Divine Champion of Bane?

[AstralUniverse]

Can we please get a bit of insight into the thought process behind opening this class to evil alignment from the team as well as opinions from you guys the players?

I'm also curious to know what sort of evil character concepts you'd use Champion rather than PDK or BG? This change just seems odd to me.

[Twohand]

Divine Champion/Champion of Torm being restricted to non-evil alignments was really only a Neverwinter Nights thing. This same restriction isn't present in Neverwinter Nights 2 and, afaik, pen and paper. I'm personally happy with this change.

[Wuthering]

I don't see a problem either. If nothing else it gives more playstyle options beyond BG and PDK (or in conjunction with them.)

I do wonder about Smite Evil though. Will evil Divine Champions retain Smite Evil or will that be changed to Smite Good? If it's changed to Smite Good will it stack with Blackguard levels?

[Hunter548]

Like got mentioned, Divine Champion in PnP isn't good-locked either. Evil deities can certainly have zealous mortal servants who serve them from pure faith.

It's also worth noting that BG and DC/Paladin don't really fill the same niche: BG mirrors paladins in a lot of ways, but thematically is not "evil divine knightly champion". You can play it that way, and you can be a BG and be one of those, but BG isn't inherently that. It's much closer to "melee warlock", in the sense that it's a black warrior who gets their powers from contact/service by fiends and undead.

[AstralUniverse]

Okay so it can pass as a BGish class that gets saves, feats and divine wrath instead of summons and doesnt have as much scaling with charisma. What about Smite Evil, actually? Will it be Smile Good if the character is evil when taking the first Champ lvl?

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

I'm for this change- it mirrors PnP, and it gives evil divine melee types a class that lets them fill feats. What I am curious about is whether or not the class will trigger Smite Good or Smite Evil for Evil champions, and whether or not Divine Champion levels will stack with BG levels for smiting purposes or if they're slotted for the acquisition of Smite Infidel (smite attacks against creatures with patron deities other than your own.)

I suspect we'll see a decent amount of Bard/Champion/Blackguard combos spring up, but I'm not opposed to that- it's actually one of my favorite PnP class combos for an evil character (especially using the Divine Bard class variant.)

Casts Commune with Devs

[Aniel]

It's much closer to "melee warlock", in the sense that it's a black warrior who gets their powers from contact/service by fiends and undead.

Personally I'm a bit skeptical of that one in the context of Arelith specifically at least. For instance, this is the class description: A blackguard epitomizes evil. They are nothing short of a mortal fiend, a black knight with the foulest sort of reputation. Many refer to blackguards as anti-paladins due to their completely evil nature. A blackguard is an evil villain of the first order, equivalent in power to the righteous paladin, but devoted to the powers of darkness.

And this is the feat Epic Blackguard: The epic blackguard is a twisted reflection of the epic paladin, the commander of legions of undead, the unholy lieutenant of evil gods, and a foul source of fear and mortal danger.

On Arelith specifically, blackguards are alignment restricted the same way as clerics. If they don't have a deity they don't receive their class features. Considering this and that all of their descriptions refer to them as an evil paladin or anti-paladin, I'd say that they fit the archetype of being an evil paladin.

[Nitro]

On Arelith specifically, blackguards are alignment restricted the same way as clerics. If they don't have a deity they don't receive their class features. Considering this and that all of their descriptions refer to them as an evil paladin or anti-paladin, I'd say that they fit the archetype of being an evil paladin.

Hunter was referring to the playstyle of a BG. They play much more similarly to a warlock (that's got melee instead of eldritch blasts) than they do a paladin, which is considerably more potent at melee combat than a BG is.

[Aniel]

Oh, I see. It's what I get for being up late and tiredly forum posting. I agree that the play style of paladin and blackguard is nothing alike. Woops.

[BHR55]

To my present knowledge the Smite Evil feat is hard coded, so it will still only work on Evil alignment. Assuming the team is happy with having this work as a generic "Smite" I would like to take a look at what can be done to make it work this way.

Divine Champion presently gets a number of bonus feats, and universal save bonuses. I could see it being paired with BG, or Assassin, among others. It just opens up options that should have been there given it was "Divine Champion" and not Champion of Torm here any longer.

[Opustus]

With the possible tweaking of the smite, could you consider the stacking of smite good with CoT levels as it does with smite evil with Pally levels? It would unlock some great smiter builds for team evil.

[Apothys]

Maybe smite should be changed to 'Smite Infidel' for all classes and ignore alignment all together?

[AstralUniverse]

With the possible tweaking of the smite, could you consider the stacking of smite good with CoT levels as it does with smite evil with Pally levels? It would unlock some great smiter builds for team evil.

It is already the case with smite good. Stacks with CoT lvls. It is my humble opinion that it should work the same for smite good now that a multiclass with BG is possible.

Maybe smite should be changed to 'Smite Infidel' for all classes and ignore alignment all together?

Smite is a holy action against an opposing alignment, to reflect the conflict and hatred between the good and evil gods. Now if you've removed the alignment aspect of it... what are you 'smiting' exactly...

[Eira]

Would it be possible to make smite good or smite evil a selectable feat? And then give DC a bonus feat that could only be used for one of them.

[Apothys]

Smite is a holy action against an opposing alignment, to reflect the conflict and hatred between the good and evil gods. Now if you've removed the alignment aspect of it... what are you 'smiting' exactly...

Those that requite smiting in the name of your god. It would also stop the meta of people choosing neutral alignments specifically to make themselves smite proof. In later editions of D&D this is what the ability became, to me it seems logical. Why only good or evil aligned can be affected by this? Surely an enemy of the faith is an enemy worthy of smiting regardless of alignment?

NWN2 changed the ability to reflect that any alignment not the same as your own when smiting was vulnerable to the effect.

[Nitro]

Not even later editions, divine champion in 3.5 gets smite infidel:

Smite Infidel (Su): Once per day, a divine champion may attempt to smite a creature with a different patron deity (or no patron deity at all) with one normal melee attack. She adds her Charisma bonus to the attack and roll and deals 1 extra point of damage per divine champion level. If the divine champion accidentally smites someone of the same patron, the smite has no effect but is still used up for that day. If the divine champion is also a paladin, she may use smite evil and this ability separately or combine them into a single strike if the target is evil and of a different faith.

[JustMonika]

Scipting something to trigger of someone's chosen diety sounds like a lot of work for something only be used in PvP sometimes.

[Hinty]

Personally, I am not against just letting Smite just work on all targets.
Sure, thematically it is a bit silly, but its not like they can spam it. It is an ability that they can use very infrequently.

[MissEvelyn]

NWN2's type of smite would be great.
It's one of the only things that game did well.

[Wuthering]

Though if you think about it "Evil" is just as likely to have a different form of "Evil" as their sworn enemy as they are to have "Good". LG would rarely go as far as to smite CG (smack around a little, maybe, but not smite) but divine champions of LE and CE would certainly smite each other.

[Opustus]

With the possible tweaking of the smite, could you consider the stacking of smite good with CoT levels as it does with smite evil with Pally levels? It would unlock some great smiter builds for team evil.

It is already the case with smite good. Stacks with CoT lvls. It is my humble opinion that it should work the same for smite good now that a multiclass with BG is possible.

Oh really? That's great then. Couldn't find any mention from nwnwiki, which usually means something doesn't exist as a feature.

[Kuma]

i rather enjoy the idea of evil smiting evil, it makes me think of hyperzealous inquisitorial types, which could be a good angle for them

[AstralUniverse]

Smite is a holy action against an opposing alignment, to reflect the conflict and hatred between the good and evil gods. Now if you've removed the alignment aspect of it... what are you 'smiting' exactly...

Those that requite smiting in the name of your god. It would also stop the meta of people choosing neutral alignments specifically to make themselves smite proof. In later editions of D&D this is what the ability became, to me it seems logical. Why only good or evil aligned can be affected by this? Surely an enemy of the faith is an enemy worthy of smiting regardless of alignment?

NWN2 changed the ability to reflect that any alignment not the same as your own when smiting was vulnerable to the effect.

If people RP their alignment as best as they can, and their neutral character is actually neutral in game - there's no reason your zealot should be able to smite them, as they arent extremists to any direction. However, if you're suggesting something like faith-opposites kind of factor (for example a Sharren can smite a Selunite and vice versa, regardless of alignment) then it's a different conversation and should receive it's own feedback thread at some point.

Also, I dont have much experience with any edition past 3.5 so I dont know. Maybe there's a lot of logic in some of those changes but remember it's also essentially a different game with a lot of different math so you can only go so far with implementing that logic here and do it carefully *cough* weave masters.

[Apothys]

Just makes more sense mate. You channel the holy energy of your smite at your target regardless of alignment, you choose based on your RP who is an enemy of the faith and who isnt and smite them accordingly. But that is my take on it. Having said that im happy either way.

[SugarFiend]

It has never made sense that a Champion of Bane couldn't smite a follower of Cyric simply because the follower is evil. He is still a Cyricist.

With this class being opened, smite should follow. It makes sense.