong?
The main issue is it takes a bonus action. You can still make it a one per turn thing and it will be but if it takes a bonus action it messes with a lot of builds and other bonus action stuff
It isn't much of a nerf to paladins.
It's a nerf to weird multiclassers.
They made smite a spell. Which means one of the main class feature of the paladin can just be counterspelled. And since they can only do it once per turn, they don’t even get another shot. And now that they’ve cast divine smite, they’ve used their bonus action, which means they can’t lay on hands or use any other fun spell they might wanna do. Now they just have their extra attack (if they’re even past 5th level) to make another basic attack. This just feels BAD. And now divine smite can’t be stacked with other smites for more damage and other cool effects. It’s not like Paladins are gonna be trash, but this nerf to their most iconic feature just seems unnecessary. Like if the goal was not to have a dominant combatant on the battlefield that blows all of their spell slots on divine smites and just nukes whatever monster you put in front of them, that should be on the DMs of the world to run more than one encounter a day 😂 the class doesn’t need to get nerfed for paladins to feel balanced. If anything they just had to make smite once per turn (which still is unnecessary but I digress), and not turned it into a spell. That way you can’t just dump everything into both of your attacks, and you still have your bonus action free to do whatever you feel like
@@Shadowrendx
A) You are assuming Counterspell isn't different in the new PHB. But even if it isn't, is rather my paladin be counterspelled than my wizard. It's time to act like he's part of a team.
B) Lay on Hands didn't synergize before with this because it was an Action. So this isn't a nerf to that interaction. Lay On Hands was simply buffed, but still can't be done at the same time as a smite.
C) Stacking smites? I'd rather be able to use the correct smite when I need it, personally. But I'll grant that's a nerf:)
@@broomemike1 the only real point that I’m trying to make is that the nerf to smite was just completely unnecessary, at least to the level that they did it. And now that it’s nerfed, it starts to conflict with the other cool things they’ve tweaked and added, like lay on hands being a bonus action for example. It’s almost like trying to use what should be a core feature, is now stepping on your own toes and preventing you from doing your cool thing. That would be like saying a fighter can use action surge, but now they can’t use all of their attacks with it. That would be silly and unnecessary. I think overall there were some nice things that they did, but what the did to smite just seems weird to me