Eldritch Knight + Bladesinger Multiclass

[Darick]

Ok, I'm sure something like this may have been done but I don't have the time to go through everything to look for the answer so I'm hoping someone can help in the short amount of time I do have.

My group is starting new characters tomorrow(at level 3) and I've spent most of my week looking for help with my problem but I guess no one else has had it before(if they have then it's not been obvious in my searches).

The character so far;
Human(Variant)
Fighter(Eldritch Knight) 3
STR 16 (+3)
Dex 10 (+0)
Con 13 (+1)
Int 14 (+2)
Wis 12 (+1)
Cha 10 (+0)
(My table isn't too fond of negative scores so we avoid them)

Magic Initiate feat for Green-Flame Blade and Light(for utility)
I'm torn between combat or utility for the 1st-level spell from this feat.


So now you're acquainted with the character as it is so far, I'm wondering does it make sense to multiclass wizard for Bladesinger or possibly one of the other wizard traditions(evocation or abjuration((one of the ones the EK is limited to)))?


Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope...

[Zman]

Can't the EK simply pick Greenflame blade as it is added to the wizard list and they choose from spells on the Wizard's list? No need for Magic Initiate.

If your character wants to be more Wizardy than Fightery, then the Multiclass makes sense so long as your DM waves the Elven prerequisite for Bladesinger. Abjurer works well too. Getting to EK7 for War Magic can be useful, Greenflame blade then bonus attack. Not terribly useful with feats like GWM, PAM, or ShielMaster.

If your character wants to be more Fightery than Wizardy then it doesn't help you too much. Much more useful for Feats, though picking up a touch of Wizard can really open up low level utility and pick up spell slots, but beware delaying your Extra Attacks etc.

[Darick]

Thanks for the quick reply.


Can't the EK simply pick Greenflame blade as it is added to the wizard list and they choose from spells on the Wizard's list? No need for Magic Initiate.


I could, but I'm going to use my EK cantrips for more utility, like True Strike or Blade Ward and Fire Bolt( for ranged)


If your character wants to be more Wizardy than Fightery, then the Multiclass makes sense so long as your DM waves the Elven prerequisite for Bladesinger. Abjurer works well too. Getting to EK7 for War Magic can be useful, Greenflame blade then bonus attack. Not terribly useful with feats like GWM, PAM, or ShielMaster.

Prereqs are waived, they don't make sense for our world.
So, Evoker wouldn't be too good of an option? And would BS still be a good idea even though I'm ignoring Dex for the time being? Should probably add that I'm likely to be in medium armor.


If your character wants to be more Fightery than Wizardy then it doesn't help you too much. Much more useful for Feats, though picking up a touch of Wizard can really open up low level utility and pick up spell slots, but beware delaying your Extra Attacks etc.

I'm looking at Wizard for the additional spells(slots and choices) mostly oh and their awesome ritual casting. The tradition features are pretty nice too.

[R.Shackleford]

Do not pick up true strike, it is a waste of a cantrip for you.

I repeat, do not pick true strike!

[Darick]

Do not pick up true strike, it is a waste of a cantrip for you.

I repeat, do not pick true strike!

Even with War Magic in the coming levels?

[MeeposFire]

sadly true strike has way too many restrictions to be useful. Often times you would be better off doing other methods of getting advantage (like shoving which only costs one of your attacks) rather than using true strike.

I would go with things like minor illusion, mage hand, and/or prestidigitation if you want more utility from cantrips in the PHB.


As for war magic consider that getting advantage is the same as getting two attack rolls on a target but you only get the better one. Using true strike you only get one attack but two rolls.

If you were to use your attack action at level 5 you would get two attacks but you could potentially hit BOTH times.


Also war magic does not combo well with true strike due to one of the lame restrictions on true strike as it only affects one attack on your NEXT turn as I recall so your attack with war magic is not affected (your next attack would be but that is not that good).

[Toadkiller]

Edit: Ninja struck with a better answer

It is still kind of lame.

It doesn't kick in until your next turn. You may well have lost concentration by then. You're better off using a cantrip to do something immediately useful, then your attack with war magic.

[MeeposFire]

To optimize war magic you want to boost damage on a single attack such as sneak attack. You can also optimize your cantrip choice. EB with a multiclass into warlock is the best option at range but in melee you can get a lot of mileage with booming blade so long as you can force the bonus damage.

If you can force the bonus damage then booming blade will deal competitive damage compared to using your attack action. If you can't force it the damage is not as good.

[Specter]

If you're trying to apply for Bladesinger, you need elvish blood, unless the DM rules otherwise.

But you don't NEED it if you're going for the Strenght route; you're better off taking the Diviner route. Check my signature, if you feel like it.

And yes, True Strike is meh.

[Darick]

To optimize war magic you want to boost damage on a single attack such as sneak attack. You can also optimize your cantrip choice. EB with a multiclass into warlock is the best option at range but in melee you can get a lot of mileage with booming blade so long as you can force the bonus damage.

If you can force the bonus damage then booming blade will deal competitive damage compared to using your attack action. If you can't force it the damage is not as good.

Would GFB be a better option if I can't force it?

Also thank you for the assistance with War Magic, and thank you to everyone else on that one as well.

[Malifice]

Ok, I'm sure something like this may have been done but I don't have the time to go through everything to look for the answer so I'm hoping someone can help in the short amount of time I do have.

My group is starting new characters tomorrow(at level 3) and I've spent most of my week looking for help with my problem but I guess no one else has had it before(if they have then it's not been obvious in my searches).

The character so far;
Human(Variant)
Fighter(Eldritch Knight) 3
STR 16 (+3)
Dex 10 (+0)
Con 13 (+1)
Int 14 (+2)
Wis 12 (+1)
Cha 10 (+0)
(My table isn't too fond of negative scores so we avoid them)

Magic Initiate feat for Green-Flame Blade and Light(for utility)
I'm torn between combat or utility for the 1st-level spell from this feat.


So now you're acquainted with the character as it is so far, I'm wondering does it make sense to multiclass wizard for Bladesinger or possibly one of the other wizard traditions(evocation or abjuration((one of the ones the EK is limited to)))?


Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope...

As a human, bladesinger is out (Elf only) unless your DM allows it.

Its a damn shame you dont have a Cha of 13+, I would have strongly suggested a 2 level dip into Paladin, and then taking levels of sorcerer.

Fighter 7, Pal 2, Sorc 11 or Fighter 11, Pal 2, Sorc 7 works nicely.

[MeeposFire]

Would GFB be a better option if I can't force it?

Also thank you for the assistance with War Magic, and thank you to everyone else on that one as well.

GFB is in a similar boat just a different trigger. GFB is best if you can get that second instance to trigger. booming blade gets it by forcing the enemy to move GFB needs a second target nearby.

Note that if you only choose one and you want ot use war magic most of the time then booming blade gets you the most damage on a single target. If you are ok with switching between war magic and your attack action then take GFB as you can use it when there are multiple targets and use the attack action when there isn't a second target.

If you use booming blade getting mobile is a good idea. Against melee enemies you back off and make them move to you or an ally. If it is a ranged enemy you stay up close and force them to choose between moving and eating the extra damage (and an opportunity attack) or stay close and be less effective and likely more vulnerable.

[Darick]

GFB is in a similar boat just a different trigger. GFB is best if you can get that second instance to trigger. booming blade gets it by forcing the enemy to move GFB needs a second target nearby.

Note that if you only choose one and you want ot use war magic most of the time then booming blade gets you the most damage on a single target. If you are ok with switching between war magic and your attack action then take GFB as you can use it when there are multiple targets and use the attack action when there isn't a second target.

If you use booming blade getting mobile is a good idea. Against melee enemies you back off and make them move to you or an ally. If it is a ranged enemy you stay up close and force them to choose between moving and eating the extra damage (and an opportunity attack) or stay close and be less effective and likely more vulnerable.

Noted and thank you again for the advice.

[Darick]

As a human, bladesinger is out (Elf only) unless your DM allows it.

Its a damn shame you dont have a Cha of 13+, I would have strongly suggested a 2 level dip into Paladin, and then taking levels of sorcerer.

Fighter 7, Pal 2, Sorc 11 or Fighter 11, Pal 2, Sorc 7 works nicely.

Prereq's for a lot of things have been waived in our setting.

I've played a Sorc before and I didn't enjoy it too much and we've already got a paladin in the party so I'm not looking to step on his toes lol.

[R.Shackleford]

Prereq's for a lot of things have been waived in our setting.

I've played a Sorc before and I didn't enjoy it too much and we've already got a paladin in the party so I'm not looking to step on his toes lol.

Unless you pick exactly the same subclass and fight exactly the same way... You won't be stepping on anyone's toes in 5e.

You could have 4 Paladins all playing the same game and none of them play identical to the other or all of them feel the same.

An Eldritch Knight is already pretty Paladin ish.

[Temperjoke]

Why are you taking EK if you're thinking Bladesinger as well? You can't use Bladesong while wearing medium or heavy armor, or while wearing a shield, which is a large part of taking Fighter levels...

[Corran]

I have one question before I can say anything else. How do you want your character to fight? Two-hander, S&B, twf, bow, or polearm? Or are you undecided and are willing to consider your options?

[Giant2005]

I wouldn't recommend Bladesinger if you are going Eldritch Knight - there is too much overlap in their abilities. Their defensive bonuses do not stack and neither do their offensive ones.
If you want to be combat focused, Enchantment or Abjuration are better schools for an EK. If you want to be magic focused, then ditch EK entirely.

[R.Shackleford]

I wouldn't recommend Bladesinger if you are going Eldritch Knight - there is too much overlap in their abilities. Their defensive bonuses do not stack and neither do their offensive ones.
If you want to be combat focused, Enchantment or Abjuration are better schools for an EK. If you want to be magic focused, then ditch EK entirely.

Fighter 2/Blade Pact Fiend Warlock X would do very well for someone wanting to do a bit of A and a bit of B while stay relevant in both ends.

[Malifice]

Fighter 2/Blade Pact Fiend Warlock X would do very well for someone wanting to do a bit of A and a bit of B while stay relevant in both ends.

If youre riding fighter to 2 here, you might as well go to 3 (BM manouvers, increased crit or simply expanding known spells and adding shield to your list of spells via EK).

Fighter 3/ Lock 17 is a damn fine MC.

[R.Shackleford]

If youre riding fighter to 2 here, you might as well go to 3 (BM manouvers, increased crit or simply expanding known spells and adding shield to your list of spells via EK).

Fighter 3/ Lock 17 is a damn fine MC.

Meh, not a bad choice, but not one I see particulary needed. Shield is a fine spell but your AC is going to be over 20 already. You could take Magic Initiate (Sorcerer) for that spell and two utility cantrips (well, 1, I would pick up shocking grasp for the funsies).

18 Warlock gives you an extra Invocation and you will already be doing (2d6 + GWF + GWM +Str + Cha + Hex) ×2 to damage (×4 with action surge) so the BM isn't really needed. There are some cool invocations.

[Malifice]

18 Warlock gives you an extra Invocation and you will already be doing (2d6 + GWF + GWM +Str + Cha + Hex) ×2 to damage (×4 with action surge) so the BM isn't really needed. There are some cool invocations.

1 invocation vs 4 sup dice (precise strike, tripping and riposte) is a massive buff that I would take over an extra invocation any day.

You get the dice early too. You have to wait till 20th for that invocation.

[R.Shackleford]

1 invocation vs 4 sup dice (precise strike, tripping and riposte) is a massive buff that I would take over an extra invocation any day.

You get the dice early too. You have to wait till 20th for that invocation.

Don't care about doing more damage, already do plenty enough damage. Fighter 3 is overrated in a multiclass. If you need a damage boost then fien, but if you don't need a damage boost then it is worthless.

If we are building level 20 builds them it doesn't matter if it's first or last, it is part of the level 20 build.

[Giant2005]

Don't care about doing more damage, already do plenty enough damage. Fighter 3 is overrated in a multiclass. If you need a damage boost then fien, but if you don't need a damage boost then it is worthless.

If we are building level 20 builds them it doesn't matter if it's first or last, it is part of the level 20 build.

I agree with this somewhat. More damage is always great, but if I am playing a caster I'd really want to have the potential for getting level 9 spells (not that I am ever actually likely to reach that high regardless of my build, but I like to at least have hope).
Sure a 3 Fighter/17 caster will eventually get level 9 spells, but they get them at level 20, which is likely going to be the level we stop playing if we actually make it that far. So in order to actually use them, I'd need to get them at level 19 or earlier.
I think that clinging to the hope of using level 9 spells is more valuable to me than a bit of extra damage. 3 levels is just too much of an investment to me, regardless of what those levels bring to the table (even 2 levels is pushing it).

[Malifice]

Don't care about doing more damage, already do plenty enough damage. Fighter 3 is overrated in a multiclass. If you need a damage boost then fien, but if you don't need a damage boost then it is worthless.

If we are building level 20 builds them it doesn't matter if it's first or last, it is part of the level 20 build.

Its not just the damage boost mate (and the damage boost is substantial) its also the extra options. Miss me? Screw it i'll riposte. I missed (with GWM?) I'll use precise strike (heck it gives you more freedom to use GWM as long as you have those dice up your sleeve). I hit the critter? Cool I'll knock the sucker prone, action surge and toggle GWM on.

As a Warlock youre pushing for short rests a fair bit. Mine gets a short rest every 2-3 encounters on average (the DMG standard), and if this guy follows the same paradigm, its nice to have (4 spell slots + 4 die + second wind + action surge) all come back online after a quick rest.

[Citan]

Ok, I'm sure something like this may have been done but I don't have the time to go through everything to look for the answer so I'm hoping someone can help in the short amount of time I do have.

My group is starting new characters tomorrow(at level 3) and I've spent most of my week looking for help with my problem but I guess no one else has had it before(if they have then it's not been obvious in my searches).

The character so far;
Human(Variant)
Fighter(Eldritch Knight) 3
STR 16 (+3) / Dex 10 (+0) / Con 13 (+1) / Int 14 (+2) / Wis 12 (+1) / Cha 10 (+0)

Magic Initiate feat for Green-Flame Blade and Light(for utility)
I'm torn between combat or utility for the 1st-level spell from this feat.

Hi! ;)
A few thoughts.

1. If you consider just dipping into a Wizard, then Magic Initiate is useless and you should pick up a melee cantrip ASAP (either with Eldricht Knight or when multiclassing).
And since you start at lvl 3 you could very well do Fighter 2 / Wizard 1 to get the "EK feeling" but with more options.

2. Your stats suggest you are going towards the STR route. In that case, Bladesinger is actually the worst tradition for you because most of its abilities require you to wield only one-handed weapons and light or no armor.
If you were considering a dual-wielder though, swap STR with DEX and you would be good to go.

3. If you consider taking more Wizards levels in your career, then (notwithstanding the previous point) Bladesinger is not the best, since the lvl 6 Extra Attack will overlap with Fighter, and you won't go up to 10 anyways. Diviner, Abjurer, Evoker or Transmuter would be great choices then (my personal favorite being Transmuter ;)).

As for "don't take EK if you multiclass in Wizard because it's useless" that I read somewhere, sorry but that's impressively stupid to say such a thing.
EK's lvl 10 feature will help you immensely in making your Wizard spells count, since you have point-buy stats so a casting stat far lesser than usual at start (14), with little chance to get it up to 20 (or even bump it at all, since you are a weapon damage dealer first).
And you will want to go at least Fighter 11 anyways because of the third attack. Probably 12 for ASI and even spell caster level.
Although, depending on what spells you plan to use, you could prefer ranged attack over melee attacks. Or you will have to take the Mobile feat to hit&run before casting. Pretty doable though and can be nasty. :)


EK 12 / Wizard 8 (Evoker for AOE and cantrips or Abjurer for protection).
Spend at least 1 ASI on STR (18), 1 on INT (16), take Mobile and Warcaster feats. Do what you want with the remaining (Alert feat would be nice because you have low DEX and you don't want to be the last to go, but you also might want to bump STR, especially if nobody can cast Bless).
When you need to wrap things up, action surge, strike up to 3 enemies then cast Slow on them. Now your friends can waste them. Or move away then cast a Fireball to roast them, simple and tasty.



EK 15 / Bladesinger 5
Swap STR and DEX obviously.
Use of ASI is basically the same, except that you are now a dual-wielder in light armor (with Dual-Wielding Fighting Style of course), and you may want to learn the related feats.

You can also use the teleport to make a nova strike on an enemy then flash away to security. :)

Going Wizard up to 5 allows you to learn interesting spells earlier than as a Fighter (namely Haste) while avoiding features overlap and keeping most useful features of Eldricht Knight.



EK 12 / Wizard 8 (Evoker or Transmuter)
Same as the previous except that you don't need Mobile anymore. You just can spew arrows at your enemies before casting nasty spell at them. You could even consider a Magic Initiate in Cleric to get a few healing spells and Bless if you plan on using only attack spells. This way you improve your to-hit by more than using an ASI on DEX, as well as your allies. With that said, if your Pal friend intends to cast Bless as a basis, forget that. You will learn Haste soon enough anyways. :)



I do agree with others though that a) if you planned on multiclassing several levels (at least 6) and b) if you had the CHA instead of INT... Sorcerer would have been a better bet because of metamagic. :)

Also agreed with the Paladin 2-3 dip suggestion for a STR Fighter. Complements your role and does not necessarily tip-toe on anyone.

You could dip up to 2 to get Paladin spells and smite. This would be especially nice if your Paladin is Vengeance already. Why?
Because he will probably always use his concentration on Hunter's Mark. So he can't cast Bless. So by dipping Paladin you get this spell and can cast it instead, benefitting everyone. Sure, story may ends once you learn Haste, but as a "nearly pure" EK you will learn it very late.
As for dipping up to 3 for either Vengeance or Devotion, it's easy. Vengeance for a melee character, especially considering how low your CHA would be. For a ranged character Devotion could be better but not impressive unless you bump CHA to at least 16, maybe 18 (And if it's a Crossbow Expert, then Vengeance will be better).


But don't think too much about it. All these suggestions do not mean that your first idea is bad. These are just min-maxing alternatives. ^^

Just focus on how you want to have fun and what role you want to fill in your group. ;)

As long as you take into account the advices posted in the thread about the Fighter / Wizard multiclass, you can stick with it without worries. ;)

[R.Shackleford]

Its not just the damage boost mate (and the damage boost is substantial) its also the extra options. Miss me? Screw it i'll riposte. I missed (with GWM?) I'll use precise strike (heck it gives you more freedom to use GWM as long as you have those dice up your sleeve). I hit the critter? Cool I'll knock the sucker prone, action surge and toggle GWM on.

As a Warlock youre pushing for short rests a fair bit. Mine gets a short rest every 2-3 encounters on average (the DMG standard), and if this guy follows the same paradigm, its nice to have (4 spell slots + 4 die + second wind + action surge) all come back online after a quick rest.

Sorry but being able to do low level stuff (level 1 - 3) at high level is pitiful.

All it is is an extra 4d8 damage per short rest. Riposte is based on the idea that I want enemies to be making melee attacks against me. All the other maneuvers don't have any feature that I can't replicate with spells or that are worth adding onto my attacks. They aren't worth taking up the space in my memory to use.

You may be excited to use a level 3 feature at level 20 but for those of us that regularly play high level games (i suggest everyone play a level 17+ one shot or campaign at least 1/month) these options just aren't worth remembering.

What you can get from an extra invocation, two invocations are taken up with Extra Attack and Thirsting Blade. Two more are taken up to make sure your ranged option is up to par. So that's 4 left to pick from. My favorites include...

Master of Myriad Form: At-Will Alter Self

Sculptors of the Flesh: Polymorph

Visions of the Distant Realms: Arcane Eye at-will

Mire of the Mind: Slow 1/day

Devil's Sight

Ascendant Step: Levitate at-will

As a Warlock I feel like Devil Sight is expected. Sculptors of the Flesh and Masters of Myriad Form are both too awesome to pass up.

Arcane Eye, Levitate, or Slow is what I would put up against the maneuver effects (for what I would want to use) and all three of these effects win out against the maneuvers. If the maneuver effects were at-will then I could see an argument for menacing attack but as they are, they aren't worth it. Hell, the maneuvers such as trip require a large or smaller enemy... Yeah that's what I wants an ability that I can't use on an enemy based on size.

Especially when I'm at those levels where I run into huge+ creatures.

So no, the options that superiority dice gives me just aren't worth it. 4d8 damage and meh maneuvers just don't equal up to what I'm getting from invocations. Hell, I would take a subpar invocation and still get more mileage out of it.

I would take champion before I took battle master. At least then my abilities make sense and don't turn off when I go up against a huge+ creature.

[Malifice]

Sorry but being able to do low level stuff (level 1 - 3) at high level is pitiful.

Divine smite, action surge, cunning action and rage all disagree with you.


All it is is an extra 4d8 damage per short rest.

Spoken like someone who doesnt understand how precise strike, tripping attack and riposte work.

DM: Ok Player, the cleric is down and the wizard is out of slots, its your turn against the ancient dragon.
Player: I toggle GWM 'on' and swing! [rolls]. Damn I missed by 2. Wait - I'll expend a superioirty dice and use precise strike. [rolls] A three! I HIT!

This NEVER gets old I assure you. Plus the fact that it comes online way before 20th level and is available over your whole career is totes worth it.

[DanyBallon]

Going EK10/BS10, would let you get both Eldritch strike (EK) and Song of defense (BS) wich would be quite useful to soak up damage since your AC won't be too high (low dex, not enough int, and restricted to light armor). You get as well war magic, and a single extra attack. Also it would allow you access to 7th level spell slots, and be able to cast 5th level wizard spells.

A more fightery build would be EK15/BS5, where you get 2 extra attacks, war magic, eldritch strike, two uses of indominatable, a total of 6 ASI, 5th level spell slots, and can cast 3rd level wizards spells. You'll still lack on the AC side, but with your ASI you can pump up your Int up to the max for a +5 to AC while bladesinging and max Int will assure you that your spells will be more potent (higher attack bonus and spell DC)

Lastly, if you go the more wizardry route, EK isn't as usefull if you don't get war magic, and to get it, you need to forgo Song of victory, BS14/F6 will give you 6 ASI, champions gives you improved crit, battlemasters let you have superiority dices, and a selection of maneuver, while EK boost your maximum spell slots level and you can bound to a weapon. Going BS16/F4 gives you all the same options with one les ASI, but in exchange you have access to 8th level spells as a wizard.

In all the case, you still benefit from action surge, second wind, and you can select a fighting style. Also, with the light armor restriction and low dex, mage armor and shield, especially the later, would be nice to have in your spellbook.

Btw, these are far from optimized options, its just to let you know what you get and what you lose at certain threshold and how it will affect the playstyle of such a character.

[Saggo]

Even with War Magic in the coming levels?

Besides True Strike really not being worth it in general, it specifically doesn't work with War Magic. You get advantage on you're first attack of your next turn.

[Malifice]

Besides True Strike really not being worth it in general, it specifically doesn't work with War Magic. You get advantage on you're first attack of your next turn.

It does work but you have not till turn 2 (and then onwards). OK combo on EK/ Rogues who plan on soloing and cant be bothered going swashbucker.

Blade ward is the absolute shizz though. Steal everything the Barbarian is famous for (resistance vs attacks), and have it running all round, every round.

[Saggo]

It does work but you have not till turn 2 (and then onwards). OK combo on EK/ Rogues who plan on soloing and cant be bothered going swashbucker.

It doesn't work the bonus attack on the turn it was cast, usually what the intent was.

[Malifice]

It doesn't work the bonus attack on the turn it was cast, usually what the intent was.

The fighter can make an attack and then (cast cantrip) and then full attack the following round (with the first attack at advantage) or attack at advantage and cantrip again and repeat each round.

[Saggo]

The fighter can make an attack and then (cast cantrip) and then full attack the following round (with the first attack at advantage) or attack at advantage and cantrip again and repeat each round.

Not sure what you're getting at, how are you casting True Strike after you attack?

[Darick]

I have one question before I can say anything else. How do you want your character to fight? Two-hander, S&B, twf, bow, or polearm? Or are you undecided and are willing to consider your options?

Mostly undecided but I was thinking Longsword + spells(like in skyrim almost). Try to make use of the Dueling fighting style.

[Malifice]

Not sure what you're getting at, how are you casting True Strike after you attack?

Does the order matter?

[Citan]

Going EK10/BS10, would let you get both Eldritch strike (EK) and Song of defense (BS) wich would be quite useful to soak up damage since your AC won't be too high (low dex, not enough int, and restricted to light armor). You get as well war magic, and a single extra attack. Also it would allow you access to 7th level spell slots, and be able to cast 5th level wizard spells.

Lastly, if you go the more wizardry route, EK isn't as usefull if you don't get war magic, and to get it, you need to forgo Song of victory.
Except that there is no good reason (imo) for any martial, even half-caster, to discard one more level which grants a 3rd attack per Attack. :)
You could argue that "there are melee cantrips that are as good and then better at end" but while it's true for many builds, it would not necessarily be true for a Fighter.
- STR Melee? Then you probably want the GWM feat, meaning you want as many attacks as possible.
- DEX Melee? If you're dual wielding (which is Bladesinger), you will want to use the Attack action because otherwise you can't get the bonus action attack.
- DEX Ranged? No cantrip can beat the versatility of three (four with Crossbow Expert) chances to hit (and maybe inflict heavy damage if you took Sharpshooter instead).
Especially on the Fighter class which get Action Surge (although you can also spend it on casting ;)).

Also, Song of Defense, didn't have a chance to play Bladesinger personnally but it seems very "meh" to me. You use both a reaction and a spell slot to mitigate damage... Sure, it's a nice panic button, but it means...
- either blowing a low level slot and reduce a very small portion of damage.
- or allowing a deadly hit at the price of your highest spell slot which you could have used to save the day before or after.
On a build which will have increased HP and probably defense compared to a pure Bladesinger, doesn't seem that useful to me.

Same with Song of Victory, because casting stat won't be high enough to beat a full additional weapon attack.

Both of these abilities were clearly designed for a pure Bladesinger Wizard, hence less useful in this particular topic compared to 3rd attack and extra ASI (Fighter 12).

Also, the greatest thing of Fighter isn't War Magic but Eldricht Strike: one of the very few ways to put enemy at disadvantage for rolling a save.


Does the order matter?
It seems to. :)
To be honest, I've been wondering too about this.
The letter of War Magic seems to imply that you make your bonus action weapon attack AFTER casting the cantrip. With that said, it's only because of the formulation, there is no express condition to follow this order.
Considering that some abilities or spells expressly specify an order, and considering that the section dedicated to bonus action tells that "unless specific rule you take your bonus action whenever", by RAW you can cast the cantrip after... Not sure about RAI but don't think it would break anything anyway.

[Malifice]

To be honest, I've been wondering too about this.
The letter of War Magic seems to imply that you make your bonus action weapon attack AFTER casting the cantrip. With that said, it's only because of the formulation, there is no express condition to follow this order.

True strike says it happens on your first attack the following turn (as long as your concentration doent drop prior).

So its irrelevant whether (on round one) you attack and cast true strike, or the other way around. The following round (as long as you havent lost concentration) true strike kicks in and you get advantage on the first melee attack you make.

You can repeat this over and over again if you only want to make the one attack at advantage per turn, on every turn, barring your first turn for the encounter.

[Specter]

True Strike blows, it's settled. You know what's better than attacking with advantage? Attacking twice. Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade called.

As for feats, War Caster is good to use a shield along with that sword, otherwise casting becomes hell.

[Malifice]

True Strike blows, it's settled. You know what's better than attacking with advantage? Attacking twice. Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade called.

As for feats, War Caster is good to use a shield along with that sword, otherwise casting becomes hell.

Its useful in corner cases. A EK 7/ Rogue 13 could make some use out of true strike.

[Saggo]

Does the order matter?

It does, War Magic triggers when you cast a cantrip.

Turn 1: Action True Strike (concentrating), Bonus Normal Attack.
Turn 2: Action True Strike (replaced concentration, so previous True Strike goes away), Bonus Normal Attack.

[Specter]

The only situation where I can see True Strike shining is against a target that provides constant disadvantage (such as someone with Blur or Cloak of Displacement). A rogue can find better ways to get advantage with his bonus action.

[DivisibleByZero]

It does, War Magic triggers when you cast a cantrip.

Turn 1: Action True Strike (concentrating), Bonus Normal Attack.
Turn 2: Action True Strike (replaced concentration, so previous True Strike goes away), Bonus Normal Attack.

It doesn't unless your DM is a ridiculously game-ist jerk of a rules lawyer. A bonus action can be taken at any time, unless its timing is specified. Nothing in War Magic's description says that they have to be done in a certain order. It says that your action will be spent on the cantrip, and that your bonus action will be spent on the attack.

Player: "I'm going to use War Magic to make a bonus action attack and cast a cantrip. I should really just be attacking twice, but I want to do this instead."
Crappy DM: "No, because I read that in a way which makes an already useless spell even worse, so I'm going with that interpretation just to screw you over."
Reasonable DM: "Cool, go for it."

[Tanarii]

The only situation where I can see True Strike shining
If you can somehow use it before combat begins, but in a situation where you can't stealth to surprise the target.

If you're a rogue in one on one combat with no other way to get advantage against your foe.

If you're going to drop a massively damaging attack that you can only use once, and it's worth sacrificing this rounds damage for next rounds. IMO this is why it's a spell for spellcasters, not physical attackers. Of course, the number of spells that use attack rolls in the PHB sucks, so it's hard to justify getting the cantrip. If it also gave your target disadvantage of Ref saves, it might have some oomph to it.

[Tanarii]

It doesn't unless your DM is a ridiculously game-ist jerk of a rules lawyer. A bonus action can be taken at any time, unless its timing is specified. Nothing in War Magic's description says that they have to be done in a certain order. It says that your action will be spent on the cantrip, and that your bonus action will be spent on the attack.

its not ridiculously jerky nor rules lawyerly. It's the basics of reading the feature which has timing built in (when you use your action), how bonus actions work (you don't even have one to use unless something gives you one), and in this case how concentration works.

True Strike just flat out isn't useable with chained War Magic.

Edit: It is rules lawyerly. Just not ridiculously. :smalltongue: It's also a good demonstration of why True Strike is flat out broken. There's almost no way to get it to work, even with abilities that should help handle its fatal flaws. So it's better to point it out and house rule the cantrip, than house rule the interaction. IMO

[DanyBallon]

It doesn't unless your DM is a ridiculously game-ist jerk of a rules lawyer. A bonus action can be taken at any time, unless its timing is specified. Nothing in War Magic's description says that they have to be done in a certain order. It says that your action will be spent on the cantrip, and that your bonus action will be spent on the attack.

Player: "I'm going to use War Magic to make a bonus action attack and cast a cantrip. I should really just be attacking twice, but I want to do this instead."
Crappy DM: "No, because I read that in a way which makes an already useless spell even worse, so I'm going with that interpretation just to screw you over."
Reasonable DM: "Cool, go for it."

Actually, bonus actions are available only if something allow for a bonus action to be taken, in the case of the War Magic, if you cast a cantrip using War Magic, you are then allowed to make an attack as a bonus action.

But I agree with you, that a more liberal interpretation of the rule has more chance to bring more fun around the table.

[DivisibleByZero]

Actually, bonus actions are available only if something allow for a bonus action to be taken, in the case of the War Magic, if you cast a cantrip using War Magic, you are then allowed to make an attack as a bonus action.

But I agree with you, that a more liberal interpretation of the rule has more chance to bring more fun around the table.

Yes, but the simple act of declaring that you'll be using War Magic should be enough to create the bonus action. Because that's what War Magic does. It creates a bonus action which you use to make an attack as long as you cast a cantrip that round using your action.
If the declaration isn't enough, then your DM is being a lawyer-ish jerk.

This is the opposite argument from Quickening a spell. Remember that whole debate, about if you do it in a certain order, then you can cast a regular spell with your action?
The order of operations doesn't matter in that case, and it still doesn't matter here.

[Tanarii]

Because that's what War Magic does.

No it isn't. Go read it again. It create the bonus action when you use your action to cast a cantrip. You must use your action, and you must cast a cantrip.

trying to get around this is clearly just the player being a munchkin, or he can't read the rules.

[Saggo]

Yes, but the simple act of declaring that you'll be using War Magic should be enough to create the bonus action. Because that's what War Magic does. It creates a bonus action which you use to make an attack as long as you cast a cantrip that round using your action.
If the declaration isn't enough, then your DM is being a lawyer-ish jerk.

You don't say you're using War Magic. War Magic is just there, it adds one attack to your list of possible bonus actions when you cast the cantrip. Anything else is a houserule to the feature.

[DivisibleByZero]

No it isn't. Go read it again. It create the bonus action when you use your action to cast a cantrip. You must use your action, and you must cast a cantrip.

trying to get around at is clearly just the player being a munchkin who can't read the rules.

Exactly, you declare that you'll be using War Magic to cast a cantrip and make an attack. The order doesn't matter. The declaration is what matters. When you [do this] doesn't have to mean These things happen in this order.
When you [do this] can simply be interpreted to mean that you spend your turn on that action.... which you are.
Inferring an order of operations that is not expressly stated creates problems. The word When could imply an OoO, but it doesn't have to, so instantly concluding that it does is on the game-ist lawyer side.

Read in plain English, it can go either way. The more liberal reading is the most fun, so why would anyone want to take the game-ist lawyer's version that's less fun? It's not like there is ANY combination of cantrips and single weapon attacks that becomes broken, so using the game-ist lawyer's reading is unreasonable in my mind.

You call me a munchkin, I call you a game-ist lawyer. To each his own.

[Tanarii]

You call me a munchkin, I call you a game-ist lawyer. To each his own.im not calling you anything. I'm sarcastically pointing out how innapropriate your accusations of jerk game-ist rules-lawyering are.

[DivisibleByZero]

im not calling you anything. I'm sarcastically pointing out how innapropriate your accusations of jerk game-ist rules-lawyering are.

But that interpretation is rules lawyer-ish.
It is game-ist.
And it is less fun for everyone involved, which means it's kind of jerk-ish as well.
Is my calling a spade a spade a problem for you?

[DanyBallon]

Technically speaking, you don't say you use War Magic, when you have the feature and you cast a cantrip, you automatically gain a possible bonus action in the form of an attack.

Again, I'm with you saying that the more liberal interpretation allow for more fun. But those who prefer to use War Magic as written are not being rule-lawyerish, they just use the rules.

[DivisibleByZero]

Technically speaking, you don't say you use War Magic, when you have the feature and you cast a cantrip, you automatically gain a possible bonus action in the form of an attack.

Again, I'm with you saying that the more liberal interpretation allow for more fun. But those who prefer to use War Magic as written are not being rule-lawyerish, they just use the rules.

But it doesn't say "after you use your action to cast a cantrip". The people claiming an order of operations are ignoring the fact that When doesn't necessarily imply an OoO. It might, but it doesn't have to.
Both readings are perfectly viable. I admit that their reading is viable.
When might imply an OoO in some cases.
But it could just as easily be stating that your action will be spent this turn on X, and that is also a viable reading of the word When.
They refuse to admit that mine/ours/the other one is also viable.
That's where the lawyers come in.

[Giant2005]

This argument is the exact same one that occurred regarding Shield Master. Regarding Shield Master, JC clarified that the order doesn't matter - the same should apply with War Magic.

[DivisibleByZero]

This argument is the exact same one that occurred regarding Shield Master. Regarding Shield Master, JC clarified that the order doesn't matter - the same should apply with War Magic.

As I have already stated, only I used the Quicken Spell comparison.
The word When does not imply an order of operations.
The order doesn't matter.
People are still too used to 3e/4e's rules lawyering. Everyone was a rules lawyer back then, because the game basically had rules for everything. 5e doesn't play this way. 5e was never intended to play this way. But people are still so used to playing this way that it's second nature to them.
Old habits die hard.

[Tanarii]

Is my calling a spade a spade a problem for you?its funny how people who are rude, inappropriate and insulting always try to defend it as calling a spade a spade.

If you have to insult to try and claim your interpretation is correct, you've already lost the debate.

[DivisibleByZero]

If you have to insult to try and claim your interpretation is correct, you've already lost the debate.

If you have to ignore a directly related rules answer regarding a directly related rules question just because you don't like said answer, then you've already lost the debate.

[Tanarii]

If you have to ignore a directly related rules answer regarding a directly related rules question just because you don't like said answer, then you've already lost the debate.then stop doing that. :smalltongue:

[DivisibleByZero]

then stop doing that. :smalltongue:

I will when you do. (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/29/shield-master-feat/) :smalltongue:

The Shield Master shove can come before or after the attack action.
Notice how it has similar wording. Only instead of "when you do X" it says "if you do X".
But the order doesn't matter for "If you do X", so why would the order matter for "When you do X?"

If the Shield Master's bonus attack can come before the Attack action, then it stands to reason that the War Magic's bonus attack can come before the cantrip.
The order doesn't matter. Declaring War Magic is all this requires.

[Specter]

When it comes to True Strike, none of the last 5 posts matter; it activates on the next turn.

[Temperjoke]

Mostly undecided but I was thinking Longsword + spells(like in skyrim almost). Try to make use of the Dueling fighting style.

Have you considered a Valor Bard? That gives you a lot of the capabilities and benefits of a Fighter, along with spellcasting. You get martial weapons, medium armor, and shields. If you don't like the bard concept, you can think of your spellcasting as chanting instead of singing/music.

[Saggo]

And it is less fun for everyone involved, which means it's kind of jerk-ish as well.
Not a useful argument, no one gets to decide that for anyone else.



But the order doesn't matter for "If you do X", so why would the order matter for "When you do X?"
When inherently means order.


When it comes to True Strike, none of the last 5 posts matter; it activates on the next turn.

It does matter in corner cases, mostly people that are looking to chain True Strike and a single big attack turn to turn, like EK/Rogue.

[Malifice]

It does, War Magic triggers when you cast a cantrip.

Turn 1: Action True Strike (concentrating), Bonus Normal Attack.
Turn 2: Action True Strike (replaced concentration, so previous True Strike goes away), Bonus Normal Attack.

With the ruling on shield master (worded the same as war magic), then you can make your attack first before casting your cantrip on round 2.

[Saggo]

With the ruling on shield master (worded the same as war magic), then you can make your attack first before casting your cantrip on round 2.

The second clauses are the same, but the first clauses are only vaguely similar. One's a conditional during the turn, the other is a moment of use. They even worded the action different. That would certainly seem to fall under the "unless the bonus action’s timing is specified" portion of the paragraph. People can do what they want, but consistency would have helped given the ruling more weight.

[Giant2005]

When it comes to True Strike, none of the last 5 posts matter; it activates on the next turn.

That right there is the truth of it. With War Magic, you can attack and cast your Cantrip in any order you like, but no matter what you do, you cannot have True Strike function until your next turn after casting it.

[wunderkid]

So regarding the whole war magic thing.

Say you have booming and GFB as your can trips.

You chose to follow this idea you can declare war magic then take the bonus.

But you kill the target and can no longer cast a cantrip.

Doesn't this invalidate the use of warmagic?

With shield bash using it before or after can't invalidate the attack. (Or can it actually? Assuming you've been sentinel'd for 0 movement and push them away) how would you deal with that situation?

[DivisibleByZero]

When inherently means order.

The rules for (and ruling regarding) casting a bonus action spell disagree with that statement.
Like I said, this is similar to the rules/ruling regarding Quicken Spell.
JC stated, as we all knew he would, that the order doesn't matter.

When absolutely does not inherently mean order.

[DanyBallon]

The rules for (and ruling regarding) casting a bonus action spell disagree with that statement.
Like I said, this is similar to the rules/ruling regarding Quicken Spell.
JC stated, as we all knew he would, that the order doesn't matter.

When absolutely does not inherently mean order.

I believe the difference between casting as spell as a bonus action, and the bonus action granted via the War Magic feature, is that the simple fact to cast a spell with a casting time of one bonus action (or casting a quickened spell) grant you a bonus action that you can take whener you want on your turn. While when you have the War Magic feature, its the action of a casting a cantrip that grant you an attack as a bonus action.

Some DM will allow for you to declare that you use War Magic, hence triggerring the bonus action and allowing you to take it before or after casting your cantrip, other will say that you can't declare that you are using War Magic, and it just happen when you cast a cantrip. Neither are wrong, it's just different playstyle.

[DivisibleByZero]

Neither are wrong, it's just different playstyle.

Exactly, which highlights and proves my earlier points about others not accepting any other interpretations, and old habits.

The bottom line is this: some people inferring that the word When implies timing does not mean that the timing is specified. It is not. Since it has to be inferred, it it by definition not specified. So you can do it in any order you like.

[Citan]

{scrubbed}

[DivisibleByZero]

{scrubbed}
I direct you to the earlier post where I state that both readings are viable.
I'm not calling the kettle black. But nice try.

[Citan]

I direct you to the earlier post where I state that both readings are viable.
I'm not calling the kettle black. But nice try.
A a matter of fact, I've been the first one in the thread to make arguments towards the opinion that both ways are doing are defendable. So I actually agree with you, {scrubbed}

[DivisibleByZero]

I'm not posing as anything.
Dont pretend I'm being the sole aggressor while simultaneously breaking the rules and telling me what I need to read.

Both readings are viable.
One of those readings is gamist, lawyery, and less fun for everyone. The other reading is directly related to a ruling already made regarding bonus actions by JC, is more fun for everyone, and creates exactly zero issues with balance or anything else.

I know which one I'll be using and which one I consider unreasonable.

[Citan]

{scrubbed}

[DanyBallon]

I'm not posing as anything.
Dont pretend I'm being the sole aggressor while simultaneously breaking the rules and telling me what I need to read.

Both readings are viable.
One of those readings is gamist, lawyery, and less fun for everyone. The other reading is directly related to a ruling already made regarding bonus actions by JC, is more fun for everyone, and creates exactly zero issues with balance or anything else.

I know which one I'll be using and which one I consider unreasonable.

The bold part is why some perceive you as being agressive. Direct reading of the rules, which means that the bonus action is triggered by casting the cantrip, is not being lawyery and is no less fun for those who like it that way. The other reading is more permissive and while you and I may think is more fun, it can be otherwise for others. We don't have the right to say what is fun and what isn't. Lastly, JC ruling on Quickened spell don't apply with War Magic, because, as I explained before, casting a quickened spell grant a bonus action that you use to cast the spell, while the War Magic feature, grant an attack as a bonus action, as you cast the spell. Therefore, by RAW, you need to cast a cantrip in order to be granted you bonus action.

Like you I prefer the more permissive reading of declaring War Magic, thus granting the bonus action, but it's not by RAW.

[DivisibleByZero]

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/29/shield-master-feat/

Here's the relevant ruling, paraphrased for ease of use:
As with most bonus actions, you choose the timing, so the [bonus action] can come before or after the [cantrip].

People are attributing importance to order of operation, when JC has already stated that OoO has no import in most of these situations... Unless it is specified.
Which it is not.
So this ruling us relevant.
That's all there is to it. :smallsmile:

[wunderkid]

Yeah to me it's basically like if I'm told I can play computer games when I've done my homework.

Pretty I'd get back handed into next week if I then started playing computer games and said 'well the word When implies timing does not mean that the timing is specified. It is not. Since it has to be inferred, it it by definition not specified. So I can do it in any order i like.'

You can infer that timing isn't specified but that is definitely clutching at a lose interpretation.

I'd likely play it as you can do it in any order because the rule of cool. But the text doesn't support it in any logical reading

[Saggo]

Unless it is specified.
Which it is not.


"When you use..." specifies timing, it's intrinsic to the word. Crawford is too vague, ignoring portions of the handbook text.

[DivisibleByZero]

"When you use..." specifies timing, it's intrinsic to the word. Crawford is too vague, ignoring portions of the handbook text.

Google it, or look in a dictionary.
Not all of the word's uses imply timing.
To claim that the word most definitely implies timing is incorrect.
Sometimes it does, but it doesn't have to.
Compare to Martial Arts (or possibly Flurry) , which uses the word immediately.
Now that one DOES specify timing.
Implication is not specificity.

Now consider the ruling above.

[wunderkid]

Google it, or look in a dictionary.
Not all of the word's uses imply timing.
To claim that the word most definitely implies timing is incorrect.
Sometimes it does, but it doesn't have to.
Compare to Martial Arts (or possibly Flurry) , which uses the word immediately.
Now that one DOES specify timing.
Implication is not specificity.

Now consider the ruling above.

Again that's what rules lawyering is. Taking the exact meaning of text and disregarding the interpretation that actually makes sense.

I would bet bottom dollar if someone said to you in every day talking you can have a cookie when you've taken the dog out. You wouldn't interpret that as them saying you can have a cookie now. The implication in every day use of the phrase is that once you have taken the dogs out you are allowed a cookie.

The rule of fun says interpret it the rules lawyer way because it makes the game more fun.

Just don't try to say that the rules look like that's what they say. It takes some pretty deep clutching to accept that interpretation as the one that comes to mind when you read it.

When you use. When is definitely setting precedent for a timing. At least in every possible context applicable for this. Which in every day language works as a trigger.

When this happens you can do that.

Run it however because super strict RAW and tweets say it's okay but the arguments over this one are pretty pointless

[DivisibleByZero]

When you've means when you have, which does specify after.
The more appropriate sentence would be: When you take the dog out you can have a cookie.
In that case, I'm not going to wait until after I've taken the dog out to get my cookie. I'm going to grab my cookie as I'm leaving with the dog, so that I can have my cookie when I take the dog out, not afterwards.

Once again, the word When refers to an appropriate time without specifying specific timing.

In this case, as already explained by myself and by JC, OoO is irrelevant.
Funny side note, even with the monk's bonus attack specifying, he can do it whenever he wants according to the ruling. So even in the single case that I can think of at the moment that does actually specify timing, the OoO still doesn't matter.
Just like it doesn't matter here.

[Saggo]

Google it, or look in a dictionary.
Not all of the word's uses imply timing.
To claim that the word most definitely implies timing is incorrect.
You and I have two very different Google dictionaries.


Compare to Martial Arts (or possibly Flurry) , which uses the word immediately.
Now that one DOES specify timing.
Implication is not specificity.
Flurry of Blows just means you can't use movement or items in between the action and bonus action.

[Malifice]

Flurry of Blows just means you can't use movement or items in between the action and bonus action.

Again I dont accept that argument going by the ruling how mutiple attacks work generally, and the ruling on shield master.

[DivisibleByZero]

Flurry of Blows just means you can't use movement or items in between the action and bonus action.

Once again JC disagrees with you. You can move between, according to the ruling. So like I said, even in the one case that I can think of where timing is specified, the OoO still doesn't matter.

The long and short of it is this: the order of operation doesn't matter. If you have a feature which grants you a bonus action, you can use that bonus action at any time on your turn. But in so doing, you have to also use the feature which granted said bonus action.

[Saggo]

Again I dont accept that argument going by the ruling how mutiple attacks work generally, and the ruling on shield master.

Fair enough, I misspoke. I'm not ignoring the ruling even though I think it's rubbish, since it ignores the second part of the very sentence Crawford was paraphrasing and he ignores the purpose of conditional conjunctions. I just don't think it works here since Shield Master doesn't say it works when you use the action, only if you use the action on your turn. It's not exactly opaque language like Conjure was.

[obeseboywonder]

Guys: War Magic Ruling (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/07/18/eldritch-knight-war-magic/)

[Saggo]

Guys: War Magic Ruling (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/07/18/eldritch-knight-war-magic/)

That's that. They really need to learn how to use if and when and what they mean. Text still reads opposite his intent.

[DivisibleByZero]

I can't believe.... Oh, wait.... That's exactly what I've been saying all along.
How bout that.

[Saggo]

There wasn't a need to antagonize people before, and less so now.

[Tanarii]

I can't believe.... Oh, wait.... That's exactly what I've been saying all along.
How bout that.Being right doesn't excuse your inappropriate accusations and rudeness.

It's really not appropriate to toss around the terms jerk and crappy DM just because you think the rules are being run a differently from how they should be.

[DivisibleByZero]

People are still too used to 3e/4e's rules lawyering. Everyone was a rules lawyer back then, because the game basically had rules for everything. 5e doesn't play this way. 5e was never intended to play this way. But people are still so used to playing this way that it's second nature to them.
Old habits die hard.

Almost two years later and people still need to be reminded of this repeatedly.
Old habits do indeed die hard.