Disallowing Bladesinger; Thoughts?

[AmbientRaven]

Hi Folks,

With SCAG released, some players have been discussing their backups. One player has gotten very upset I have said I wont allow Bladesinger.

I explained the reason why is they straight up outclass almost everyclass.
We're 13th level at present, so the 14th level bonus is soon.

A Bladesinger does more damage than a great weapon fighter, has 30ac with haste, better dex saves, and is a full caster.

Is my decision unnecessarily harsh? The power level of the Bladesinger will make the group Ranger, Sorcerer, Monk and Barb pretty much redundant as they can outcombat and out tank them, whilst having full caster utility..

I have not allowed the Favored Soul for similar reasons, nor are the -5/+10 feats in my game.

Thoughts?

[Malifice]

A Bladesinger does more damage than a great weapon fighter, has 30ac with haste, better dex saves, and is a full caster.

Huh? Prove it.

[AmbientRaven]

Huh? Prove it.

GWF 20str vs Singer 20dex 20int (easy to do at 14th level)

Fighter: 6d6+15 = 21-51 with 20ac
Singer = 3d8+30 = 33-54 with 25 ac (30 with shield reaction)

A fighter can burn 3 of his 4 maneuver die to get to 3-24 more damage.

[Malifice]

GWF 20str vs Singer 20dex 20int (easy to do at 14th level)

Fighter: 6d6+15 = 21-51 with 20ac
Singer = 3d8+30 = 33-54 with 25 ac (30 with shield reaction)

A fighter can burn 3 of his 4 maneuver die to get to 3-24 more damage.

Youre using a dex based weapon (most likely a single rapier) with extra attack (or spamming a single greenflame blade or booming blade). Beats me where youre getting the +30 to damage from on the Wizard.

Thats awful simulation on the fighter. At 14th level:

Fighter spams shoving attack to knock the enemy prone (DC 17 resists) and deals 2d6+5+1d10 damage. Lets assume the enemy is now prone. Fighter then attacks two more times with GWM feat switched on (at advantage) for +10 per hit, and action surges for three more. He spams precise strike to ensure the attacks that miss, in fact hit (to counter the -5 from GWM), and he spams menacing attack to deal an extra 1d10 damage and force the creature to make a DC17 wis save or be frightened of him on the attacks that do hit.

Even with just 4/6 hits, he spams around 8d6+4d10+60 damage (re-rolling 1's and 2's), and youre now prone and frightened.

Mid level fighters routinely top 100 points of damage when action surging. Aint no way a Bladesinger is topping that.

As for AC, yeah, a mid level bladesinger can spam shield while bladesinging and with a Dex and Int of 20 and with Mage armor crack an AC of 28, while our full plate fighter is rocking an AC of around 18. Our Fighter also has double the hit points, and a likely much higher Con and d10 HD, and spams a further 1d10+14 per short rest.

Do you really want to go toe to toe with an action surging BM GWM spamming fighter 14 vs a Bladesinger 14 with a strength of 8 in melee combat?

[Mara]

SCAG also has tieflings with perma fly at level 1. It's not a crunch book it's a setting book.

IMHO: Bladesinger is not that good. 2 minutes per short rest you can do some decent sword slinging if you drop feats and dips into TWF, otherwise your a low int wizard. Playing bladeslinger as a fighter+ is a good way to suck.

I see bladesinger as a standard wizard that a big red dragon thinks they can just run up and eat. Then the wizard is like "You activated my trap card!" and rips the dragon to pieces. The fighter+ bladeslinger already used her songs on some mooks and dies to the dragon.

[Zman]

GWF 20str vs Singer 20dex 20int (easy to do at 14th level)

Fighter: 6d6+15 = 21-51 with 20ac
Singer = 3d8+30 = 33-54 with 25 ac (30 with shield reaction)

A fighter can burn 3 of his 4 maneuver die to get to 3-24 more damage.

Ok, so you start with a 16 Dex and 16 Int effectively after facials. It would take 4 ASIs to get to 20 in both Dec and Int. so, that assumption is wrong. Best you can do with 3 ASIs is 20/18.

Where is the Bladesinger getting d8 damage dice? No proficiency with Rapiers and long swords don't have Finesse, so you've got to go with Shortswords for dual wielding. No way to get Ability to offhand damage. Oh, and without Warcaster you can't cast shield as a reaction while Dualwielding.

Let's not talk about how at 14th level a Bladesinger has what 80HP and there are lots of attacks that don't care and auto damage.

Blade signing can only be used twice before resting, so 2x10 rounds. It isn't hard for either a couple of long combats or multiple short ones before a resting meaning they can't bladesing through all of it always.

[Malifice]

Theyre wizards that give up some cool stuff (Portent anyone?) to have a high AC and attack twice.

Its a nice fall back, but they aint broken by any stretch.

With a guaranteed cruddy Con, two rubbish saves (No Dex, Str or Con saves) for melee and half the HP of the fighter off the bat, they need a good AC to not suck.

They'll be burning spell slots (and reaction) on shield and that arcane ward thing they do like candy in melee, where they'll be able to do slightly better than they would just hanging back and slinging cantrips and using those slots for Wizard stuff.

[Hawkstar]

The bladesinger is not OP like you seem to think it is, even if you do let them use rapiers. Good AC for the duration, yes, but ****ty HP. They also can't match any other classes' damage.

[pwykersotz]

I suggest a soft-ban. Don't allow it for now, and clarify that the reason why is because they look utterly broken to you, but that you'll investigate them. Wait a few weeks, and this forum will have ripped them apart to tiny pieces and put them back together. Also, you can try to build a few yourself based on how you see your own games progressing and compare it to other characters. Then revisit the idea. But don't be afraid to ban what you don't understand or like, because it'll just frustrate you, and it's liable to come out in your DM'ing in relation to that character. But do keep trying to find a place for it if possible. Maybe in this case, the racial restriction will help.

[Mr.Moron]

Allow the content you want to play with, disallow the content you don't want to play with. The players who want to play with the same content as you win join your games, the ones that don't won't. You don't need to justify what you do/don't want in a game you're running, and you certainly don't need to get the approval of a CharOP forum that your "It's OP" thoughts are somehow "Fair".

If the class in question is a dealbreaker for the player in question the deal will be broken and they'll go look for game more suitable to them and their tastes. You'll both be better for it.

[Sigreid]

Nothing wrong with banning it. Personally I think it's a weaker option than most of the other wizard subclasses. Melee combat buff spells are still better applied to the full contact adventurers like barbarian, and burning up spell slots to mitigate damage to one wizard is still a lousy trade that should only be done as an act of desperation.

[Malifice]

Nothing wrong with banning it. Personally I think it's a weaker option than most of the other wizard subclasses. Melee combat buff spells are still better applied to the full contact adventurers like barbarian, and burning up spell slots to mitigate damage to one wizard is still a lousy trade that should only be done as an act of desperation.

Exactly. While youre trying to be a half assed fighter doing medium melee damage and burning spells on a super high AC and mitigating your lousy HP and saves, your Evoker buddy is fireballing everything to death, or your Diviner buddy is lobbing in a save or suck spell at the BBEG... and telling the BBEG what he got on his save.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

I have no idea how you make the bladesinger as doing more damage than the fighter, considering the only actual damage boosts they get are

Weapon proficiency at level 1 (fighters get better)
Extra attack at level 6 (fighters get one at level 5)
Int to damage at level 14 (nice, but it's very late game and isn't quite equal to more extra attacks, fighting styles, action boost, etc that a fighter gets)

Bladesingers are massively outdamaged by fighters in melee combat. Their primary advantages are defensive, and they're balanced out by low hp and missing out on the other subclasses goodies like portent, save proficiency, or illusory reality.

[lordshadowisle]

I've corrected the OP's math to the best of my ability.

His player's bladesinger is dual-wielding 2 1d6 finesse light weapons, and begins combat with haste. I've taken the liberty of correcting the stats to point buy 20 Dex / 18 Int.

DPR breakdown: Extra attacks + Haste bonus + BA attack = (1d6+5+4)*2 + (1d6+5+4) + (1d6+4) = 4d6+31 = 45 DPR.

There are a few candidate fighter builds for DPR, but note that OP has banned -5/+10 feats. This puts the fighter at a disadvantage, because at Lvl 14 fighter have 5 ASIs, but can feasibly only spend 2 on mainstat and 1 on damage feat.

GWF Greatsword: 3 attacks with greatsword = 3*(2*25/6 + 5) = 40 DPR.
GWF Polearm fighter: 3 attacks with polearm, 1 BA butt = 3*(63/10+5)+(3+5) = 41.9 DPR.
*** Extra 5d10 (5*6.3= 31.5) damage for superiority die, and action surge not included ***

While the bolded melee DPR seems troubling, action surge and superiority die ensure that the fighter still deals more damage over a standard battle. The bladesinger is also spending considerable resources if he wishes to haste in every fight.

[Malifice]

I have no idea how you make the bladesinger as doing more damage than the fighter, considering the only actual damage boosts they get are

Weapon proficiency at level 1 (fighters get better)
Extra attack at level 6 (fighters get one at level 5)
Int to damage at level 14 (nice, but it's very late game and isn't quite equal to more extra attacks, fighting styles, action boost, etc that a fighter gets)

Bladesingers are massively outdamaged by fighters in melee combat. Their primary advantages are defensive, and they're balanced out by low hp and missing out on the other subclasses goodies like portent, save proficiency, or illusory reality.

Yeah. They're wizards with a very high AC, better at will melee damage (and even thats debateable with the new melee cantrips) and decent concentration buff built in.

In exchange for the Wizard school goodies, thats not a good deal.

EK fighters get a better deal with the spells they get, many of which (haste, mirror image, shield) give them the melee punch that they lack from the other archetypes.

Aside from the concentration buff, Bladesingers get nothing that makes them better wizards.

[Zman]

I've corrected the OP's math to the best of my ability.

His player's bladesinger is dual-wielding 2 1d6 finesse light weapons, and begins combat with haste. I've taken the liberty of correcting the stats to point buy 20 Dex / 18 Int.

DPR breakdown: Extra attacks + Haste bonus + BA attack = (1d6+5+4)*2 + (1d6+5+4) + (1d6+4) = 4d6+31 = 45 DPR.

There are a few candidate fighter builds for DPR, but note that OP has banned -5/+10 feats. This puts the fighter at a disadvantage, because at Lvl 14 fighter have 5 ASIs, but can feasibly only spend 2 on mainstat and 1 on damage feat.

GWF Greatsword: 3 attacks with greatsword = 3*(2*25/6 + 5) = 40 DPR.
GWF Polearm fighter: 3 attacks with polearm, 1 BA butt = 3*(63/10+5)+(3+5) = 41.9 DPR.
*** Extra 5d10 (5*6.3= 31.5) damage for superiority die, and action surge not included ***

While the bolded melee DPR seems troubling, action surge and superiority die ensure that the fighter still deals more damage over a standard battle. The bladesinger is also spending considerable resources if he wishes to haste in every fight.

Don't forget under this scenario that there is no Shield to AC because of dual wield somatic restrictions as well.

[Malifice]

I've corrected the OP's math to the best of my ability.

His player's bladesinger is dual-wielding 2 1d6 finesse light weapons, and begins combat with haste. I've taken the liberty of correcting the stats to point buy 20 Dex / 18 Int.

Or he could have just hasted the party Paladin for much better returns.

He's not casting shield with this build either (no warcaster and hands full), and he doesnt get Dex to damage with the off hand either (no TWF fighting style as a wizard). And thats at 14th level.


While the bolded melee DPR seems troubling, action surge and superiority die ensure that the fighter still deals more damage over a standard battle. The bladesinger is also spending considerable resources if he wishes to haste in every fight.

The DPR is off, The class cant have TWF fighting style as a Wizard 14 and he cant have DW feat at 14th level and still be an Elf with those stats under the SPB.

He banned GWF? Wow. And they say fighters are crap in this edition, yet we take away one of their toys.

Agree re resources. Misty step (to escape ever present grapples), spamming shield (needs a free hand though) and blowing spell slots to counter the crappy HP (con is still what it was at 1st and d6 HD), crappy Con saves vs poison (happens a lot in melee), athletics checks when grabbed shoved or tripped etc.

I view the class as a 'High AC wizard with a slightly better at will damage that requires it to be in melee to use [where no sane wizard wants to be] and no extra wizard stuff like the school specialisations' and not a frontline melee combatant.

It looks good on paper, but It would play very differently indeed if you ran it like you would an EK.

[weaseldust]

I've corrected the OP's math to the best of my ability.

His player's bladesinger is dual-wielding 2 1d6 finesse light weapons, and begins combat with haste. I've taken the liberty of correcting the stats to point buy 20 Dex / 18 Int.

DPR breakdown: Extra attacks + Haste bonus + BA attack = (1d6+5+4)*2 + (1d6+5+4) + (1d6+4) = 4d6+31 = 45 DPR.

There are a few candidate fighter builds for DPR, but note that OP has banned -5/+10 feats. This puts the fighter at a disadvantage, because at Lvl 14 fighter have 5 ASIs, but can feasibly only spend 2 on mainstat and 1 on damage feat.

GWF Greatsword: 3 attacks with greatsword = 3*(2*25/6 + 5) = 40 DPR.
GWF Polearm fighter: 3 attacks with polearm, 1 BA butt = 3*(63/10+5)+(3+5) = 41.9 DPR.
*** Extra 5d10 (5*6.3= 31.5) damage for superiority die, and action surge not included ***

While the bolded melee DPR seems troubling, action surge and superiority die ensure that the fighter still deals more damage over a standard battle. The bladesinger is also spending considerable resources if he wishes to haste in every fight.

It's worth noting that it would be more efficient for the Bladesinger to cast Haste on another party member. I can imagine someone replying "that just shows that the Bladesinger is even more powerful than shown in these numbers", but the benefit from casting Haste on, say, the party Fighter is only partly a function of the Bladesinger's power and partly also (more so, even) a function of the Fighter's power. (I know this thread is all about personal DPR, but I think it's worth pointing out that a Wizard's spells are party property, and that part of the power of martial classes is that they are good targets for spells like Haste cast by others.)

[lordshadowisle]

He's not casting shield with this build either (no warcaster and hands full), and he doesnt get Dex to damage with the off hand either (no TWF fighting style as a wizard).

The DPR is off, The class cant have TWF fighting style as a Wizard 14 and he cant have DW feat at 14th level and still be an Elf with those stats under the SPB.

Read closely and check again. Neither the TWF style nor DW feat are used for the Wizard. The +4 is for the Song of Victory feature. The Haste attack receives full bonuses regardless of TWF. Weapons are light (1d6).

[eastmabl]

From the AC aspect, the Boards have explored the possible AC in the following thread: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?454005-Unless-I-m-Mistaken. I wouldn't be worried about the class being overpowered.

With that build, the bladesinger can get crazy AC, but you're a glass hammer. As I analyzed in the thread, to get that 31 AC by level 20, you're ignoring almost every other possible way that you can be harmed.

HP: You're going to be a 20th level character with 102 hp. You are a scratch away from getting Power Word Kill'd (no save!), not to mention general things that might kill you. You can mitigate damage by sacrificing spell slots, but that sucks the "I have spells!" power out of the build.

Saves: You'll have a great Dex and Int saving throw, but your Con and Wis saving throws are going to be +1 at 20th level. When DCs for spells and other abilities are around 18-19, you're looking at failing 90% of the time. For a spellcaster who might need to concentrate on spells like Haste while a cantrip deals 26 points of damage (poison spray - 4d12 at 17+), it basically means that you are going to lose a spell if you get harmed.

Shield: unlike a normal wizard, a bladesinger is martially inclined and may wish to use the reaction to make an Opportunity Attack. There is some opportunity cost her. Notably, this ability doesn't come online until 18th level, and until then, he must use a spell slot to get the +5 AC.

Bladesinging: You only get the Int bonus to AC while bladesinging. Since it's limited to two times per short rest, it's not an at-will AC boost. A DM who monitors for abuse of the short rest mechanic should limit

Conclusion: you can get a really high AC, but there are other ways to skin an elf than to meet/beat its AC. Bladesinger is something that looks amazing in theory. When you analyze it, the class has flaws that should be addressed which prevent a wizard from the 31 AC. Be open with your player that you will begin to include threats which target more than just his AC if he wants to play this build.

[Raxxius]

Ok, so you start with a 16 Dex and 16 Int effectively after facials. It would take 4 ASIs to get to 20 in both Dec and Int. so, that assumption is wrong. Best you can do with 3 ASIs is 20/18.

Where is the Bladesinger getting d8 damage dice? No proficiency with Rapiers and long swords don't have Finesse, so you've got to go with Shortswords for dual wielding. No way to get Ability to offhand damage. Oh, and without Warcaster you can't cast shield as a reaction while Dualwielding.

Let's not talk about how at 14th level a Bladesinger has what 80HP and there are lots of attacks that don't care and auto damage.

Blade signing can only be used twice before resting, so 2x10 rounds. It isn't hard for either a couple of long combats or multiple short ones before a resting meaning they can't bladesing through all of it always.

fairly certain bladesingers gain a weapon proficiency at level 2 in a single handed melee weapon of their choice.

[Kryx]

Theyre wizards that give up some cool stuff (Portent anyone?) to have a high AC and attack twice.
It's not just high AC. High AC would be 23, 24 at the appropriate levels (high levels), but it gets ridiculously high AC at early levels and then just blows up at high levels.

@Lordshadowisle: TWF isn't a good fighting style. It is not the best to base DPR off, though I forget the prof that the Bladesinger gets.




Conclusion: you can get a really high AC, but there are other ways to skin an elf than to meet/beat its AC. Bladesinger is something that looks amazing in theory. When you analyze it, the class has flaws that should be addressed which prevent a wizard from the 31 AC. Be open with your player that you will begin to include threats which target more than just his AC if he wants to play this build.
A GM can always design encounters around a specific character, but he shouldn't have to. Being basically immune to the most standard way of being damaged isn't balanced imo.

[DireSickFish]

As far as proficiency goes, you have to be an elf RAW which means you get Rapiers, Long-swords, and longbow right out of the gate. I suppose you could be a half-elf and not get a rapier but you still get to chose 1 martial weapon as a Blade Singer, which should be the rapier if you don't already have it.

I think the AC is a more problematic feature of the Blade-singer than DPR is going to be. It will take you a standard action to haste so for that round you get 0 DPR. In some games it is reasonable to assume you can bladesing every fight. A lot of GM's have a hard time enforcing resting rules or prefer fewer set piece fights to long slogs.

[JoeJ]

I've corrected the OP's math to the best of my ability.

His player's bladesinger is dual-wielding 2 1d6 finesse light weapons, and begins combat with haste. I've taken the liberty of correcting the stats to point buy 20 Dex / 18 Int.

DPR breakdown: Extra attacks + Haste bonus + BA attack = (1d6+5+4)*2 + (1d6+5+4) + (1d6+4) = 4d6+31 = 45 DPR.

There are a few candidate fighter builds for DPR, but note that OP has banned -5/+10 feats. This puts the fighter at a disadvantage, because at Lvl 14 fighter have 5 ASIs, but can feasibly only spend 2 on mainstat and 1 on damage feat.

GWF Greatsword: 3 attacks with greatsword = 3*(2*25/6 + 5) = 40 DPR.
GWF Polearm fighter: 3 attacks with polearm, 1 BA butt = 3*(63/10+5)+(3+5) = 41.9 DPR.
*** Extra 5d10 (5*6.3= 31.5) damage for superiority die, and action surge not included ***

While the bolded melee DPR seems troubling, action surge and superiority die ensure that the fighter still deals more damage over a standard battle. The bladesinger is also spending considerable resources if he wishes to haste in every fight.

If you're going to count Haste for the bladesinger then you need to count it for the fighter as well, since they're in the same party and would therefore have the same access to it.

[MaxWilson]

Saves: You'll have a great Dex and Int saving throw, but your Con and Wis saving throws are going to be +1 at 20th level. When DCs for spells and other abilities are around 18-19, you're looking at failing 90% of the time. For a spellcaster who might need to concentrate on spells like Haste while a cantrip deals 26 points of damage (poison spray - 4d12 at 17+), it basically means that you are going to lose a spell if you get harmed.

Great Dex and Int saves? Don't you mean Int and Wis? It's still a wizard.

[lordshadowisle]

@Lordshadowisle: TWF isn't a good fighting style. It is not the best to base DPR off, though I forget the prof that the Bladesinger gets.

I've not used TWF style for either the fighter or wizard DPR calculations. Did you mean GWF instead?


If you're going to count Haste for the bladesinger then you need to count it for the fighter as well, since they're in the same party and would therefore have the same access to it.

The wizard selfishly buffed himself to outdo the fighter :smallsmile:! But I suppose if the wizard really wanted to win the DPR contest, hasting the fighter is the correct decision... as the wizard will immediately lose concentration 'accidentally'.

Just to clarify matters for everyone, I'm not the OP, nor any player involved in his games. I'm just a fact-checker that's computing the DPR to see what the numbers say.

[eastmabl]

Great Dex and Int saves? Don't you mean Int and Wis? It's still a wizard.

Oh coffee - you're a harsh mistress when I haven't had you yet.

[Malifice]

It's not just high AC. High AC would be 23, 24 at the appropriate levels (high levels), but it gets ridiculously high AC at early levels and then just blows up at high levels.

Ok 11th level. How high can you make your AC with SPB as a straight bladesinger?

Dex 16 and Int 20 is the best you can do as an Elf at that level with SPB. No feats - all your ASI have gone into these stats. Mage armor already cast gives you AC 21 (26 with shield). 28 if you want to drop a Haste on yourself as well for a minute (takes an action to do). Being unable to act for a turn if haste dropped would suck badly as a bladesinger if that drops in melee by the way).

Youre at +7 to hit with your rapier, dealing 1d8+3 damage (youre likely spamming GFB every round + making a rapier attack via haste, so 4d8+6 damage plus some extra splash damage on a dude next to your target) so slightly under what a Warlock can do from range with EB, or around the same as what a Champion is pulling off.

You're also in melee, and with around 56 HP (Con 12), and a Con save of +1.

Why bother? At 11th level you're fighting things like CR 11 Rocs (2 attacks at +13 dealing 4d8+9 and DC 19 Con save or be grappled) or CR 11 Horned devils (3 attacks at +10, dealing 2d8+6 damage + DC17 Con save or suck), or CR11 Rhemoraz (1 x +11 bite attack dealing 6d10+7, and Con save DC 17 or be swallowed) all of whom hit you on around a 15ish, if they hit you will ruin your day by grappling you or poisoning you, dropping your haste (dropping your AC and rendering you locked out for a turn), and many of whom can drop you in one hit (god help you if the Rhemoraz lands a crit!).

Youre a melee liability next to the raging barbarian, smiting Paladin and the Battlemaster. Even the Swashbuckler who took magic initiate Sorcerer and buffed Dex is making 2 attacks at +9 dealing 6d6+3d8+5, and then just walking out of reach as a bonus action, and uncannily dodging anything that hits him and halving the damage.

A bog standard Evoker would have likely hasted the party Paladin instead of themselves (for quintuple the DPR returns that it has on a melee bladesinger, and half the chance of it dropping in melee), isnt wasting spell slots on shield and misty step every single round to stay alive in melee, and is safely blasting away from the rear ranks excluding party members for area effect DPR that would make a bladesinger blush.

[DracoKnight]

Where is the Bladesinger getting d8 damage dice? No proficiency with Rapiers and long swords don't have Finesse, so you've got to go with Shortswords for dual wielding. No way to get Ability to offhand damage. Oh, and without Warcaster you can't cast shield as a reaction while Dualwielding.

There's Greenflame Blade, Booming Blade, and the fact that they choose 1 melee weapon to be proficient in. Not longsword. They choose their weapon.

[Kryx]

I've not used TWF style for either the fighter or wizard DPR calculations. Did you mean GWF instead?
Ignore the fighting style word. I just mean Fighting with 2 light weapons. It's quite bad for all builds.

Though now that I have the book in front of me I'm not sure Bladesinger has a better DPR option. Likely Longsword + Cantrip.




Mage armor already cast gives you AC 21 (26 with shield). 28 if you want to drop a Haste on yourself as well for a minute (takes an action to do). Being unable to act for a turn if haste dropped would suck badly as a bladesinger if that drops in melee by the way).
Higher AC than the highest standard build (Plate + Shield). It's already a problem. Add on the ability to shield and it's more of a problem. The damage is likely not great, on that I agree. My only issue is with the off the scales AC.
If you're playing with +X magic items then this conversation changes, but the game assumes no magic items and many groups play without +X magic items.
The drawbacks don't matter when you break the math of the game. Especially 18+ where shield is permanent.

I could use the same drawback argument for every gish build - the same is true for a Valor Bard, but you don't see him crying about needing obscene AC. The same is true for bladelock or melee Sorcerers (Favored Soul). They have some mitigation tools, just like the Wizard has shield.

[Zman]

There's Greenflame Blade, Booming Blade, and the fact that they choose 1 melee weapon to be proficient in. Not longsword. They choose their weapon.

I had forgotten about getting to pick a MWP. I am well aware of the melee cantrips. I assumed because of the Triple (Dex+Int) damage boosts they were using TWF with Haste, otherwise the +30 didn't make sense to me.

Longsword was a reference to the Elven Proficiency as I had forgotten about their bonus one.

[DracoKnight]

Longsword was a reference to the Elven Proficiency as I had forgotten about their bonus one.

Ah. Okay, that makes sense. :smallsmile:

[JakOfAllTirades]

Bladesong ends "if you use two hands to make an attack with a weapon."

I'd recommend for the OP to rule that this applies to fighting with two weapons, not just using two-handed ones. That should lower the Bladesinger's DPR to something he considers reasonable, and he'll have one less point of AC as well.

And when I finally get around to running 5E, that's the way I'll rule it as well. Bladesinger = Duelist.

[Malifice]

Bladesong ends "if you use two hands to make an attack with a weapon."

I'd recommend for the OP to rule that this applies to fighting with two weapons, not just using two-handed ones. That should lower the Bladesinger's DPR to something he considers reasonable, and he'll have one less point of AC as well.

And when I finally get around to running 5E, that's the way I'll rule it as well. Bladesinger = Duelist.

Thats certainly my interpretation of that section.

Not that it matter to me anyway really. Fighting with 2 weapons as a bladesinger requires Warcaster (to spam shield while your hands are full) in addition to either DW or TWF style. Its not worth it in my books.

You have 5 feats over 20 levels as an Elf. All the high AC builds rely on Int 20 + Dex 20 + Shield spell (requires warcaster with hands full) + Dual weilder (for the additional +1 AC) which isnt possible with 5 ASI. You need 2 for each stat, and 2 more for the two feats.

Most likely end game AC is 28 (mage armor, spamming shield, Int 20 and Dex 20) for 2 x encounters per short rest. 30 if you want to waste your concentration slot and risk Haste. Many monsters are hitting at +14 odd by then anyways, and spamming DC 19ish Con saves or ripping off your face/ stunning you/ poisoning you/ restraining you, and you still have the same Con score you had at 1st (and d6 HD) so its kind of meh.

[MaxWilson]

Most likely end game AC is 28 (mage armor, spamming shield, Int 20 and Dex 20) for 2 x encounters per short rest. 30 if you want to waste your concentration slot and risk Haste. Many monsters are hitting at +14 odd by then anyways, and spamming DC 19ish Con saves or ripping off your face/ stunning you/ poisoning you/ restraining you, and you still have the same Con score you had at 1st (and d6 HD) so its kind of meh.

You can add an extra +3 AC (plus resistance to everything) if your friendly neighborhood Life Cleric will cast Shield of Faith and Warding Bond on you.

[Malifice]

You can add an extra +3 AC (plus resistance to everything) if your friendly neighborhood Life Cleric will cast Shield of Faith and Warding Bond on you.

So were wasting our own haste spell (and our concentration slot) and the Clerics (and his concetration slot) to buff a substandard fighter at 20h level? I suppose the bard is wasting his reaction every round to cutting words you as well to make you unhittable to the point the monsters ignore you and just... stop bothering and just kill everyone else.

OR we could Haste Shield of Faith the Paladin and send that fundamentalist nutter in to stab things, and the Wizard hangs back and rains AoE death on the creatures with magic.

Just a thought.

[Sigreid]

So were wasting our own haste spell (and our concentration slot) and the Clerics (and his concetration slot) to buff a substandard fighter at 20h level? I suppose the bard is wasting his reaction every round to cutting words you as well to make you unhittable to the point the monsters ignore you and just... stop bothering and just kill everyone else.

OR we could Haste Shield of Faith the Paladin and send that fundamentalist nutter in to stab things, and the Wizard hangs back and rains AoE death on the creatures with magic.

Just a thought.

This has always been the case with wizard out doing fighter in melee in 3.5. Sure the wizard could buff up and do as well or better than the fighter, but if you put those same buffs on the fighter you could just toss him in the room and hold the door closed laughing maniacally until the screaming stops.

[Malifice]

If you're playing with +X magic items then this conversation changes,

I'd hazard a guess most do. Certainly all AL games do.

[Tenmujiin]

I'm curious as to what makes the favored soul sorcerer OP? The way I see it you are just taking the worst full-caster option, adding some proficiencies and a good expansion to the spell list (which should have been on the original sub-classes anyway). Sure it's probably better than the two PHB options but since they are both garbage it's hardly a problem...

[JakOfAllTirades]

I'm curious as to what makes the favored soul sorcerer OP? The way I see it you are just taking the worst full-caster option, adding some proficiencies and a good expansion to the spell list (which should have been on the original sub-classes anyway). Sure it's probably better than the two PHB options but since they are both garbage it's hardly a problem...

"Some proficiencies" = Medium armor and shields.

At 6th level they get an extra attack.

So yes, they might be kinda OP depending on which domain you choose. Making a serious gish out of them is still difficult due to their d6 hit dice and lack of martial weapons, but that's not too hard to fix. Then they're awesome.

[MaxWilson]

So were wasting our own haste spell (and our concentration slot) and the Clerics (and his concetration slot) to buff a substandard fighter at 20h level? I suppose the bard is wasting his reaction every round to cutting words you as well to make you unhittable to the point the monsters ignore you and just... stop bothering and just kill everyone else.

OR we could Haste Shield of Faith the Paladin and send that fundamentalist nutter in to stab things, and the Wizard hangs back and rains AoE death on the creatures with magic.

Just a thought.

Your biases are showing. A single party probably isn't going to have a bladesinger and a cleric and a paladin, because the bladesinger is already filling the tank role so why would you have two? A paladin blowing all of his best spell slots on smiting can outdamage the bladesinger, because a bladesinger is mediocre at best at melee damage; but he'll take 3x as much damage from the Pit Fiend in the process in addition to spending all of his spells on smites. By the third fight of the day the paladin will really be hurting (out of smites, low on HP) but the bladesinger will still be fresh.

This is not an endorsement of the bladesinger strategy on my part--just pointing out for the sake of other readers that your answer has a strong bias towards offensive novas, which only work sometimes. All you're really doing is converting spells into HP damage, and the 18th level pure Paladin only has 288 HP worth of smiting in a whole day even if he uses it purely on undead and fiends, which isn't quite enough to kill a single Pit Fiend, let alone four of them, or three Mariliths and three Goristros, or whatever else turns up in your adventuring day. Smiting paladin can work but it's not particularly good after the first fight.

[ruy343]

To the Original Poster,

I recommend that you have a word with your player, explaining your reservations about the class, and that you haven't seen it in play yet. Then, allow them a chance to test it out for a few sessions, explaining that if the other players feel that they're being overshadowed by the class, that you'll ask the player to make a new character.

Many people on the boards here are saying that the bladesinger isn't broken, although it is quite good. The thing is, you and I don't really know what it's like to play one at this point and how it balances out with the rest of the team. Why not give it a try?

[Kryx]

I'd hazard a guess most do. Certainly all AL games do.
The default game doesn't have magic items. In 5e magic items are considered optional. Based on the forums there are many groups who do not use +X magic items - there are many posts about them. I agree that this portion of players isn't everyone.

If you're choosing to play with magic items and specifically +X magic items then a lot changes. Features like Unarmored Defense start to look awful, wielding a 2 handed weapon instead of a +3 shield starts to look awful, etc.
In these games where the AC math is bloated then Bladesinger looks fine. In games where the AC math is normal then the amount that a Bladesinger can achieve is not within the normal bounds.

[Naanomi]

In games with magic item access, spellsingers can find bracers to keep up with the bloat

Anyways if a full caster wants to spend their resources meleeing I'm not too worried about it, even with high(est) AC... Crits and save damage happen, and you can always do the mighty tank tactics option and walk past them to stab more vulnerable characters, grapple them (hard to cast shield with pinned arms) and so on

[TrollCapAmerica]

Im often amazed at the sheer ineptitude I see around so many communities for 5E. Thd bladesinger is adorable blowimg sll itd ASI to kinda sorta melee alright. This is almost as bad as dimwits I saw talking bladelocks as if they had infinite ASIs and totally didnt lose any effectiveness for thier gimmick

Its so cute when you blow potentially encounter ending spell slots tl up your own AC. I guess ill have to be content with my underpowered Paladin doing 60-80 or so damage a round with good HP AC and saves

[CNagy]

In games with magic item access, spellsingers can find bracers to keep up with the bloat

Anyways if a full caster wants to spend their resources meleeing I'm not too worried about it, even with high(est) AC... Crits and save damage happen, and you can always do the mighty tank tactics option and walk past them to stab more vulnerable characters, grapple them (hard to cast shield with pinned arms) and so on

Not as hard as you'd imagine. Unless you can grapple items into their hands, you aren't preventing them from casting spells with somatic and/or material components. You could be doing your best Zangief bear-hug and the wizard will just be lining up the burning hands he wants to use to take off your eyebrows. Not even pinning him will make much of a difference, except that the wizard will choose a nice Dex save spell for you instead, like Disintegrate.

[GraakosGraakos]

Im often amazed at the sheer ineptitude I see around so many communities for 5E. Thd bladesinger is adorable blowimg sll itd ASI to kinda sorta melee alright. This is almost as bad as dimwits I saw talking bladelocks as if they had infinite ASIs and totally didnt lose any effectiveness for thier gimmick

Its so cute when you blow potentially encounter ending spell slots tl up your own AC. I guess ill have to be content with my underpowered Paladin doing 60-80 or so damage a round with good HP AC and saves

Dude...

Dude. The amount of condescension is amazing. Seriously.

Maybe someone wants to make a pretty-boy elf that can have the flavor of swinging a sword with pretty elf magic. Maybe a dude wants to make a Tiefling with the witch king mace and walk around shooting fire and breakin' heads. Are they gimmicks? Who cares? They're still fun and you can play the game without going full 3.5 style 80 splat-books of "player choice" cheese on top. Talking about how much "better" your character is is absolutely irrelevant. As long as they're having fun with their character, does it matter if you swing for 60-80 dpr and they only hit 41.5?

Yes, you can make a super duper optimized dude and rp well. You can make a super optimized dude and have fun. And yes, optimization is a way some people have fun, before those arguments start. It's a totally vaild path for a character to take, since doing well is fun.

But comparing your toons to another person's is silly and ridiculous, and does nothing but make you look like a smug a-hole that wants to have the coolest Dad on the playground or the hottest Canadian girlfriend, seriously, you guys don't know her but she's like, so cool.

You can't make a character incorrectly, because at the end of the day, as long as you understand the rules and he's hitting the concept you wanted, he's your character. He's a reflection of something you thought was cool and how you wanted to put him into the game system.

[The Shadowdove]

I've never seen so many DMs that are afraid of non-homebrewed classes!

Allow it and be the DM who appropriately grants challenges corresponding to the groups' strengths/weaknesses.

Then there is no overpowered. Just well played.

[pwykersotz]

I've never seen so many DMs that are afraid of non-homebrewed classes!

Allow it and be the DM who appropriately grants challenges corresponding to the groups' strengths/weaknesses.

Then there is no overpowered. Just well played.

Everything about this is wrong.

It's not about being afraid, it's about what you are comfortable allowing in your game. If you don't like olives, are you afraid of them when you don't put them in your salad?

Official classes are still a matter of taste. There are hosts of reasons to not include them if you don't want to.

Granting challenges to vastly differently balanced characters takes a lot of work, and isn't necessarily worth it depending on the time you have to invest.

I'm not even sure how to reply to your claim that there is no such thing as overpowered. That is obviously wrong.

[CNagy]

Honestly, this incarnation of the Bladesinger is a sick, sad joke.

In 2e, the Bladesinger was a 1-elf army; basically an elven Paladin, champion of all things Elf. They had some serious stat requirements (13 Strength and Constitution, 15 Dexterity and Intelligence), required you to devote yourself to a single type of weapon (typically the longsword), and were generally a pain in the rear with no sense of humor for friendly jibes. They were required to be Fighter/Mages, and while multiclass Fighters did not get all of the same options single-classed Fighters got, being a Fighter/Mage meant that you were usually more Fighter than Mage (given the different rates of level advancement, you were usually a level or two ahead in Fighter.) They got bonuses to attack and damage, a huge defensive boost when casting (it was a big deal back then, as casting a spell spanned across other peoples' turns and getting hit wasted your entire effort), and they got bonuses to offset the penalties of special weapons maneuvers. A high-level Bladesinger would negate the Called Shot penalty (did I just give some of you flashbacks?) entirely, disarming opponents and attempting to literally remove arms with the same ease as a normal attack.

The gist of it was that if you insulted a Bladesinger, your rapid change in perspective usually came from having their very pretty blade take your head off rather than having them putting your head in a vice between the thumb and forefinger of Bigby's Crushing Hand.

3.5e basically neutered the Bladesinger. With the BAB and feat requirements, it almost guaranteed that you went into Bladesinger as a 5/1 Fighter/Wizard and came out the other end, 10 levels later--16th level--with an effective caster level of 6. Seriously? And don't get me started on that Races of Faerun version.

I don't know what they did to the 4e Bladesinger, I didn't play 4e. Based on the apparent pendulum of thought that is Bladesinger design, I'm imagining the shift in the swing to a more Wizardly and less Fighterly character. Someone who knows for certain can provide more details, but it's the only way I can understand how the Bladesinger has come to this...

A Wizard subclass. Yer a wizard, Haerinduil! Your martial prowess? Enhanced AC (admittedly nice, and in keeping with the concept over the years), a second attack with a 1-handed weapon whose ability modifier is either the stat you never touch or the stat you were just going leave at 16 or whatever you put it at creation. Eventually, you'll get to add Int modifier to damage. You're just martial enough to trick yourself into melee combat, where all of your precious resources will be drained just trying to stay alive. This is a very long, utterly tragic fall from being a 1-Elf army, Champion and Ambassador of all things Elf.

-----------

So here's my personal solution. Your adventuring Bladesinger is mostly something else. Mostly an Eldritch Knight, mostly an Arcane Trickster; rarely a Paladin (utterly MAD but maybe fun), a Ranger or Monk (slightly less MAD, more odd), or a Barbarian (Ragesinging? Elfcore!) Your academic Bladesinger went the whole Bladesinger 14 and then either kept going or spent the next 6 levels exploring a hobby (Lore Bard?). Your aristocratic Bladesinger is an elf wizard who has only ever fancied himself a duelist when fighting humanoids one on one. Put him in a party and suddenly he is acting in a decidedly unmartial fashion as the party Wizard.

[Hawkstar]

A Wizard subclass. Yer a wizard, Haerinduil! Your martial prowess? Enhanced AC (admittedly nice, and in keeping with the concept over the years), a second attack with a 1-handed weapon whose ability modifier is either the stat you never touch or the stat you were just going leave at 16 or whatever you put it at creation. Eventually, you'll get to add Int modifier to damage. You're just martial enough to trick yourself into melee combat, where all of your precious resources will be drained just trying to stay alive. This is a very long, utterly tragic fall from being a 1-Elf army, Champion and Ambassador of all things Elf.
You have the same attack bonus as any fighter, paladin, ranger, or Valor bard. You have excellent AC. Your attack is one of your two primary stats (You choose Bladesinger at level 1, so you're going into it at character creation instead of waiting afterward. If you think of it as "That stat you were just going to leave at 16/character creation", you're stupid stupid stupid and doing it wrong and need your character creation/assessment privileges revoked.). ... how does the multiattack work? Because it might also make you a damn good archer.

Eldritch knights are barely-magical jokes.

[CNagy]

You have the same attack bonus as any fighter, paladin, ranger, or Valor bard.
And a fragility that they all lack. And also, no, you don't have the same attack bonus. Not as a fighter and a ranger. A paladin and bard might be juggling their Cha and Str/Dex, but Fighter and Ranger don't have anything stopping them from getting to +5 early. The Bladesinger does; it's called "that stat his entire class usually runs on."


You have excellent AC. Your attack is one of your two primary stats (You choose Bladesinger at level 1, so you're going into it at character creation instead of waiting afterward.
Eventually, you have an excellent AC (defined as significantly better than all the other frontliners). Which is nice, because you are still fragile in a way that a front-liner shouldn't be, and using resources to try and mitigate that fact rather than flattening the enemy. Also, Bladesinging doesn't break the Wizard tradition rules; it starts at level 2. I don't even know why that matters to you one way or the other, but hey! Accuracy.


If you think of it as "That stat you were just going to leave at 16/character creation", you're stupid stupid stupid and doing it wrong and need your character creation/assessment privileges revoked.)
Oh, go administer an ogre's prostate exam. There is more D&D than levels 16-20, which is level range you're playing at when you've finally gotten enough ASIs to max your Dex and Int. For a good long part of a Wizard's life (11 levels, typically), you leave your Dex right where you put it an work on maxing your Int. Only now, at 2nd level suddenly you have this melee weapon that runs off of it. So you wanted War Caster? Get it at 4 or 8. You don't need max Int as early as you could get it. But that pushes back ever changing your Dex to 16th level and maxing it at 19th level. The "primary" stat that hasn't budged while you've been using it to swing your sword for 14 levels (or more accurately, got you killed 6 levels ago).


... how does the multiattack work? Because it might also make you a damn good archer.
It's Extra Attack. It doesn't make you a damn good archer. Feats and fighting styles (and optionally sneak attack) make you a damn fine archer, but you can't afford the former and you don't get the latter (or sneak attack for that matter.) You're just a dude firing a longbow twice for 1d8+[3-5]. Which would be awesome if you didn't have these things called spells that also sometimes work at long range and deal many longbows worth of damage.



Eldritch knights are barely-magical jokes.
And yet they become so much more magical with 4-8 levels of Bladesinger. And their Constitution saves aren't through the floor. And they have more hit points. And they get the better AC. And a fighting style. And they actually blend sword and spell like a Bladesinger is supposed to!

[Malifice]

In 5e magic items are considered optional.

In 5E, everything is considered optional.

Again, I dont have the raw data, but I hazard a guess magic items form part of around 95 percent of campaigns out there. Enough so that campaigns that dont feature them would be the exception rather than the rule (which is what your data is based on).


In these games where the AC math is bloated then Bladesinger looks fine. In games where the AC math is normal then the amount that a Bladesinger can achieve is not within the normal bounds.

Have you considered that its a feature of the game to have some classes be outliers from those bounds in a certain fixed area. For bladesingers thats AC. For a Paladin/ Monk that saving throws. For a Rogue, thats skills (double skill bonus, never rolls less than a 10 and can auto score a 20).

High AC is situationally useful , buit its usefullness is highly overrated in actual play, particularly on a Wizard who should be avoiding melee combat in the first place.

I wouldnt give up the portent ability on a diviner alone in exchange for an AC of 40 instead of 15. I honestly wouldnt.

There are six saves in addition to AC (and a million other ways to die) and failing one of them (at high level) or getting just the one natural 20 on an attack roll against you, on a D6HD Con 12 chassis with no more than around 100 HP at 20th level, just kinda... kills you. I dare say most of the time, a high level bladesinger will be using his class feature (and reaction) to absorb damage from hits, rather than spam shield anyway, and his Haste spell is almost certainly better used on the party heavy hitter.

[MaxWilson]

Im often amazed at the sheer ineptitude I see around so many communities for 5E. Thd bladesinger is adorable blowimg sll itd ASI to kinda sorta melee alright. This is almost as bad as dimwits I saw talking bladelocks as if they had infinite ASIs and totally didnt lose any effectiveness for thier gimmick

Its so cute when you blow potentially encounter ending spell slots tl up your own AC. I guess ill have to be content with my underpowered Paladin doing 60-80 or so damage a round with good HP AC and saves

You had me nodding in agreement right up until you mentioned the Paladin, who judging from your damage numbers is either fighting AC 8 zombies with GWM and Polearm Master, or is blowing valuable spell slots to Smite.

With a decent AC, the 18 points of damage (4d8 radiant) that you get from smiting with a 3rd level spell slot is less valuable than the 70 HP of healing you could be regaining with that same spell slot after the combat is over. Smiting is usually a bad deal unless things have gone truly pear shaped and it's imperative to kill something nownownow, e.g. to finish off Orcus before the lucky Hold Monster spell wears off and he Time Stops himself away. (In that case, smite away.)


I wouldnt give up the portent ability on a diviner alone in exchange for an AC of 40 instead of 15. I honestly wouldnt.

I would, if the DM were insane enough to offer. AC is a good 50% of the threats in the game, and if you can negate that 50% almost entirely with a single two-level dip, why wouldn't you? Paladin 6/Uberdiviner 2, here I come!

[Malifice]

I would, if the DM were insane enough to offer. AC is a good 50% of the threats in the game, and if you can negate that 50% almost entirely with a single two-level dip, why wouldn't you? Paladin 6/Uberdiviner 2, here I come!

Have you seen Portent in play? You choose if your enemy fails his saving throw a few times per long rest.

You can have all the AC you want. I first select your initative result (ensuring I win) and then I select your save result (meaning you lose). No AC in the world stops that.

You highly overrate AC. Particularly on a Wizard who shouldnt be getting attacked that often in the first place.

Your job as the Wizard is to 'big boom' a challenging encounter to make it much easier for others to mop up, or to SoS a hard to kill BBEG out of existence (again making the encoutner easier to end), and to provide magical support to make other non combat encounters trivial or much easier (comp languages, knock, teleport, rope trick etc) a limited number of times per day.

Taking this archetype makes you less capable in that role (both in a 'hard' manner in that you have less class features to work towards smashing encounters, and in a 'soft' way in that to have your high AC and to be in melee requires the expenditure of actions, reactions and resources in spell slots when you should be expending those resources and actions in blowing things to kingdom come) in exchance for better at will [melee based] DPR, and a high AC.

I see the main role for Bladesinger is on a DEX and INT based elven EK for a 2 level dip. Then its very nice.

[MaxWilson]

Have you seen Portent in play? You choose if your enemy fails his saving throw a few times per long rest.

You can have all the AC you want. I first select your initative result (ensuring I win) and then I select your save result (meaning you lose). No AC in the world stops that.

But Legendary Resistance does. And Portent doesn't help against hordes either, so that leaves Portent as solidly middle-of-the-line, useful against mid-CR creatures like Slaads and Mind Flayer Arcanists. I've seen Portent in play a few times and it's not anything like what you're saying here. It's not bad by any means, but even if you happen to roll a pair of natural 1s for your Portent today (unlikely to say the least) it's still not a game-changer in and of itself. It's good, but AC 40 would obviously be better, especially as a dip for a tank like the aforementioned Paladin 6/Uberdiviner 2. You can't seriously dispute this.

[Coidzor]

You don't need to justify what you do/don't want in a game you're running, and you certainly don't need to get the approval of a CharOP forum that your "It's OP" thoughts are somehow "Fair".

Unless you have an established relationship with your group and aren't just lording it over randos or something similarly outlandish, of course. :smalltongue:

[Malifice]

But Legendary Resistance does. And Portent doesn't help against hordes either, so that leaves Portent as solidly middle-of-the-line, useful against mid-CR creatures like Slaads and Mind Flayer Arcanists.

End enemy mages, archmages, etc etc. Its an absolute game changer when used right.

Also; just the fear of the DM knowing you have it means he will save his legendary resistances to defeat it. Meaning your BM fighter is tripping the monster at will, your Monk is stunning it, etc etc


I've seen Portent in play a few times and it's anything like what you're saying here. It's not bad by any means, but even if you happen to roll a pair of natural 1s for your Portent today (unlikely to say the least) it's still not a game-changer in and of itself.

Dude; giving a BBEG an initiative score of 1, allowing your party to spam 4-5 x full attack actions on it?

Its a 1-3 times per day death sentence for a monster with no save.

Its also a 1-3 times per day almost guaranteed success on your own saves (add in the lucky feat for the win).


t's good, but AC 40 would obviously be better, especially as a dip for a tank like the aforementioned Paladin 6/Uberdiviner 2. You can't seriously dispute this.

Were not talking about an 8th level character. Were talking about devoting 20 levels of a class into spamming a high AC over a crappy HD/HP medium melee DPR via bladesinger v simply being a diviner 20 and focussing on winning.

[Mrglee]

You can disallow whatever you want. However, Bladesigners are pretty much one trick ponies when compared to other wizards, and you shouldn't worry about them out preforming other melee combatants. They will not reach the same level of damage, fall over if they get hit or fail a saving throw, and their best features are still there spells. They are good, but like most of the wizard subclasses, a lot of the power is in the class itself, the subclass just gives a few more options in one direction or another.

[djreynolds]

I think this archetype will prove to be very fun to play for casters who get bored playing the atypical caster. Its nice to have some extra defense to fall back on that doesn't compete for concentration, such as haste and stoneskin do with each other. I could definitely see myself casting mirror image all day and stop flankers.

And since this caster can wear light armor and bladesing, RAW, there will be an elfin chain shirt floating around and that's just fine.

I'm glad they came up with the green flame blade cantrip, cause otherwise his 1d8 rapier would be competing with casting of cantrips instead.

But disallow, no. Might be a good multiclass for arcane tricksters though to get that extra attack and be the expert in arcana as well.

[OracleofWuffing]

I don't know what they did to the 4e Bladesinger, I didn't play 4e. Based on the apparent pendulum of thought that is Bladesinger design, I'm imagining the shift in the swing to a more Wizardly and less Fighterly character. Someone who knows for certain can provide more details, but it's the only way I can understand how the Bladesinger has come to this...
Eeeeh... Bladesingers in 4e are generally grouped with the lower end of effectiveness, and the typical advice from a numbers point of view is to avoid the fact that it is a Wizard subclass that says it's a Controller, and focus on Melee Attacks to kill things in the brief time you have bonuses to attack, defense, and damage each encounter. And that wasn't an exceptional strategy, but more of making the best of the situation. This old thread goes into a bit more detail if you want (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?311235-Bladesinger).

[georgie_leech]

Eeeeh... Bladesingers in 4e are generally grouped with the lower end of effectiveness, and the typical advice from a numbers point of view is to avoid the fact that it is a Wizard subclass that says it's a Controller, and focus on Melee Attacks to kill things in the brief time you have bonuses to attack, defense, and damage each encounter. And that wasn't an exceptional strategy, but more of making the best of the situation. This old thread goes into a bit more detail if you want (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?311235-Bladesinger).

To make a quick 5e comparison, imagine a Bladelock that functioned off INT instead of CHA, and recharged on a Long Rest instead of Short.

[Mara]

To make a quick 5e comparison, imagine a Bladelock that functioned off INT instead of CHA, and recharged on a Long Rest instead of Short.Oh yes, I can picture the thread now:

"Bladesinger is just fine they get true polymorph and eldritch blast!"

*begin tangent on true polymorph*

*insert SA quote that the real intension was something no one could have ever assumed from reading the text*

*Someone that liked 4e complaining how martials are bland and uninteresting and how the bladesinger is better than them because of magic*

Then 15 pages of semantic arguments.

[ad_hoc]

My initial response to the balancing of the Bladesinger is that it is fine if you use point buy. It is a MAD subclass where you need to sacrifice other things in order to make it work.

My feeling with 5e in general is that if you have stats higher than point buy, then balance breaks down in general. If you use feats, they become overpowered. MAD classes become much better. Etc.

I think the solution is to lower starting stats and have ASIs become an important decision point.

[Kryx]

Have you considered that its a feature of the game to have some classes be outliers from those bounds in a certain fixed area. For bladesingers thats AC. For a Paladin/ Monk that saving throws. For a Rogue, thats skills (double skill bonus, never rolls less than a 10 and can auto score a 20).
Outliers in a bounded accuracy system create problems. There are many examples of gish classes that improve their AC, but none require breaking bounded accuracy.

As far as magic items: many groups play without +X magic items. It's likely many more than 5% based on the forums. Though even if most groups play with them the game hasn't been balani around them for other classes. And this class shouldn't be an exception to that.

[Mrglee]

I wouldnt give up the portent ability on a diviner alone in exchange for an AC of 40 instead of 15. I honestly wouldnt.

Oh, I would, in a heartbeat. Well, for bladesong as a whole anyhow. Like, Portent is solid, but I feel incredibly overrated. Meanwhile, bladesong gives three key features I feel make it a stronger ability. The AC has been discussed, but the +int to concentration, when stacked upon warcaster and the innate damage reduction, makes it the most consistent buffer in the game. And it is up way more than Portent is over the course of a day.
Like, not dropping haste on your key damage source because someone blasted you with dragon breath or you just got focused fired is still really good. I just feel if wizard archetypes are of power x, then the class as a whole is x^2 as it were, so cutting them out doesn't really do much.

[Mara]

Ac by level during bladesinging

2: 19

4: 20

8: 21

12: 22

16: 23

18: 28

Yawn

[Kryx]

Ac by level during bladesinging

2: 19

4: 20

8: 21

12: 22

16: 23

18: 28
Thanks for calculating the numbers!

[djreynolds]

Ac by level during bladesinging

2: 19

4: 20

8: 21

12: 22

16: 23

18: 28

Yawn

Can you help me out? Where are these numbers coming from? I thought it was int and dex, no shield, but light armor possible and perhaps haste.

[Mara]

Can you help me out? Where are these numbers coming from? I thought it was int and dex, no shield, but light armor possible and perhaps haste.
Mage armor, assumes elf with starting 16 dex, 16 int, and 14 con. (10 str, 10wis, 8 cha).

No haste is assumed since I believe the bladesinger is a wizard with a good backup thus is probably already concentrating on a spell.

Int increases first, then dex, then one ASI for con.

[Hawkstar]

You can disallow whatever you want. However, Bladesigners are pretty much one trick ponies when compared to other wizards, and you shouldn't worry about them out preforming other melee combatants. They will not reach the same level of damage, fall over if they get hit or fail a saving throw, and their best features are still there spells. They are good, but like most of the wizard subclasses, a lot of the power is in the class itself, the subclass just gives a few more options in one direction or another.

Ehh... they're certainly competitive with other melee combatants... at the cost of their ability to be a 'normal' wizard. Which is as it should be.

[MaxWilson]

Ac by level during bladesinging

2: 19

4: 20

8: 21

12: 22

16: 23

18: 28

Yawn

Hey.

Once you add in Blur/Mirror Image/Shield it's quite good, just like any other wizard gish. Deserves better than a yawn anyway. How about a nod of approval and an invitation to hunt treasure together?

A.C. 21 + Shield + Blur is exactly what a paladorc uses for tanking and frankly it's pretty incredibly. Bladesinger doesn't get the auras for saves, but has twice as many spell slots. It's really not yawn-worthy.

BTW now I want to see a Mounted Combatant Bladesinger on a Phantom Steed. It's been possible all along but between bladesinging and Booming Blade, now it can finally be beneficial.

[Mara]

You can gish for 2 minutes per short rest. If you try to make that your main thing you will fail. If it's just your backup to turn the tables, that works.

"Oh no Sir Bran the Strong and Fair has fallen! Who will slay the dragon now?"

Bladesinger draws finesse-able silver sword and polish folk music starts playing witcher 3 style.

Compare that to situation two where the bladesinger burns feats on warcaster and a fighter dip to pump dex but already used bladesinging to kill some downers and he is trying to replace the BSF.

[DireSickFish]

I think a big part of the problem is how good shield is. It is the best scaling level 1 spell as that +5 AC is always useful, creatures never stop making attacks. It's using a reaction which has very little to compete against it. The dualing feat requires a feat, only gives +3 AC, and is only useful against one attack instead of lasting the entire round. The only advantage it has is that it never runs out and doesn't use a spell slot but I really don't think that outweighs the disadvantages.

If we look at Mara's numbers without Shield (because you can basically slap a +5 onto them up until the level 18 one whenever you need to) the bladesinger is on the high end of bounded accuracy but still within it. 23 is hitable by all but the absolute worst to-hit bonuses.

An Eldrich Knight in fullplate with a shield and defense fighting style is rocking 21 AC, and he can shield often for 26 AC. He isn't quite reaching the same heights as Bladesinger but fullplate + shield + shield spell is high enough to be problematic for most groups. When you have Ac disparity of other people int he party having between 16-18 AC it really makes the high AC builds seem uninhabitable by comparison.

[Kryx]

I think a big part of the problem is how good shield is. It is the best scaling level 1 spell as that +5 AC is always useful, creatures never stop making attacks. It's using a reaction which has very little to compete against it. The dualing feat requires a feat, only gives +3 AC, and is only useful against one attack instead of lasting the entire round. The only advantage it has is that it never runs out and doesn't use a spell slot but I really don't think that outweighs the disadvantages.
What would you suggest? +3 AC?

[Mara]

Shield is not an issue until level 18 wizard's can spam it for free. But that is the point of the game where you start tangling with Gods and demon lords.

[DireSickFish]

What would you suggest? +3 AC?

I don't really know what would be the best number to knock it down to. Either having it be +3 OR having the +5 only work against 1 attack and not lasting the entire round would be my ideas, but I'd need to see it in play. That would make other reactions and spell of that level more competitive with it.


Shield is not an issue until level 18 wizard's can spam it for free. But that is the point of the game where you start tangling with Gods and demon lords.

From my experience it gets out of hand a lot earlier. At level 5 your cantrip is basically as good as a level 1 damage spell, or near enough to not want too waste the resources. So level 1 slots become utility or buff slots.

I don't think it's breaking the game to the same extent 3.5 could, but it is the best use of a 1st level spell slot most of the time. Which forces everyone to take it, which is kind of boring to have such limited options.

[Mara]

Mage armor is far more mandatory.

[Raxxius]

Mage armor is far more mandatory.

Not really, mithral chain shirt is in basic equipment, and is basically an undispellable mage armour.

[Mara]

Not really, mithral chain shirt is in basic equipment, and is basically an undispellable mage armour.

Chain shirt caps at 15 AC. Mage armor doesn't cap. At level one you have 16 AC and it increases at 12 and 16.

Mithral does not increase the max dex requirement. DMG 182

[Zman]

Not really, mithral chain shirt is in basic equipment, and is basically an undispellable mage armour.

And at what level do you happen to find Mithril Chain?? What about before that??

[DireSickFish]

Mage armor is far more mandatory.

Mage armor is useful, especially characters with high dex. So it's going to be of use for our bladesinger and wizard classic. There are a lot of ways around mage armor as long as you get medium or heavy armor proficiency. Dragon Sorcerers get built in mage armor so the spell is not useful for them. In theory you could end up in a game with magic AC boosting light armor for the bladesinger but that's a very niche case.

If your a bard that uses arcane secrets to get shield you don't have to worry about mage armor. In my games a lot of Paladins will dip sorcerer or go full sorcerer after level 2 for more smite slots and sheild.

It's also only ever going to use up 1 of your spell slots. So with those other spell slots Shield is going to be very useful in and at higher levels few other spells will be.

[pwykersotz]

Oh yes, I can picture the thread now:

"Bladesinger is just fine they get true polymorph and eldritch blast!"

*begin tangent on true polymorph*

*insert SA quote that the real intension was something no one could have ever assumed from reading the text*

*Someone that liked 4e complaining how martials are bland and uninteresting and how the bladesinger is better than them because of magic*

Then 15 pages of semantic arguments.

Crud, you've cracked the forum code! Abandon thread!

[Demonic Spoon]

Is the problem just their AC at 18?

Because a fighter 1/wizard X (or mountain dwarf Wizard X with feats) can do similar - 20 AC as soon as they can get full plate + shield, 25 AC at 19 (Signature spell:shield).

I don't think it's bladesinger that breaks bounded accuracy, it's signature spell: Shield.

[ad_hoc]

Mage armor is far more mandatory.

I think Mage Armour is a waste of a spell when you can wear light armour. Save that spell slot for Shield.

[Kryx]

I don't think it's bladesinger that breaks bounded accuracy, it's signature spell: Shield.
They can do 21 AC with defensive style.

The problem is Bladesinger scales higher. It scales to 23 AC. No other normal build can do that. I think there is some extreme of Monk + Barb, but that's 3 stats and 2 classes.

Though I'm inclined to agree with DireSickFish that shield is likely too strong.

[Demonic Spoon]

The problem is Bladesinger scales higher. It scales to 23 AC. No other normal build can do that. I think there is some extreme of Monk + Barb, but that's 3 stats and 2 classes.

Not actually true - a level 20 barbarian with 24 CON (per capstone), 20 DEX, and a shield, gets 10 + 5 (Dex) + 7 (Con) + 2 (shield) = 24 AC.

[Raxxius]

Chain shirt caps at 15 AC. Mage armor doesn't cap. At level one you have 16 AC and it increases at 12 and 16.

Mithral does not increase the max dex requirement. DMG 182

Yeah my bad was using memory of an old old character from beta when M Chain was a light armour.

Still, the impact of +1 point of AC (mage armour vs studded leather) is significantly less likely to make a difference on being hit the impact of a +5 point boost of AC. Additionally you're not running the risk of mage armour being dispelled, getting caught in an antimagic barrier etc etc.

Shield is a really strong spell.

[Momar]

You can gish for 2 minutes per short rest. If you try to make that your main thing you will fail. If it's just your backup to turn the tables, that works.

Has anyone tried a bladesinger yet to comment on the limitation? The two uses per rest doesn't seem like a huge limiting factor to me. By DMG guidelines of 6-8 medium encounters, assuming a fight is done within 10 rounds (I haven't played a lot yet, but that's been every 5e fight for my group so far), you have a 75%-100% up time. Put another way, you get 6 per day if your DM is giving 2 short rests as recommended, which is the same as a 17th level barbarian's total rage up time.

Tangent: Am I the only one who thought it was weird that they gave the bladesingers extra attacks when literally right next to it they print the new attack cantrips that offer a passable alternative to multi attacking? If it were me I would have left off the extra attack to toss in something a little more interesting and try to use to class to highlight the new cantrips.

[Z3ro]

I can't help but feel like the bladesinger is going to be a lot like the necromancer when the PHB first came out; lots of kvetching about being overpowered, but far less powerful than it appears at first glance. Situationaly useful, to be sure, and potentially problematic if you take things to their maximum, but I can't help but think it won't be nearly as powerful at the majority of levels people play at. Really I think the lack of HP is going to be the biggest limiting factor in this build.

[ruy343]

Has anyone tried a bladesinger yet to comment on the limitation? The two uses per rest doesn't seem like a huge limiting factor to me. By DMG guidelines of 6-8 medium encounters, assuming a fight is done within 10 rounds (I haven't played a lot yet, but that's been every 5e fight for my group so far), you have a 75%-100% up time. Put another way, you get 6 per day if your DM is giving 2 short rests as recommended, which is the same as a 17th level barbarian's total rage up time.


Thank you! As any player will tell you, AC only protects you from a fraction of all enemy abilities at the aforementioned problematic levels. There are actually quite a few spells and spell-like abilities that target other saves at that level (like Cone of Cold, banishment, and dominate person for example) which a character who's entirely focused on AC won't be able to defend well against (and I shudder to think of the consequences of a dominated bladesinger among your back ranks). Also, bear in mind that an opponent with the grappler feat could pin the opponent, shutting them down entirely since they couldn't take actions or reactions while pinned. Heck, he might just be vulnerable to the sleep spell after a few hits too... That would be funny...

TL;DR: I think that the bladesinger, while potent and powerful while bladesinging in melee/ranged combat, only has a few defenses covered. If you hit the bladesinger with anything outside of their specialty, they're toast.

[CNagy]

Thank you! As any player will tell you, AC only protects you from a fraction of all enemy abilities at the aforementioned problematic levels. There are actually quite a few spells and spell-like abilities that target other saves at that level (like Cone of Cold, banishment, and dominate person for example) which a character who's entirely focused on AC won't be able to defend well against (and I shudder to think of the consequences of a dominated bladesinger among your back ranks). Also, bear in mind that an opponent with the grappler feat could pin the opponent, shutting them down entirely since they couldn't take actions or reactions while pinned. Heck, he might just be vulnerable to the sleep spell after a few hits too... That would be funny...

TL;DR: I think that the bladesinger, while potent and powerful while bladesinging in melee/ranged combat, only has a few defenses covered. If you hit the bladesinger with anything outside of their specialty, they're toast.

Why are people consistently under this impression? Pinning puts both the grappler and the grappled in "restrained" condition. In such a condition, you have 0 speed, you make attacks at a disadvantage, people make attacks against you with advantage, and you get disadvantage on Dex saves.

Pinning does nothing to prevent a spellcaster from casting a spell. In fact, because you've just given yourself a disadvantage on Dex saves, pinning a high-level caster is an invitation to get Disintegrated.

[Forum Explorer]

My initial response to the balancing of the Bladesinger is that it is fine if you use point buy. It is a MAD subclass where you need to sacrifice other things in order to make it work.

My feeling with 5e in general is that if you have stats higher than point buy, then balance breaks down in general. If you use feats, they become overpowered. MAD classes become much better. Etc.

I think the solution is to lower starting stats and have ASIs become an important decision point.

My feeling is that Bladesinger is fine so long as multiclassing is forbidden. As a dip they are broken, but as a full class their high AC is dependent on multiple factors, and if it ever gets beaten the Bladesinger is going to suffer badly for it. Also the Bladesinger has no defenses in other categories, so they can be punished that way.

Also wouldn't feats make MAD classes worse? They already are struggling with the few ASIs available. Adding in Feats mean they won't have the resources to hit everything they've got, and classes with abundant ASIs to spare will be stronger as a result.

[MaxWilson]

I can't help but feel like the bladesinger is going to be a lot like the necromancer when the PHB first came out; lots of kvetching about being overpowered, but far less powerful than it appears at first glance. Situationaly useful, to be sure, and potentially problematic if you take things to their maximum, but I can't help but think it won't be nearly as powerful at the majority of levels people play at. Really I think the lack of HP is going to be the biggest limiting factor in this build.

Have you seen a necromancer in play? They're stupidly powerful. Not in a bad way. Conventional wisdom was spot on.

And yet for some reason, they don't destroy the game, and they're not ubiquitous. Could it be that 5E players prefer something other than gamebreaking power every time? ;)

[ruy343]

Why are people consistently under this impression? Pinning puts both the grappler and the grappled in "restrained" condition. In such a condition, you have 0 speed, you make attacks at a disadvantage, people make attacks against you with advantage, and you get disadvantage on Dex saves.

Pinning does nothing to prevent a spellcaster from casting a spell. In fact, because you've just given yourself a disadvantage on Dex saves, pinning a high-level caster is an invitation to get Disintegrated.

I have been rightly corrected. However, my other points still stand.

[ad_hoc]

My feeling is that Bladesinger is fine so long as multiclassing is forbidden. As a dip they are broken, but as a full class their high AC is dependent on multiple factors, and if it ever gets beaten the Bladesinger is going to suffer badly for it. Also the Bladesinger has no defenses in other categories, so they can be punished that way.

Also wouldn't feats make MAD classes worse? They already are struggling with the few ASIs available. Adding in Feats mean they won't have the resources to hit everything they've got, and classes with abundant ASIs to spare will be stronger as a result.

Yeah, that too. Multiclassing is an optional rule for a reason. If used, I feel it should be on a case by case basis. Personally I don't like it and with subclasses I don't think it is needed. Classes give a starting structure to a character at level 1, might as well just play a classless game if we're going to mess with that.

Those are meant to be different thoughts. High starting stats make feats overpowered. High starting stats make MAD classes overpowered.

Basically being MAD with high starting stats means you just get to take better advantage of your stats rather than spreading yourself out so that you aren't quite as good with a main stat. Feats are balanced against taking a bonus in a primary stat. A choice between a +2 in a 3rd or 4th stat and a feat is not balanced.

[Forum Explorer]

Yeah, that too. Multiclassing is an optional rule for a reason. If used, I feel it should be on a case by case basis. Personally I don't like it and with subclasses I don't think it is needed. Classes give a starting structure to a character at level 1, might as well just play a classless game if we're going to mess with that.

Those are meant to be different thoughts. High starting stats make feats overpowered. High starting stats make MAD classes overpowered.

Basically being MAD with high starting stats means you just get to take better advantage of your stats rather than spreading yourself out so that you aren't quite as good with a main stat. Feats are balanced against taking a bonus in a primary stat. A choice between a +2 in a 3rd or 4th stat and a feat is not balanced.

Ah, I see what you mean.

[CNagy]

My feeling is that Bladesinger is fine so long as multiclassing is forbidden. As a dip they are broken, but as a full class their high AC is dependent on multiple factors, and if it ever gets beaten the Bladesinger is going to suffer badly for it. Also the Bladesinger has no defenses in other categories, so they can be punished that way.

Also wouldn't feats make MAD classes worse? They already are struggling with the few ASIs available. Adding in Feats mean they won't have the resources to hit everything they've got, and classes with abundant ASIs to spare will be stronger as a result.

I think it just feels that way. A 10' move increase isn't broken. Nor is advantage to Acrobatics checks. The +Int to AC and Concentration saves feels like it could be--but it runs on Intelligence, and only the Eldritch Knight and the Arcane Trickster really have any use for Intelligence. So they benefit the most from a dip, but the end result doesn't feel particularly broken.

For the Eldritch Knight, he gains this bonus to his AC in exchange for giving up medium armor, heavy armor, and shields, as well as restricting himself to a one-handed weapon. If he picked another type of Wizard (a Diviner dip or Evoker dip, as an example), he could get most of the AC from medium or heavy armor, emphasize Strength over Dexterity, and either use a shield or use a two-handed weapon. The rest of the AC he gets in trade for his 4th attack capstone and an ASI if you dip 2 levels, Greater War Magic, his second Action Surge, and third Indomitable if you dip 4 levels. On a Diviner he'd be trading those for some guaranteed rolls, on an Evoker the ability to exclude his allies from area effect spells (which he'd now have enough arcane juice to make better use of.)

Arcane Trickster stands to gain more (mostly because he doesn't miss out on armor opportunities that he never had) but he is also more likely to go 6 levels in as a Bladesinger, at which point you can't really call it a dip. Neither he nor the Eldritch Knight suffer from what most people are caught up on when it comes to the Bladesinger--constant Shield use resulting in a 27+ consistent AC.

[EvilAnagram]

Okay, so we're talking about a level 14 Bladesinger?

I want to math this. I want to math it hard.

Let's assume 20 Dex and 18 Int because that works best. We'll also assume they take the Rapier for weapon proficiency. Plus, no reason not to have Haste, right? And studded leather armor.

With Bladesong your AC equals 12+DEX+INT, or 21. You'll get +5 with Shield to make it 26, but that's limited.

Each round you can cast a cantrip, plus make a bonus attack from Haste.

Cantrip damage=1d8+2d8+DEX+INT
CD=3d8+5+4
CD=(4.5x3)+9
CD=13.5+9
CD=22.5 damage




Bonus attack damage=1d8+DEX+INT
BD=4.5+5+4
BD=13.5


So that's a total of 36 damage per turn, plus another 3d8 (13.5) if the baddy moves (and he probably won't)

For comparison, let's look at an Eldritch Knight. Great Weapon Fighting with 20 Str, 20 Int, plus a feat. Polearm Master and a Glaive? Sounds good to me. Oh, and he can pull out an 18 AC, 23 with Shield.

So, Eldritch Knight casts Fireball for 8d6 fire damage, then action surges and attacks 3 times, plus the Polearm Master attack.

Nah, just kidding. We'll just have him use Booming Blade at first. Keep in mind that GWF rerolls apply by Raw to all damage rolled as part of an attack with the weapon.


CD=1d10+2d8+5
CD=6.3+(2x5.25)+5
CD=11.3+10.5
CD=11.8



Then Action Surge and full-out attack!


Attack=1d10+5
3 Attacks=3d10+15
PM Attack=1d4+5
Action Surge Damage=3d10+1d4+20
AD= 3(6.3)+3+20
AD=18.9+23
AD=41.9



For a total of 53.7 points of damage. Of course, he'll just average the 41.9 points per turn on account of not being able to Action Surge every turn. Unless he uses magic. And he can deal 74.9 damage if he ignores the cantrips when he surges.

So, in conclusion, the Bladesinger is better at fighting than other Wizards, but doesn't deal as much damage as a fighter can at the same level. Still, he has lots of AC and is pretty cool.

[Vogonjeltz]

Hi Folks,

With SCAG released, some players have been discussing their backups. One player has gotten very upset I have said I wont allow Bladesinger.

I explained the reason why is they straight up outclass almost everyclass.
We're 13th level at present, so the 14th level bonus is soon.

A Bladesinger does more damage than a great weapon fighter, has 30ac with haste, better dex saves, and is a full caster.

Is my decision unnecessarily harsh? The power level of the Bladesinger will make the group Ranger, Sorcerer, Monk and Barb pretty much redundant as they can outcombat and out tank them, whilst having full caster utility..

I have not allowed the Favored Soul for similar reasons, nor are the -5/+10 feats in my game.

Thoughts?

Yes, you're overreacting, Bladesinger can have niceish AC for two minutes per short rest. That's so-so.


And they say fighters are crap in this edition, yet we take away one of their toys.

These they people really need to step up their game, if they keep getting everything wrong like this nobody will listen to them anymore!


Bladesinging: You only get the Int bonus to AC while bladesinging. Since it's limited to two times per short rest, it's not an at-will AC boost. A DM who monitors for abuse of the short rest mechanic should limit

Wait a minute, I'm away from book, but doesn't bladesinging also require the character use only a one-handed weapon and nothing else? (no twf, no 2h, no shield?)


You have the same attack bonus as any fighter, paladin, ranger, or Valor bard. You have excellent AC. Your attack is one of your two primary stats (You choose Bladesinger at level 1, so you're going into it at character creation instead of waiting afterward. If you think of it as "That stat you were just going to leave at 16/character creation", you're stupid stupid stupid and doing it wrong and need your character creation/assessment privileges revoked.). ... how does the multiattack work? Because it might also make you a damn good archer.

Eldritch knights are barely-magical jokes.

Well, technically everyone can have the same attack bonus, except for ranged attacks which the Fighting style classes win at. Eldritch Knights do the whole spellcasting in melee better than Bladesingers because they already have proficiency at constitution saving throws.

[Kryx]

Not actually true - a level 20 barbarian with 24 CON (per capstone), 20 DEX, and a shield, gets 10 + 5 (Dex) + 7 (Con) + 2 (shield) = 24 AC.
True, but that's 22 max before level 20. Beyond that Barb starts at 18 Using Mara's list earlier Bladesinger starts at 19 and scales to 28.

Though what is your suggestion - prevent spell specialization shield? Imo that doesn't fix the problem.
Bladesinging is higher AC than every build at every tier if we look at Mara's list (assuming GMs give out plate armor at the appropriate tiers).

Many won't find that to be a problem. Many do. The rest of the class is an entirely different discussion imo.




Yes, you're overreacting, Bladesinger can have niceish AC for two minutes per short rest. That's so-so.
2 minutes per short rest falls into the balance paradigm to be used in nearly every combat. If groups ignore short rests then it's much less of an issue, but that's not standard balance.

[Demonic Spoon]

True, but that's 22 max before level 20. Beyond that Barb starts at 18 Using Mara's list earlier Bladesinger starts at 19 and scales to 28.

Though what is your suggestion - prevent spell specialization shield? Imo that doesn't fix the problem.
Bladesinging is higher AC than every build at every tier if we look at Mara's list (assuming GMs give out plate armor at the appropriate tiers).

Many won't find that to be a problem. Many do. The rest of the class is an entirely different discussion imo.

Why is that a problem, though? On the whole they are going to still be squishier in melee combat due to low HD (and mediocre CON due to the strong emphasis on dex and int). If they don't actually break the bounds of bounded accuracy (without signature spell: shield which I suggested is a problem), where does the balance problem show up?

[Mara]

I would still rather play an illusionist.

Bladesinger is nice for those thinking about a dex based EK 5/wiz 15.

[MeeposFire]

Okay, so we're talking about a level 14 Bladesinger?

I want to math this. I want to math it hard.

Let's assume 20 Dex and 18 Int because that works best. We'll also assume they take the Rapier for weapon proficiency. Plus, no reason not to have Haste, right? And studded leather armor.

With Bladesong your AC equals 12+DEX+INT, or 21. You'll get +5 with Shield to make it 26, but that's limited.

Each round you can cast a cantrip, plus make a bonus attack from Haste.

Cantrip damage=1d8+2d8+DEX+INT
CD=3d8+5+4
CD=(4.5x3)+9
CD=13.5+9
CD=22.5 damage




Bonus attack damage=1d8+DEX+INT
BD=4.5+5+4
BD=13.5


So that's a total of 36 damage per turn, plus another 3d8 (13.5) if the baddy moves (and he probably won't)

For comparison, let's look at an Eldritch Knight. Great Weapon Fighting with 20 Str, 20 Int, plus a feat. Polearm Master and a Glaive? Sounds good to me. Oh, and he can pull out an 18 AC, 23 with Shield.

So, Eldritch Knight casts Fireball for 8d6 fire damage, then action surges and attacks 3 times, plus the Polearm Master attack.

Nah, just kidding. We'll just have him use Booming Blade at first. Keep in mind that GWF rerolls apply by Raw to all damage rolled as part of an attack with the weapon.


CD=1d10+2d8+5
CD=6.3+(2x5.25)+5
CD=11.3+10.5
CD=11.8



Then Action Surge and full-out attack!


Attack=1d10+5
3 Attacks=3d10+15
PM Attack=1d4+5
Action Surge Damage=3d10+1d4+20
AD= 3(6.3)+3+20
AD=18.9+23
AD=41.9



For a total of 53.7 points of damage. Of course, he'll just average the 41.9 points per turn on account of not being able to Action Surge every turn. Unless he uses magic. And he can deal 74.9 damage if he ignores the cantrips when he surges.

So, in conclusion, the Bladesinger is better at fighting than other Wizards, but doesn't deal as much damage as a fighter can at the same level. Still, he has lots of AC and is pretty cool.

Wait why are you using the polearm master attack? That is a waste of a bonus action in your example. You used a cantrip so you can use war magic to get a bonus action attack using your main attack again. Any round you cast a cantrip you should NOT be using polearm master.

Your damage is actually slightly higher.

[Malifice]

Why are people consistently under this impression? Pinning puts both the grappler and the grappled in "restrained" condition. In such a condition, you have 0 speed, you make attacks at a disadvantage, people make attacks against you with advantage, and you get disadvantage on Dex saves.

Pinning does nothing to prevent a spellcaster from casting a spell. In fact, because you've just given yourself a disadvantage on Dex saves, pinning a high-level caster is an invitation to get Disintegrated.


Stun them. This incapacitates them ending bladedance. PWS does it automatically (no Bladesinger has 151+ HP, ever). Monks can screw with them too (Con saves arent that good on a wizard with all his ASI's dedicated to Dex and Int boosts). Hitting could prove difficult at higher levels. Alterantively paralyze them. Common enough status effect, however targets Wisdom which wizards are OK with (Bladesingers rarely have a Wis of more than 10 though).

Intresting that the rule is bladesong only drops when incapacitated. I would have added it also ends if grappled and restrained too.

I will in my houserules.

[Vogonjeltz]

Your biases are showing. A single party probably isn't going to have a bladesinger and a cleric and a paladin, because the bladesinger is already filling the tank role so why would you have two? A paladin blowing all of his best spell slots on smiting can outdamage the bladesinger, because a bladesinger is mediocre at best at melee damage; but he'll take 3x as much damage from the Pit Fiend in the process in addition to spending all of his spells on smites. By the third fight of the day the paladin will really be hurting (out of smites, low on HP) but the bladesinger will still be fresh.

This is not an endorsement of the bladesinger strategy on my part--just pointing out for the sake of other readers that your answer has a strong bias towards offensive novas, which only work sometimes. All you're really doing is converting spells into HP damage, and the 18th level pure Paladin only has 288 HP worth of smiting in a whole day even if he uses it purely on undead and fiends, which isn't quite enough to kill a single Pit Fiend, let alone four of them, or three Mariliths and three Goristros, or whatever else turns up in your adventuring day. Smiting paladin can work but it's not particularly good after the first fight.

Probably because even the ideal is only good for 10 consecutive rounds twice per short rest. After that their AC is down to an 18 (23 with shield, provided they burn their reaction, or 25 with haste and shield...of course they get stunned after 10 rounds and probably can't survive that with their meager hit points) even lower if they don't have Mage armor up.

Why use something so flimsy when you can hire on a nice Fighter or Barbarian?

[djreynolds]

Its a very flavorful class. Got style and of course it will be abused.

And I have no problem with the abuse or multiclassers, paladins and warlocks and bards and sorcerers have been doing it forever, eldritch blasts coming out my ***. People are running around with shillegeah and quaterstaves and shields and polearm master, and lets no forget Jessie James and dueling hand crossbows. I just want to use a shield and spear, and real reason to use a trident.

Really and we are worried about a cool and very well made class that has style to it.

The obvious defense vs blade song is to just walk off once he/she starts singing and just kill their buddies, the song is 1 minute (10 rounds) at a time and the shield spell is 1 round.

And the class is very focused on stats, you may not have space for the war caster feat til later on or even resilient con, hence the intelligence bonus to concentration checks.

And the shield spell, is a reaction. So RAI, can you really cast the shield spell on your own or do you have to be attacked to do so because you need a reaction?

[Malifice]

Your biases are showing. A single party probably isn't going to have a bladesinger and a cleric and a paladin, because the bladesinger is already filling the tank role so why would you have two?

A party with a bladesinger 'filling the tank role' is not surviving past 1st level.

Theyre back up fighters at best. Theyre wizards with a very high AC who have a slightly higher at will DPR over other wizards, but need to be in melee combat to deliver it. They are NOT tanks and should never be played like one.

Play it like a normal wizard who (when forced to use a cantrip) enters bladesong and delivers it in melee.

As a dedicated tank they suck, and suck badly, and arent even survivable till around 8th level (when Dex is finally 20), and even then damage is still rubbish with a single finess weapon+GFB or finesse weapon + extra attack.

If you want to use one as a 'tank' then thats what Eldritch Knight is for. Go EK 9/ Bladesinger 11 for a much better tank build. Go an elf for perception and GFB off the bat as your cantrip to get the concept up and running - ensure your background gets you acrobatics (it'l help you get out of those grapples). Max Int and Dex to 16 then Con. Dump Str and Cha. Put a 10 in Wis. Run Fighter to second level (for action surge, dueling F/S, armor prof, second wind, con saves, better HP, low level survivability) then run Wizard BS to 2nd (for Bladesong 2/short rest and casting) then run EK for 1 more (2nd level slots, more spells known). Youre now 5th level, with a ton of spells known, GFB picking up the slack for your DPR and 2nd level slots.

DPR will be OK (if a little low) for the first few levels.

From there follow EK to 7th for the cantrip + attack spamming. At Ftr 4th and 6th pump Dex. At 8th take resilient (Wisdom) Then back to Wizard for the final 9 levels for 6th level spells (7th level slots), and all the bladesong goodies (capstone is basically spend a slot to absorb damage). At Wizard 4th and 8th max Int.

Now you're proficient in Con, Wis and Str saves, and your Int and Dex saves are boss thanks to stats of 20 (to go with your high AC). You also have indomitable if all else fails. You also have 20 more HP, better hit dice AND A short rest second wind of 1d10+9. Finally you can spam spell slots to absorb damage when needed. Your AC is up the wazoo (23 base, 30 w shield and haste - add mirror image for more laughs), and youre casting 6th level wizard spells with 7th level slots.

Your at will damage is solid at (5d8+14)+(adjacent enemy takes 3d8+5)+ and you have an (Action surge)+(Haste) nova at your disposal for (10d8+28)+(6d8+10).

[djreynolds]

A party with a bladesinger 'filling the tank role' is not surviving past 1st level.

Theyre back up fighters at best. Theyre wizards with a very high AC who have a slightly higher at will DPR over other wizards, but need to be in melee combat to deliver it. They are NOT tanks and should never be played like one.

Play it like a normal wizard who (when forced to use a cantrip) enters bladesong and delivers it in melee.

As a dedicated tank they suck, and suck badly, and arent even survivable till around 8th level (when Dex is finally 20), and even then damage is still rubbish with a single finess weapon+GFB or finesse weapon + extra attack.

If you want to use one as a 'tank' then thats what Eldritch Knight is for. Go EK 9/ Bladesinger 11 for a much better tank build. Go an elf for perception and GFB off the bat as your cantrip to get the concept up and running - ensure your background gets you acrobatics (it'l help you get out of those grapples). Max Int and Dex to 16 then Con. Dump Str and Cha. Put a 10 in Wis. Run Fighter to second level (for action surge, dueling F/S, armor prof, second wind, con saves, better HP, low level survivability) then run Wizard BS to 2nd (for Bladesong 2/short rest and casting) then run EK for 1 more (2nd level slots, more spells known). Youre now 5th level, with a ton of spells known, GFB picking up the slack for your DPR and 2nd level slots.

DPR will be OK (if a little low) for the first few levels.

From there follow EK to 7th for the cantrip + attack spamming. At Ftr 4th and 6th pump Dex. At 8th take resilient (Wisdom) Then back to Wizard for the final 9 levels for 6th level spells (7th level slots), and all the bladesong goodies (capstone is basically spend a slot to absorb damage). At Wizard 4th and 8th max Int.

Now you're proficient in Con, Wis and Str saves, and your Int and Dex saves are boss thanks to stats of 20 (to go with your high AC). You also have indomitable if all else fails. You also have 20 more HP, better hit dice AND A short rest second wind of 1d10+9. Finally you can spam spell slots to absorb damage when needed. Your AC is up the wazoo (23 base, 30 w shield and haste - add mirror image for more laughs), and youre casting 6th level wizard spells with 7th level slots.

Your at will damage is solid at (5d8+14)+(adjacent enemy takes 3d8+5)+ and you have an (Action surge)+(Haste) nova at your disposal for (10d8+28)+(6d8+10).

Now that's a very cool build. And I have a question, since the shield spell is a reaction, perhaps... very perhaps defensive duelist could provide some breathing room in regards to churning through spells if you're boss fighting or really just worried about one the enemies your facing. I don't think you would have room for it ASI/Feat wise though

That's a cool build though

[Raxxius]

Stun them. This incapacitates them ending bladedance. PWS does it automatically (no Bladesinger has 151+ HP, ever). Monks can screw with them too (Con saves arent that good on a wizard with all his ASI's dedicated to Dex and Int boosts). Hitting could prove difficult at higher levels. Alterantively paralyze them. Common enough status effect, however targets Wisdom which wizards are OK with (Bladesingers rarely have a Wis of more than 10 though).

Intresting that the rule is bladesong only drops when incapacitated. I would have added it also ends if grappled and restrained too.

I will in my houserules.

I don't think making a keystone ability which isn't an at will end on a gapple is a good idea, this would make the class really weak if any mook can shutdown nearly every feature of the class, there isn't another class in the game with such a glaring weakness on its keystone.

[Gothos]

I say let wizards have their swords. They have the lowest HP in the game and the high AC is dependent upon spell slots that might otherwise be useful. Being a wizard is all about long term resource management and this just give them a cantrip for melee that is actually good, compared to shocking grasp which is just a get away from the enemy spell.

[djreynolds]

This could be a very powerful class and I'm all for it. This really enables this wizard to help out and man the lines, "if" needed. He could be a great asset on a team. If you are fighting a boss with huge resistances, your spells will do nothing. And if your fighter and paladin are shielded up, they may not be giving out damage in proportion to what they are receiving.

But in a way the barbarian's rage allows him to tank in the battlefield but also control by drawing attacks to himself, because everyone wants to hit him. Now I'm not saying the bladesinger is even close to the barbarian's ability to control and tank simultaneously on the battlefield This wizard for two minutes could take huge pressure off the fighter and paladin and allow them to drop their shields and produce some extra damage of their own and because this wizard gets an intelligence boost to concentration, you can haste that paladin or fighter as well.

This could be a big boon in a fight if timed out appropriately and its not like he's the only wizard to do this. My abjurer wizard does it all the time. You can't always cast fireballs, but you can cast mirror image and spam your arcane ward with a shield spell or protection from evil, and in doing so allow that fighter to go two-handed because he's not taking all the hits and damage.

Always remember the Wonder Pets and Teamwork

[EvilAnagram]

Wait why are you using the polearm master attack? That is a waste of a bonus action in your example. You used a cantrip so you can use war magic to get a bonus action attack using your main attack again. Any round you cast a cantrip you should NOT be using polearm master.

Your damage is actually slightly higher.

You are correct. I undersold how much better the Eldritch Knight is at doing damage.

[McNinja]

Hi Folks,

With SCAG released, some players have been discussing their backups. One player has gotten very upset I have said I wont allow Bladesinger.

I explained the reason why is they straight up outclass almost everyclass.
We're 13th level at present, so the 14th level bonus is soon.

A Bladesinger does more damage than a great weapon fighter, has 30ac with haste, better dex saves, and is a full caster.

Is my decision unnecessarily harsh? The power level of the Bladesinger will make the group Ranger, Sorcerer, Monk and Barb pretty much redundant as they can outcombat and out tank them, whilst having full caster utility..

I have not allowed the Favored Soul for similar reasons, nor are the -5/+10 feats in my game.

Thoughts?

I think by this point it's been proved a few times over that disallowing the Bladesinger is silly at best. They have high AC but in a given fight a Fighter will do more damage without question and the fighter will have roughly DOUBLE the HP of a 'singer.

I personally find disallowing feats to be a little petty, but hey. Your game.

[MaxWilson]

I think by this point it's been proved a few times over that disallowing the Bladesinger is silly at best. They have high AC but in a given fight a Fighter will do more damage without question and the fighter will have roughly DOUBLE the HP of a 'singer.

Nitpick:

Lots more damage, yes, but double the HP? Not so. They're almost on par (for the same Con score) once you consider Contingencies.

Con 14 Bladesinger 14: 2 + (6*14) = 86 HP, plus Contingency (False Life V) for 26 HP, total 112 HP.

Con 14 Fighter 14: 4 + (8*14) = 116 HP.

The only way for the fighter to anwhere close to double the HP of the Bladesinger would be to spend four ASIs on raising his Con to 20 and taking Tough. In that case he'd have 4+13*14=186 HP, about 66% more total HP and 116% more HP if you discount Contingency... but four ASIs is a ton and that will really hurt his overall effectiveness as a fighter.

Contingency is awesome.

[Malifice]

I don't think making a keystone ability which isn't an at will end on a gapple is a good idea, this would make the class really weak if any mook can shutdown nearly every feature of the class, there isn't another class in the game with such a glaring weakness on its keystone.

Barbarian rage ends when they get grappled by the book if they use thier action to escape. They ain't attacking or doing damage.

I think it's perfectly fine to limit blade song to when not restrained or grappled. Different horses though.

[Malifice]

Nitpick:

Lots more damage, yes, but double the HP? Not so. They're almost on par (for the same Con score) once you consider Contingencies.

Con 14 Bladesinger 14: 2 + (6*14) = 86 HP, plus Contingency (False Life V) for 26 HP, total 112 HP.

Con 14 Fighter 14: 4 + (8*14) = 116 HP.

The only way for the fighter to anwhere close to double the HP of the Bladesinger would be to spend four ASIs on raising his Con to 20 and taking Tough. In that case he'd have 4+13*14=186 HP, about 66% more total HP and 116% more HP if you discount Contingency... but four ASIs is a ton and that will really hurt his overall effectiveness as a fighter.

Contingency is awesome.

Your fighter can dump more stats and has 2 more ASI than a wizard. Blacesingers discussed in this thread devote all ASI to dex and int and have a Con of 12 at 20th at best. Odds are your average fighter has a higher con than most wizards, and much higher than your 20th level blade singer, probably starting at 1st (14 is pretty average, ending around the 18 mark).

A fighter has 50 percent more HP off the bat. Factoring con 12 v con 18 and were talking nearly double.

Bladesingers can blow slots for extra HP buffer 1 x round. If they haven't blown their reaction on shield of course.

Or just doing what they should be doing and blasting **** to Kingdom come.

Seriously. dont run your bladesinger like a tank. Play it like a wizard (avoid melee if at all possible) with high AC who can enter Melee at a pinch.

[EvilAnagram]

Barbarian rage ends when they get grappled by the book if they use thier action to escape. They ain't attacking or doing damage.


Can't the rage continue if they're adjacent to an enemy?

[DracoKnight]

Can't the rage continue if they're adjacent to an enemy?

You have to take damage or deal an attack, or their rage ends.

[Forum Explorer]

Nitpick:

Lots more damage, yes, but double the HP? Not so. They're almost on par (for the same Con score) once you consider Contingencies.



That's where your assumption falls apart. The Fighter has more ASI's and isn't as MAD as the Bladesinger. In all likelihood they'll have a Con score of 20 by the end of the game, while a Bladesinger will have that nearly impossible to achieve.

[EdgeSharpsword]

And yet they become so much more magical with 4-8 levels of Bladesinger. And their Constitution saves aren't through the floor. And they have more hit points. And they get the better AC. And a fighting style. And they actually blend sword and spell like a Bladesinger is supposed to!

This is why I'm planning to build into an EK 4 / Bladesinger 16 for a campaign I'm playing in. I'm going to lose the highest level spell slot, but it feels a bit more like I'd expect the Bladesinger to feel.

I do miss the 2e bladesinger. This gets a lot closer than 3rd or 4th did.

[MaxWilson]

This is why I'm planning to build into an EK 4 / Bladesinger 16 for a campaign I'm playing in. I'm going to lose the highest level spell slot, but it feels a bit more like I'd expect the Bladesinger to feel.

I do miss the 2e bladesinger. This gets a lot closer than 3rd or 4th did.

Why choose that split over a Fighter 2/Bladesinger 18? Is it for the weapon bond and the ASI?

[EdgeSharpsword]

Why choose that split over a Fighter 2/Bladesinger 18? Is it for the weapon bond and the ASI?

Likely, yes. Although the character will begin as a Fighter 2 / Bladesinger 2 tonight. So I'm open to suggestions. I'll have to roll ability scores, so I've got the opportunity to have higher scores than point buy as it is a homebrew game. Honestly, I feel like if I don't at least go high enough to snag the EK bonus spell level on the slot table and the ASI, then I'm leaving at least one ASI on the table, so why bother doing anything other than a straight Bladesinger. The +2 from Dueling won't be that important. And the HP bump will be miniscule.

High elf, obviously.

Honestly, I'm catching a lot of flack from my DM who is arguing that the Bladesinger is far superior to all of the other Wizard specialists and primarily because his argument seems to be light armor and extra attack as to WHY the Bladesinger is superior/OP. I don't feel it is myself, but I'm having trouble articulating why.

[krugaan]

we've established that

- bladesinger dps is inferior to fighter dps
- bladesingers can get astronomically high AC at the cost of CON every once in awhile
- bladesingers still get full wizard progression

you're trading a wizard specialty (cough portent) for a fairly good "o crap" button when mobbed by melee. Seems balanced, roughly.

I fail to see how bladesingers are particularly OP. well, any more than any other brand of wizard.

[Strill]

we've established that

- bladesinger dps is inferior to fighter dps
- bladesingers can get astronomically high AC at the cost of CON every once in awhile
- bladesingers still get full wizard progression

you're trading a wizard specialty (cough portent) for a fairly good "o crap" button when mobbed by melee. Seems balanced, roughly.

I fail to see how bladesingers are particularly OP. well, any more than any other brand of wizard.

It's not every once in a while. It's every fight if you're following the DMG's encounter guidelines. The Bladesinger can reach such high AC as to become nearly unhittable except by the most powerful enemies in the book. A full caster that is also a nigh-invulnerable to normal attacks is completely unreasonable.

[EdgeSharpsword]

we've established that

- bladesinger dps is inferior to fighter dps
- bladesingers can get astronomically high AC at the cost of CON every once in awhile
- bladesingers still get full wizard progression

you're trading a wizard specialty (cough portent) for a fairly good "o crap" button when mobbed by melee. Seems balanced, roughly.

I fail to see how bladesingers are particularly OP. well, any more than any other brand of wizard.

I see that. My DM... well, he's of the opinion that next to the other specialty abilities that mages get, that the bladesinger should always be the choice based on the Extra Attack feature. In his eyes, none of the rest come close.

Honestly, I'm just trying to decide how to start it at 4th level. I'm looking at either Wiz 4 or Ftr 2 / Wiz (bladesinger) 2 to start. I have story reasons that would justify the Fighter levels. If I roll well enough, I have even considered the possibility of going Monk 2 / Wiz (bladesinger) 2, mostly just because I like Monks and some of the extras they get. But I can also justify that as part of the story.

[Strill]

I see that. My DM... well, he's of the opinion that next to the other specialty abilities that mages get, that the bladesinger should always be the choice based on the Extra Attack feature. In his eyes, none of the rest come close. Then he hasn't done the math. Extra Attack alone brings your damage on-par with cantrips.

[MaxWilson]

Honestly, I'm catching a lot of flack from my DM who is arguing that the Bladesinger is far superior to all of the other Wizard specialists and primarily because his argument seems to be light armor and extra attack as to WHY the Bladesinger is superior/OP. I don't feel it is myself, but I'm having trouble articulating why.

Meh. Your DM is wrong. He's obviously never seen a what a powergamer can do with a wizard. In fact you'll probably be less overpowered as a bladesinger because you'll be having so much fun gishing that you won't ever try to abuse the wizard spell list.

Simple example: Variant human Mobile Fighter 1/Diviner X has better AC (21) than a Bladesinger (19) (some people will claim you need high Str to wear full plate but they're wrong Mobile compensates just fine, and so would Longstrider), full Con save proficiency, more feats (because doesn't have to pump Dex and can be variant human instead of Elvish), the exact same DPR as a Bladesinger from Booming Blade, and Portent: the ability to force enemies to fail saving throws twice per day or allies to pass. (Depends on what you rolled that day.) And of course it also works with ability checks like Persuasion and Deception, out of combat. "I foresee that I will be very, very persuasive today. The stars are right for me to finally go ask the King for permission to marry his daughter." (Yeah, I know, the modern D&D idiom is more about "let's go haggle for magic items today.")

Or "today I can Counterspell absolutely anything."

Or "today I can Planar Bind a Pit Fiend for a year and a day with 100% success."

(Note that Portent works with any creature that you can see, so it actually works through divination spells like Scrying and Arcane Eye. Just in case you want to make somebody's life miserable on a regular basis. :))

[EdgeSharpsword]

Then he hasn't done the math. Extra Attack alone brings your damage on-par with cantrips.

THAT was exactly my argument. And he brushed that one off.


Meh. Your DM is wrong. He's obviously never seen a what a powergamer can do with a wizard. In fact you'll probably be less overpowered as a bladesinger because you'll be having so much fun gishing that you won't ever try to abuse the wizard spell list.

Simple example: Variant human Mobile Fighter 1/Diviner X has better AC (21) than a Bladesinger (19) (some people will claim you need high Str to wear full plate but they're wrong Mobile compensates just fine, and so would Longstrider), full Con save proficiency, more feats (because doesn't have to pump Dex and can be variant human instead of Elvish), the exact same DPR as a Bladesinger from Booming Blade, and Portent: the ability to force enemies to fail saving throws twice per day or allies to pass. (Depends on what you rolled that day.) And of course it also works with ability checks like Persuasion and Deception, out of combat. "I foresee that I will be very, very persuasive today. The stars are right for me to finally go ask the King for permission to marry his daughter." (Yeah, I know, the modern D&D idiom is more about "let's go haggle for magic items today.")

Or "today I can Counterspell absolutely anything."

Or "today I can Planar Bind a Pit Fiend for a year and a day with 100% success."

I do love diviners. Especially after reading the Counselors & Kings series.

It should probably be noted that I'm giving up a Gnome Transmuter 4 to swap to the bladesinger. I've only played the Gnome for a few sessions, so I've not got much invested in him. When the bladesinger was announced in the SCAG, I became very excited. It was my favorite kit in 2e. It's what I always play there if allowed.

[TrollCapAmerica]

Dude...

Dude. The amount of condescension is amazing. Seriously.

Maybe someone wants to make a pretty-boy elf that can have the flavor of swinging a sword with pretty elf magic. Maybe a dude wants to make a Tiefling with the witch king mace and walk around shooting fire and breakin' heads. Are they gimmicks? Who cares? They're still fun and you can play the game without going full 3.5 style 80 splat-books of "player choice" cheese on top. Talking about how much "better" your character is is absolutely irrelevant. As long as they're having fun with their character, does it matter if you swing for 60-80 dpr and they only hit 41.5?

Yes, you can make a super duper optimized dude and rp well. You can make a super optimized dude and have fun. And yes, optimization is a way some people have fun, before those arguments start. It's a totally vaild path for a character to take, since doing well is fun.

But comparing your toons to another person's is silly and ridiculous, and does nothing but make you look like a smug a-hole that wants to have the coolest Dad on the playground or the hottest Canadian girlfriend, seriously, you guys don't know her but she's like, so cool.

You can't make a character incorrectly, because at the end of the day, as long as you understand the rules and he's hitting the concept you wanted, he's your character. He's a reflection of something you thought was cool and how you wanted to put him into the game system.

and every game when I out RP the dimwit that couldnt figure out that Resilant Cha isnt that good or that Savage attack sucks ill remember that probably after the dimwit alerts another Orc camp and needs me to save his rear end again.Just like the guy that kept bragging about his 18 str in character with his "Op grappler" going into Reaping Mauler in 3.5 which im sure you know ended well

Dumb people with bad reasoning skills tend to also make equally dumb decisions in RPGs

They are also often whiny little brats that actually get angry if you point out that Savage attack can ony be used once a round and is terrible. Ive had people get offended for not snorkeling their butts for their awesome OP characters plenty of time and im sick of babying them


You had me nodding in agreement right up until you mentioned the Paladin, who judging from your damage numbers is either fighting AC 8 zombies with GWM and Polearm Master, or is blowing valuable spell slots to Smite.

With a decent AC, the 18 points of damage (4d8 radiant) that you get from smiting with a 3rd level spell slot is less valuable than the 70 HP of healing you could be regaining with that same spell slot after the combat is over. Smiting is usually a bad deal unless things have gone truly pear shaped and it's imperative to kill something nownownow, e.g. to finish off Orcus before the lucky Hold Monster spell wears off and he Time Stops himself away. (In that case, smite away.)
!

V.Human Paladin lv9 with GWM PAM and Sentinel with an 18 rolled during chargen and put in Str. +4 to hit from 19 str {+1 V human] +4 from prof and +2 from a magic weapon. Oh whats that the fight matters? Sacred Weapon gives me +3 and even without it I could find ways to get advantage or take my shot with a +5. Im averaging 21 damage on regular attacks or reaction attack and 18 on my bonus action for 81 ideally and if I miss half ill still put out about 40 which would match all my non PAs hitting [11/11/11/8]. Its not rocket science its basic math

and of course everything I said like 10 pages ago stands.

[Malifice]

It's not every once in a while. It's every fight if you're following the DMG's encounter guidelines. The Bladesinger can reach such high AC as to become nearly unhittable except by the most powerful enemies in the book. A full caster that is also a nigh-invulnerable to normal attacks is completely unreasonable.

You keep saying this and it keeps getting shown to you that this isnt the case.

Sacrificing school abilities for a high AC is not unreasonable.

[Mara]

Sacrificing school abilities for a high AC is not unreasonable.
It's not unreasonable but it is a lazy mechanic because it puts stress on bounded accuracy.

If I was redoing bladesinger I would have the following:

2: weapon and armor proficiencies (like the current one), bonus melee attack cantrip,

6: extra attack, that reaction ability to reduce damage, int to concentration checks

10: When you cast a cantrip, make one finessable weapon melee attack as a bonus action

14: Add int to damage for melee attacks

[MaxWilson]

It's not unreasonable but it is a lazy mechanic because it puts stress on bounded accuracy.

It's possible that "bounded accuracy" doesn't mean what you think it means. Please excuse me for a second while I rant about a common misconception:

<Rant>

If we go back to the guy who coined the term (http://archive.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120604), which of Rodney Thompson's observations about Bounded Accuracy fall apart when the Bladesinger is in the game?

In fact, it looks as if the Bladesinger fits perfectly into one of the very first points he mentions, which is, "Getting better at something means actually getting better at something." A Bladesinger with an AC of 28 (when Shielding) really is extremely hard to hit with attacks, but weak on Con/Dex saving throws because he has only +1 to +5 there at most. Likewise, when Thompson says, "It is easier for players and DMs to understand the relative strength and difficulty of things," that still fits. It would only be violated if monster to-hit bonuses increased in lockstep with the Bladesinger AC such that AC 28 wasn't really very high after all.

In short, Bounded Accuracy is primarily a feature of gameworld and adventure design. It isn't violated just because a PC is good at something. When we start seeing CR 1/4 goblins with +10 to hit, THEN you can complain about Bounded Accuracy violations.

</Rant>

[Mando Knight]

I don't know what they did to the 4e Bladesinger, I didn't play 4e. Based on the apparent pendulum of thought that is Bladesinger design, I'm imagining the shift in the swing to a more Wizardly and less Fighterly character. Someone who knows for certain can provide more details, but it's the only way I can understand how the Bladesinger has come to this...

A Wizard subclass. Yer a wizard, Haerinduil! Your martial prowess? Enhanced AC (admittedly nice, and in keeping with the concept over the years), a second attack with a 1-handed weapon whose ability modifier is either the stat you never touch or the stat you were just going leave at 16 or whatever you put it at creation. Eventually, you'll get to add Int modifier to damage. You're just martial enough to trick yourself into melee combat, where all of your precious resources will be drained just trying to stay alive. This is a very long, utterly tragic fall from being a 1-Elf army, Champion and Ambassador of all things Elf.


Eeeeh... Bladesingers in 4e are generally grouped with the lower end of effectiveness, and the typical advice from a numbers point of view is to avoid the fact that it is a Wizard subclass that says it's a Controller, and focus on Melee Attacks to kill things in the brief time you have bonuses to attack, defense, and damage each encounter. And that wasn't an exceptional strategy, but more of making the best of the situation. This old thread goes into a bit more detail if you want (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?311235-Bladesinger).

Like OracleofWuffing said, you're right: the 5e Bladesinger is a Wizard subclass with a bit of Fighter because the 4e Bladesinger is a Wizard who wants to pretend he's a Fighter as well. The funny thing is, WotC basically did the Bladesinger twice for 4e, and the first time was way more badass.

The Swordmage, from 4e's Forgotten Realms Player's Guide (and unlike the Bladesinger which was released near the end of 4e's development cycle, was released early on and received plenty of additional support from other books), took the concept of a swordfighting spellcaster and ran with it. 4e didn't really support the concept of one-man-army PCs in general, but the Swordmage was the Arcane Defender (i.e. Wizard-Tank), whose attack options weren't so much "swing a sword or cast a spell" as much as it was that the spell and the sword were the same action. The SCAG cantrips are adaptations of the Swordmage's basic attack powers, to get an idea on how they played. There were a bunch of more boring spells that were basically only "deal elemental damage instead of your normal attack damage", but plenty of pretty cool ones like attacks that also threw mini-meteors at secondary targets or creating a persistent lightning storm around yourself that lashed out at enemies that tried to run away. And teleportation, lots of teleportation. A high-level high-elf Swordmage built for it could find enough teleportation powers to basically be anywhere he wanted whenever he wanted during a fight without ever doing something so mundane as walking.

[Mara]

It's possible that "bounded accuracy" doesn't mean what you think it means. Please excuse me for a second while I rant about a common misconception:

<Rant>

If we go back to the guy who coined the term (http://archive.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120604), which of Rodney Thompson's observations about Bounded Accuracy fall apart when the Bladesinger is in the game?

In fact, it looks as if the Bladesinger fits perfectly into one of the very first points he mentions, which is, "Getting better at something means actually getting better at something." A Bladesinger with an AC of 28 (when Shielding) really is extremely hard to hit with attacks, but weak on Con/Dex saving throws because he has only +1 to +5 there at most. Likewise, when Thompson says, "It is easier for players and DMs to understand the relative strength and difficulty of things," that still fits. It would only be violated if monster to-hit bonuses increased in lockstep with the Bladesinger AC such that AC 28 wasn't really very high after all.

In short, Bounded Accuracy is primarily a feature of gameworld and adventure design. It isn't violated just because a PC is good at something. When we start seeing CR 1/4 goblins with +10 to hit, THEN you can complain about Bounded Accuracy violations.

</Rant>

Maybe I just meant that it seems odd for wizards to be the hardest thing to hit for 2 combats per short rest. A bladesinger being good at avoiding damage is fine. Best seems odd to me.

[pwykersotz]

It's possible that "bounded accuracy" doesn't mean what you think it means. Please excuse me for a second while I rant about a common misconception:

<Rant>

If we go back to the guy who coined the term (http://archive.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20120604), which of Rodney Thompson's observations about Bounded Accuracy fall apart when the Bladesinger is in the game?

In fact, it looks as if the Bladesinger fits perfectly into one of the very first points he mentions, which is, "Getting better at something means actually getting better at something." A Bladesinger with an AC of 28 (when Shielding) really is extremely hard to hit with attacks, but weak on Con/Dex saving throws because he has only +1 to +5 there at most. Likewise, when Thompson says, "It is easier for players and DMs to understand the relative strength and difficulty of things," that still fits. It would only be violated if monster to-hit bonuses increased in lockstep with the Bladesinger AC such that AC 28 wasn't really very high after all.

In short, Bounded Accuracy is primarily a feature of gameworld and adventure design. It isn't violated just because a PC is good at something. When we start seeing CR 1/4 goblins with +10 to hit, THEN you can complain about Bounded Accuracy violations.

</Rant>

I think the idea of "breaking bounded accuracy" tends to lean towards the idea that certain things are always a threat. That you don't invalidate lower level encounters simply by leveling, just make them easier. 5e seems to have set the bar around 30 for the upper bound, barring excessive magic items. I do remember the thread where someone tested the true limits of bounded accuracy by giving a PC every possible bonus. It was pretty crazy, in the 70's or something.

I haven't played past level 12 yet (getting there) but so far I don't like AC of above 24 for anyone on either side. One of the parts of 5e I've enjoyed the most is that misses tend to be rarer. This means everyone feels effective at what they're doing. The players slaughter monsters, DM's take their pound of flesh, and life moves on. When someone scales so high in AC that you may as well not target that stat, I think the game loses something. I'm not against someone having a very high AC, but I do feel that if you can't be hit by a standard equal CR creature on a 17 or above, things might be being pushed a little far.

[Dimolyth]

I haven't played past level 12 yet (getting there) but so far I don't like AC of above 24 for anyone on either side. One of the parts of 5e I've enjoyed the most is that misses tend to be rarer. This means everyone feels effective at what they're doing. The players slaughter monsters, DM's take their pound of flesh, and life moves on. When someone scales so high in AC that you may as well not target that stat, I think the game loses something. I'm not against someone having a very high AC, but I do feel that if you can't be hit by a standard equal CR creature on a 17 or above, things might be being pushed a little far.

First, you did say "their pound of flesh". The difference between wizard and fighter, that pound of flesh of fighter could be equal 1,5 of the whole wizard. High AC arrives with cost of having bad Con (point buy + ASIS - for DEx and Int) - so bladesinger optimized AC is squishy.
Second, "mellee wizard" tend to become a valid target for everyone, unlike a backup wizard in a robe - who hides after fighters, barbarians, paladins. If that wizard would cast something really nasty - he will become the first target before other party members. And when you focus fire on something unlikely hittable, you will hit sooner or later. For a bladesinger one or two hit means same that for a barbarian a dozen or twenty.
In other words: you have a barbarian, who has lowest AC and most durability, a fighter, who has both medium, a bladesinger, who has highest AC and lowest durability. That is not a problem to a DM. Not at all.
Bladesinger itself is not "gamebreaking". The archetype represents another style of play - I know a player, who really loves a squishy mellee character with high AC, and he had been dissapointed of the absence of it in 5e, before the release of SCAG (and he is definitely not a powergamer, running his paladin with 9 Con but 16 Int for fluff)

[pwykersotz]

First, you did say "their pound of flesh". The difference between wizard and fighter, that pound of flesh of fighter could be equal 1,5 of the whole wizard. High AC arrives with cost of having bad Con (point buy + ASIS - for DEx and Int) - so bladesinger optimized AC is squishy.
Second, "mellee wizard" tend to become a valid target for everyone, unlike a backup wizard in a robe - who hides after fighters, barbarians, paladins. If that wizard would cast something really nasty - he will become the first target before other party members. And when you focus fire on something unlikely hittable, you will hit sooner or later. For a bladesinger one or two hit means same that for a barbarian a dozen or twenty.
In other words: you have a barbarian, who has lowest AC and most durability, a fighter, who has both medium, a bladesinger, who has highest AC and lowest durability. That is not a problem to a DM. Not at all.
Bladesinger itself is not "gamebreaking". The archetype represents another style of play - I know a player, who really loves a squishy mellee character with high AC, and he had been dissapointed of the absence of it in 5e, before the release of SCAG (and he is definitely not a powergamer, running his paladin with 9 Con but 16 Int for fluff)

I didn't assert that the Bladesinger is gamebreaking, or that wanting to play the class and boost AC is powergaming. I merely prefer a game where everyone is subject to what I perceive to be the basic rules. Attack vs AC and Save vs Effect are two of the major ones. I'm okay with damage mitigation or even one or two immunities, but I don't like one of the two ways attackers contest with defenders to be skewed quite so much.

I'm actually fine with burning spell slots to mitigate HP damage, and I'm okay with this Wizard attaining pretty high AC, but blasting so far past the norm isn't something that I like right off the bat.

I'll probably allow Bladesinger in my game anyway.

[MaxWilson]

Why does everyone focus on the Bladesinger's AC and completely ignore their ability to easily impose disadvantage on attackers? Not to mention Blink, Mirror Image, and Contingency. AC syngergizes with those things but the obsession with AC per se tends to obscure the qualitative difference in durability between e.g. an AC 23 Paladin and an AC 23 Bladesinger (even without Shield).

[Dimolyth]

I didn't assert that the Bladesinger is gamebreaking, or that wanting to play the class and boost AC is powergaming. I merely prefer a game where everyone is subject to what I perceive to be the basic rules. Attack vs AC and Save vs Effect are two of the major ones. I'm okay with damage mitigation or even one or two immunities, but I don't like one of the two ways attackers contest with defenders to be skewed quite so much.

I'm actually fine with burning spell slots to mitigate HP damage, and I'm okay with this Wizard attaining pretty high AC, but blasting so far past the norm isn't something that I like right off the bat.

I'll probably allow Bladesinger in my game anyway.

I must say "blasting so far past the norm" is really Shield spell with Spell Mastery. Without it - that is only 23, at high levels (when Dex and Int are maxed), and that is not constant (2/per shot rest + Mage Armor, that could be dispelled).
Shield is gamebreaker here. Before 18 level - wizard will spend his resources to maintain that 20+ AC. So, he will be less wizard, and more squishy fighter who survives until a critical hit or Con save happens. After that 18th level... well, high CR monsters tend to have more than one way to hurt that one-trick monkey PCs)) So personnally I don`t worry about it either as PC or as DM. Still, I can ask fellow player not to use that combo shield spell mastery, if that would really create a disbalance.

[Princess]

Bladesinger shores up Wizard weaknesses - all the core options play to their strength. Is a wizard with good AC, or a wizard who has advantage against all spells, scarier to you? Most of the fear and rumormongering around bladesingers seems to miss the fact that wizards were already good and nothing about bladesinger is going to bring a campaign grinding to a halt.

[georgie_leech]

Bladesinger shores up Wizard weaknesses - all the core options play to their strength. Is a wizard with good AC, or a wizard who has advantage against all spells, scarier to you? Most of the fear and rumormongering around bladesingers seems to miss the fact that wizards were already good and nothing about bladesinger is going to bring a campaign grinding to a halt.

It does notably shore up one of the traditional perceived weaknesses of Wizards, that if you can get next to them they're quite vulnerable. I don't think it's much of an issue because those are some tasty goodies you're giving up for the privilege, but it can definitely rub some the wrong way.

[MaxWilson]

It does notably shore up one of the traditional perceived weaknesses of Wizards, that if you can get next to them they're quite vulnerable. I don't think it's much of an issue because those are some tasty goodies you're giving up for the privilege, but it can definitely rub some the wrong way.

That perception isn't even all that true in 5E any more. Mage Armor + Dex 14 + Shield = AC 20, and then there's Blink/Mirror Image/Contingency (False Life V)/Fire Shield, while he's hitting back at you with Vampiric Touch or Hold Person. 10% to 30% less HP than the equivalent fighter is about all the downside there is.

I never played 3E but I did play a CRPG version of it quite a bit (IWD2) and wizards were chock-full of excellent defensive spells there, too. Thus AFAICT wizards haven't been squishy since 3E, and even AD&D wizards weren't squishy either if you had the right spells up. (E.g. Stoneskin/Ironskin, custom version of Fire Trap that triggers on melee attacks instead of trap opening, etc.)

The correct perception, which is still true today in 5E, is that wizards are squishy inside of an antimagic field or after a Dispel Magic.

There are a number of mid- and high-level monsters including Mezzoloths, Nycaloths, and Glabrezu which can cast Dispel Magic either 2/day or at will. Going from Hasted AC 28 to AC 18 at the same time you get hit with Haste's "wave of lethargy" for a round makes a bladesinger a sad panda.

[Dimolyth]

Pretty much any bladesinger who was made for that unhittable AC is vulnerable to:

1. Focus fire. 20 goblins with slings would have a good chance hitting that mellee arcane god of Armor Class. Focus fire on unhittable mellee wizard? That becomes evident like at second round of combat.

2. Constitution saving throws. And more rear - Str & Cha. And even with Dex & Wis - saves are not "unhittable high", they are unlikely to fail. Make them roll saving throws.

3. Dispel Magic/Counterspell/Antimagic field. Bladesingers which relying on spells even for survivability, not only for attack, are much more affected by magic negating actions.

When a bladesinger becomes a major thread in the party, he will be knocked off much easier than anyone else. They are more vulnerable than any other wizard who stays out of mellee. Those could have they AC also high enough to be not hit by evidence, but they are harder to focus fire, or target Con save (and also they would have higher Con), and dispelling them would just stop their attacks, without making them a guy for beating.

[Kryx]

1. Focus fire. 20 goblins with slings would have a good chance hitting that mellee arcane god of Armor Class. Focus fire on unhittable mellee wizard? That becomes evident like at second round of combat.
How is he vulnerable to focus fire? Just because there are a lot of attacks? He's far less vulnerable than other classes as his AC is higher..


2. Constitution saving throws. And more rear - Str & Cha. And even with Dex & Wis - saves are not "unhittable high", they are unlikely to fail. Make them roll saving throws.
So, the same as any other class? Plus he has a bonus (Int) to concentration checks.


3. Dispel Magic/Counterspell/Antimagic field.
Only an antimagic field would end bladesong. He still has a great base AC without his protective spells, but all pure casters are vulnerable to that..

[MaxWilson]

Pretty much any bladesinger who was made for that unhittable AC is vulnerable to:

1. Focus fire. 20 goblins with slings would have a good chance hitting that mellee arcane god of Armor Class. Focus fire on unhittable mellee wizard? That becomes evident like at second round of combat.

I agree with your points #2 and #3, but this one not so much. Let's stipulate that the bladesinger has Wis 12 and Perception proficiency, so call it +4 to perception total at 5th level. A goblin has +6 to Stealth so has a 57% chance of beating the wizard's active perception, or a 60% chance of beating the DC 15 to hide from the wizard successfully with Nimble Escape. That means that if the wizard puts up Blur, or if they are at greater than 30' range (long range for slings), or if he goes prone, they have a 60% chance of attacking normally at +4 (because advantage from being hidden cancels out disadvantage from Blur/etc.) and 40% chance of attacking with disadvantage at +4, doing d4+2 damage on a hit. (If all twenty goblins are within 30' they are perfectly positioned for a Fireball BTW. Shouldn't clump up that way.)

If the Bladesinger still has AC 19 at that level and is caught without partial cover, he will get hit 4.32 times per round on average for 20.99 DPR including crits if he does not Shield, or 0.62 times per round for 4.32 points of damage if he does Shield. (Instead of Shielding, or in addition to it, he can also choose to seek partial cover and snipe goblins with Acid Splash or Fire Bolt or a longbow.)

If the Bladesinger were alone and 5th level (that would be 454% of Deadly BTW), the goblins might do all right. But with three other PCs involved, inflicting 4.32 DPR is just not enough. It's not a winning proposition for the goblins.

Incidentally, your typical GWM Barbearian would be taking 38.50 damage per round, approximately halved to 18ish for Rage. The Bladesinger is actually four times as durable as a Barbearian in this scenario! Lesson: Twenty goblins are murderously good. But, you should really let them keep their shortbows instead of trading them out for slings so they can avoid disadvantage.