It's identity is nerfed. It no longer gets additional damage against fiends and undead as well as they can't stack smites and like you pointed out the spell versions are better than the basic divine smite. Cleric can use those spells better than the paladin cause they get better spell progression. It's no longer a holy warrior. It's simply a magical warrior
That’s a really good point. Because they now fall into the “divine spell” list I guess clerics can smite. Even abjure foes seems like it’s trying to be a generic “turn undead”. While I think it might motivate some cool unique characters, you might be right in the fact of if you want to play a “traditional” Paladin but might be better off going with cleric.
@@encountersmith I mean even with things as small as removing the extra damage for fighting fiends or undead. It was only 1 die of damage more (2 if you crit) but that's one of the things that cemented it in the idea that it's a holy warrior instead of simply a magical warrior. They could have done interesting things having different subclasses possibly change the creature types to add more flavor into the subclasses. With the versatility of ranged smites, cantrips, opened up spell list, no extra damage against specific creature types, and only the aura mechanic being left that gives it any real identity. If it weren't for the aura mechanic I would say it more fits a red mage from FF that has healing abilities then a paladin. As is this doesn't feel like a paladin
I’ve always at my table allowed throwing weapons to smite but all ranged weapons is absurd. Like smiting with a javelin I think that’s cool. Smiting with a heavy crossbow is ridiculous.
I like the idea of an order of holy archers but I think it would have been more neat to have ranged smites as a subclass rather than an ability all paladins get. I never thought they NEEDED ranged smites
@encountersmith I second this. However the player wants to live their paladin fantasy is fine with me. A DM has literal infinite tools at their disposal to counteract it enough to keep it balanced if it ends up being too strong.
Yeah all the people mad at Paladin "nerfs" are crazy. Every game I've played a Paladin felt like easy mode. Like you're telling me I get to be a tank, healer, utility caster, AND one of if not THE best damage dealer in my party- PLUS I'm super duper good at fighting every DM's two favorite recurring encounters (undead and fiends)? Imo they didn't nerf them enough if they were really trying to cement Paladins as support tanks, like they mentioned in several 2024 texts. You simply don't need all that damage packed into such a character.
Abjure Foes needs a fix, because as it is written, it is the one thing making this video's title correct imo. Ranged smites are up there too, but really, I don't think Paladins should get to use a ranged smite at all.
Silence or counterspell will make your paladin a brick, or an enemy as Rakasha a fiend who is immune to spells under the 5th lv. They burned paladins while they made other classes more powerful, so it will be the new ranger, it is there but no ones play, the eldritch knight will have more paladin flavor than paladin.
I get there are new threats to paladins but you could say that for just about any other spell caster. If your paladin is only facing counterspells and rakashas then the class isn't the reason that player might be feeling underpowered
I played a paladin for the first time about 3-4 years ago, the DM was nice but bad at her craft. She would only, EVER, give us one combat per day! For me, as a paladin, that meant I was smiting the crap out of everything! Why not? But is that the fault of the paladin class and divine smite? Or was that the fault of a DM who needed to put multiple encounters into the same day? With one fight, I smite everything. When the paladin is tapped out for the second fight, they maybe start learning to conserve some spell slots.
Disagree with your analysis. If they wanted to limit Divine Smite to once a turn, then they should have just made it like Sneak Attack. By having Divine Smite now be a spell that costs them their bonus action, it limits their action economy. Polearm Master? Not for paladins, anymore! Two weapon fighting? Great, in One DnD, paladins can get the full range of fighting styles, including two weapon fighting...only both the off-hand attack and your Divine Smite are a bonus action! So no two weapon fighting! Virtually, anything that you might want to use your bonus action for, will now compete with divine smite. Instead of giving a paladin more options, they now have fewer. WotC clearly wants all paladins to be boring sword and board paladins, all others need not apply. Paladins are also not the most powerful class in 5e. Paladins had an incredible nova round potential, but as you noted, it meant they were done for the day. Wizards and sorcerers are way more powerful in 5e as are most full casters. Where paladins got super powerful was MC with sorcerer, warlock or bard. Paladins after level 6 are solid and good, but a 6 paladin/14 sorcerer was more powerful and a 20 paladin.
Onednd paladins don't get access to the tasha's optional feature. This video is stupid, I'm not even going to bother watching the rest. Thank god my 5e group jumped ship to p2e.
![[LIVE] นาทีนี้ต้องพี่ทนาย | ทนายแก้ว vs ทนายไพศาล | #คุยให้เด็กมันฟัง EP.47 (02/11/67)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HmquaO-PL_M/mqdefault.jpg)
It's identity is nerfed. It no longer gets additional damage against fiends and undead as well as they can't stack smites and like you pointed out the spell versions are better than the basic divine smite. Cleric can use those spells better than the paladin cause they get better spell progression. It's no longer a holy warrior. It's simply a magical warrior
That’s a really good point. Because they now fall into the “divine spell” list I guess clerics can smite. Even abjure foes seems like it’s trying to be a generic “turn undead”.
While I think it might motivate some cool unique characters, you might be right in the fact of if you want to play a “traditional” Paladin but might be better off going with cleric.
@@encountersmith I mean even with things as small as removing the extra damage for fighting fiends or undead. It was only 1 die of damage more (2 if you crit) but that's one of the things that cemented it in the idea that it's a holy warrior instead of simply a magical warrior. They could have done interesting things having different subclasses possibly change the creature types to add more flavor into the subclasses. With the versatility of ranged smites, cantrips, opened up spell list, no extra damage against specific creature types, and only the aura mechanic being left that gives it any real identity. If it weren't for the aura mechanic I would say it more fits a red mage from FF that has healing abilities then a paladin. As is this doesn't feel like a paladin
Another note:
Smites are blocked by silence now. ALL of them.
@@sev1120do smites have verbal components? I didnt think they did
@@TheWither129 they don't in 5e. They do in onednd
Idc about an Adventuring day, I want to play a paladin so that I can nuke some mfs😂
It really is part of their charm lol that’s why I at least hope we get more clarification on smite Crits. Nothing feels better than critical smites 😆
I’ve always at my table allowed throwing weapons to smite but all ranged weapons is absurd. Like smiting with a javelin I think that’s cool. Smiting with a heavy crossbow is ridiculous.
I like the idea of an order of holy archers but I think it would have been more neat to have ranged smites as a subclass rather than an ability all paladins get. I never thought they NEEDED ranged smites
@encountersmith I second this. However the player wants to live their paladin fantasy is fine with me. A DM has literal infinite tools at their disposal to counteract it enough to keep it balanced if it ends up being too strong.
Yeah all the people mad at Paladin "nerfs" are crazy. Every game I've played a Paladin felt like easy mode. Like you're telling me I get to be a tank, healer, utility caster, AND one of if not THE best damage dealer in my party- PLUS I'm super duper good at fighting every DM's two favorite recurring encounters (undead and fiends)? Imo they didn't nerf them enough if they were really trying to cement Paladins as support tanks, like they mentioned in several 2024 texts. You simply don't need all that damage packed into such a character.
Abjure Foes needs a fix, because as it is written, it is the one thing making this video's title correct imo. Ranged smites are up there too, but really, I don't think Paladins should get to use a ranged smite at all.
I kinda agree. I never felt the need for ranged smites. I think ranged smites would have been cool for a Paladin subclass. That’s just me though.
@@encountersmith exactly. It should be gated to a subclass
Silence or counterspell will make your paladin a brick, or an enemy as Rakasha a fiend who is immune to spells under the 5th lv. They burned paladins while they made other classes more powerful, so it will be the new ranger, it is there but no ones play, the eldritch knight will have more paladin flavor than paladin.
I get there are new threats to paladins but you could say that for just about any other spell caster. If your paladin is only facing counterspells and rakashas then the class isn't the reason that player might be feeling underpowered
Dude, ranger is the new ranger. Haven't you seen it? Their capstone ability is their hunters mark goes up to a d10 for christ's sake! 😂
I'd say they can crit. Its not very clear so it would be up to the DM.
Totally. Even if it said somewhere it can’t Crit I think most DMs would allow it cause rolling dice is fun 😆
I played a paladin for the first time about 3-4 years ago, the DM was nice but bad at her craft. She would only, EVER, give us one combat per day! For me, as a paladin, that meant I was smiting the crap out of everything! Why not? But is that the fault of the paladin class and divine smite? Or was that the fault of a DM who needed to put multiple encounters into the same day? With one fight, I smite everything. When the paladin is tapped out for the second fight, they maybe start learning to conserve some spell slots.
The new paladins are worthless and people say the monk is bad
I think they are powerful but not in a way that is fun. Using abjure foe and smithing at ranged sound useful but boring .
The problem is my playgroup takes a long rest after every combat so these new paladins lack damage in my playgroup
@@aaronrodriguez9376well there's your problem, use short rests ya dingus lol
Disagree with your analysis. If they wanted to limit Divine Smite to once a turn, then they should have just made it like Sneak Attack. By having Divine Smite now be a spell that costs them their bonus action, it limits their action economy. Polearm Master? Not for paladins, anymore! Two weapon fighting? Great, in One DnD, paladins can get the full range of fighting styles, including two weapon fighting...only both the off-hand attack and your Divine Smite are a bonus action! So no two weapon fighting! Virtually, anything that you might want to use your bonus action for, will now compete with divine smite.
Instead of giving a paladin more options, they now have fewer. WotC clearly wants all paladins to be boring sword and board paladins, all others need not apply. Paladins are also not the most powerful class in 5e. Paladins had an incredible nova round potential, but as you noted, it meant they were done for the day. Wizards and sorcerers are way more powerful in 5e as are most full casters. Where paladins got super powerful was MC with sorcerer, warlock or bard. Paladins after level 6 are solid and good, but a 6 paladin/14 sorcerer was more powerful and a 20 paladin.
Onednd paladins don't get access to the tasha's optional feature. This video is stupid, I'm not even going to bother watching the rest. Thank god my 5e group jumped ship to p2e.
Thats why I said if but that’s your prerogative to not finish it. P2e is great though you and your group should have a lot of fun with it!
But they do. They're saying to assume everything is compatible and only the things changed would be affected
@@tomraineofmagigor3499 that’s what I assumed as well but it’s early enough in the play test that anything is possible
I'm really curious to see how old subclasses are meant to work with onedns
They blatantly stated tashas and xanathars are made to be compatible with 2024 so this is just lying for the sake of being angry lol