Bladesinger Fix?

[SirAxealot]

I love the Bladesinger in terms of the fluff, it was one of my favorite (once slightly fixed) classes from 3.5 in terms of mechanics as well. Problem is, it seems pretty bad in 4E. I know some people say the Swordmage occupies it's niche, but I would like to see it stand on its own feet.

Has anyone made a fix that works well?

[Yakk]

Here is something I threw together in 20 minutes earlier:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?311235-Bladesinger
Oh, and a revision:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16646649&postcount=4

[Kurald Galain]

Another option that works is a warlock focusing on the Eldritch Strike power (using off-action attacks for its encounter powers as much as possible, plus White Lotus Riposte).

[Zaq]

Scrap the Bladesinger as a class. Staple Bladespells onto the Hexblade, rejiggered to whatever stat you find appropriate. (Whether or not you keep the Hexblade's existing bonus damage mechanic depends on the power level you're going for; it won't break anything in a high-op group to keep it as written, but a low-op group will notice.)

[vasharanpaladin]

Scrap the Bladesinger as a class. Staple Bladespells onto the Hexblade, rejiggered to whatever stat you find appropriate. (Whether or not you keep the Hexblade's existing bonus damage mechanic depends on the power level you're going for; it won't break anything in a high-op group to keep it as written, but a low-op group will notice.)

This, except scrap bladespells as well because they're no substitute for having an Arcane at-will and the "bladesinger" you're looking for is in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide.

[Nightgaun7]

This, except scrap bladespells as well because they're no substitute for having an Arcane at-will and the "bladesinger" you're looking for is in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide.

Other people want to do something different than you, we get it. Bladespells aren't great, we get it.

You could maybe make the Bladesinger a version of the Swordmage, dropping the Aegis and Sword Bond for Bladespells and Bladesong, but you could just as easily make a new class or base it on the Bard or something, and some people might enjoy homebrewing instead of playing another class that sort of fits if you squint.

[Tegu8788]

That has some promise. Why not 'brew a build of the Swordmage that acts how you want it to act. The Bladesinger was supposed to be a Controller, but it acts more like a Striker. Assaultmage would be a good place to start for Striker, Ensnaremage perhaps for Controller.

[georgie_leech]

. The Bladesinger was supposed to be a Controller, but it acts more like a Striker

That was the bit I never understood about the Bladesinger. What about a skilled warrior deftly weaving powerful magic with graceful sword strikes is supposed to make it a Controller? That's one of the most Striker-y bases you can get. It seems like they labeled it Controller because it gets Wizard powers (except less often); since it gets Controller powers, it must be a Controller. The Bladesinger probably would have worked a lot better if it was built as a Striker from the ground up, possibly having a Striker mechanic that encourages switching between Melee strikes and Ranged spells, possibly with powerful combination moves for Dailies.

[squiggit]

The quick and dirty is to just give it actual dailies and craft lots of bladesong wands.

[Kurald Galain]

That was the bit I never understood about the Bladesinger. What about a skilled warrior deftly weaving powerful magic with graceful sword strikes is supposed to make it a Controller? That's one of the most Striker-y bases you can get.

Perhaps the designer who worked on controllers most had been fired from or otherwise left WOTC? Because really, all controllers printed in the 4.4 books are laughably bad at their role (except the mage, who's mostly a copy/paste job from the wizard).

[Sol]

Perhaps the designer who worked on controllers most had been fired from or otherwise left WOTC? Because really, all controllers printed in the 4.4 books are laughably bad at their role (except the mage, who's mostly a copy/paste job from the wizard).

I think that's extremely likely. Rob Heinsoo, the lead designer of 4e, left to make 13th Age shortly before the release of the essentials line, and had nothing whatsoever to do with any of the "Heroes of" books. He was in charge of the Rules Compendium, and that was his last WoTC project.

[Zaq]

That was the bit I never understood about the Bladesinger. What about a skilled warrior deftly weaving powerful magic with graceful sword strikes is supposed to make it a Controller? That's one of the most Striker-y bases you can get. It seems like they labeled it Controller because it gets Wizard powers (except less often); since it gets Controller powers, it must be a Controller. The Bladesinger probably would have worked a lot better if it was built as a Striker from the ground up, possibly having a Striker mechanic that encourages switching between Melee strikes and Ranged spells, possibly with powerful combination moves for Dailies.

I can sorta-kinda see what they were going for. Imagine being able to tie up one target with your standard action attack (with your sword) and hinder a different target with your bladespell. If they fleshed that out and made it a whole class, that'd actually be pretty darn cool; you have one set of controlly effects that you have to be close-up to use, and one set of controlly effects that you can toss halfway across the map if you feel like it. Unfortunately, that's not what the class actually does, but if that is in fact what they had in mind before they hit deadline and had to print the unfinished stub that is the Bladesinger, it makes sense to me.

If one were to rebuild the class from the ground up (or at least with a severe enough overhaul that the original is barely recognizable in the product), I think that's what would make sense. Give them a set of good, solid melee and close burst attacks that actually have controlling effects (use the Predator Druid for inspiration, I think, and maybe even the Fighter, since they've got some darn cool control effects as well), both as at-wills and as encounters. Then also give them bladespells that they can use whenever they use one of their melee/close burst powers (class-lock it if you really feel like you need to), letting them have a minor but still noticeable controlling presence across the map from where they're actually fighting. (This is, to a certain degree, how the Shieldmage operates, but I'm thinking more than that.) In-class paragon paths might open up new bladespells, much like how in-class PPs for Runepriests open up new rune states. You might also let their dailies have a rider effect of "also, until the end of the encounter, you can use XYZ as a bladespell." Kinda like the Vestigelock, in a way; the daily power has an effect on its own, and then it opens up a new option for what you're already doing with your pact boon and with Eyes of the Vestige. And of course, give them feat support, make sure that their stats aren't totally idiotic, make them sturdy enough to actually withstand being in melee, make sure that they don't end up more striker than controller, and all that other good stuff that should go without saying.

THAT is how you'd make the Bladesinger a decent controller. They'd have a relatively unique niche, they'd actually get some control out of their class features and not just their powers (a surprising rarity, really), and they wouldn't be a stupid useless stub.

Honestly, the Monk is half a step (maybe a quarter of a step) in the right direction already; they tend to get cool melee or burst effects, and then they get a separate (but triggered) rider effect in the form of FoB that can, in the right build, be used to toss around some extra control—or, in the case that you're playing the Monk as a striker, some extra damage. (I've actually toyed with gimmicky but interesting Monk builds that are, in fact, controllers rather than strikers, but I never got around to actually playing them.) But if you use THAT as your baseline, I think you'd be on the right track to making an interesting controller, though I'd give them at least two if not three different Bladespells to play with, chosen from a decently sized list. (Perhaps that'd be where the "choose-your-own-class-feature" part would come in; you'd get one or two Bladespells from a general list, and then you'd get one more based on which class feature you chose.)

[Yakk]

To distinguish from a defender, a bladesinger should gain significant defensive buffs against the adjacent target they control as a rule, and nothing like marking.

So the adjacent target is discouraged from attacking the bladesinger, rather than encouraged.

Toss in that "oh, and a control effect on foes far away" and it might be a decent chassis.

[Nightgaun7]

To distinguish from a defender, a bladesinger should gain significant defensive buffs against the adjacent target they control as a rule, and nothing like marking.

So the adjacent target is discouraged from attacking the bladesinger, rather than encouraged.

Toss in that "oh, and a control effect on foes far away" and it might be a decent chassis.

I'll get to work on that as soon as I'm done figuring out how to turn the Avenger into a force to be feared :smalltongue:

[Zaq]

To distinguish from a defender, a bladesinger should gain significant defensive buffs against the adjacent target they control as a rule, and nothing like marking.

So the adjacent target is discouraged from attacking the bladesinger, rather than encouraged.

Toss in that "oh, and a control effect on foes far away" and it might be a decent chassis.

So something akin to Runic Artistry?