Making a Mage Slayer

[Chronos Flame]

So I am going to be in a likely upcoming 5e game and have had a character idea/build floating around in my head for a while now. I'm not concerned with making it overpowered or anything, I'm just curious about the best way to go about it.

So the idea is a rogue/fighter with the basis being Mage slayer and shield master, having the option to knock people down that he needs to help the party take down (getting a sneak attack against a prone target in the process) and locking down mages hard. I was thinking feint attack from battle master could be used when adjacent to a mage if needed to make the AoO from them casting a sneak attack maybe. What I am wondering is how many fighter levels to take, whether to start as rogue or fighter, and if I should go str or dex based.

Pros of Str consist mainly of really maximizing that athletics check.
Pros of Dex are sticking to light armor I guess? And having a higher save in a better stat.
Likewise, the pros of either class is either Dex as a save and a single extra skill or a couple extra HP and Con as a save.

Anyway, thoughts?

[CantigThimble]

In terms of Mage slayers I don't think anything approaches the shadow monk. Between the bonus action teleport, stunning strike and increased base speed they can reach spellcasters with ease and take them out of the fight.

I'd also consider a fey bladelock, they can use misty step, their 6th level feature and counterspell to make life very difficult for mages. Also, wisdom save proficiency.

If you're set on fighter or rogue I'd go with swashbuckler rogue for the increased mobility and higher burst damage to break concentration more easily. Plus sneak attack works great with the Mage slayer feat.

[Chronos Flame]

Thanks, but yeah I am looking to stick to rogue/fighter. While I really like warlocks I kind of want the character to have no real magic of his own. Monk is an interesting idea that hadn't hit me, but I think I want to stay in the mundane martials mostly. Not really intending to make the BEST mage killer, just the best I can within the concept.

I'll know later this week if we are going core only, but yeah, I do like swashbuckler, and it fits my concept slightly better than assassin. That said, how do they have better burst potential? I know they can SA on all attacks while alone but with shield master and maneuvers I should already be able to do that as well as the occasional assassin crit right?

[CantigThimble]

If you go single class swashbuckler (since you don't need shield proficiency) you will have 1-2 more dice of sneak attack and can use TWF to increase the likelihood of landing that sneak attack in any given round, however if you're going core only I'd take one level of fighter followed by pure rogue. The value of action surge is much lower for rogues than most other classes and I'd prefer the better SA progression. If you were creating the character at a higher level rogue first might work but heavy armor and shield is just so much better than light armor at lower levels. I'd also go str based and take heavy armor over dex based, though that costs you your stealth.

[Corran]

If you go single class swashbuckler (since you don't need shield proficiency) you will have 1-2 more dice of sneak attack and can use TWF to increase the likelihood of landing that sneak attack in any given round, however if you're going core only I'd take one level of fighter followed by pure rogue. The value of action surge is much lower for rogues than most other classes and I'd prefer the better SA progression. If you were creating the character at a higher level rogue first might work but heavy armor and shield is just so much better than light armor at lower levels. I'd also go str based and take heavy armor over dex based, though that costs you your stealth.
I dont agree with the bolded part. Action surge gives you an additioal action, allowing you thus to attack in your turn and also to ready an attack that will be triggered during the turn of an enemy. So you will be dealing your sneak atttack damage twice during that round, hopefully. The battlemaster's maneuvres are a good addition too, riposte essentially lets you do what I described above, precision will help you turn misses into a hit, and for a rogue that is a big deal sometimes, etc. So I see a 3 level dip in battlemaster like a good idea for a melee rogue. Not sure if it is worth taking more fighter levels instead of pressing the rogue progression. Between the two classes, I would probably start as a fighter, for better hp and better saves at the expense of 1 less skill.

[Specter]

Eldritch Knight 5/Swashbuckler 15.

Ek gives you Shield and Absorb Elements, reactions that protect you from spells with attacks and spells that deal elemental damage (like Fireballs and the like). Swashbuckler lets you reach anyone more easily with no op. attacks and dashing. With Shield Master, you use your bonus action and bring them down and smash forever. Even if they try something funny like casting a spell around you, you save with advantage and kill them. Silly mages.

[CantigThimble]

Oh, right, I forgot about the ready trick!

[Chronos Flame]

Thanks Corran. Is Con considered a better save than Dex? That was part of the decision for sure. Certainly not as big as if I should go Dex or Str as my focus, but certainly there.

And yeah, I was thinking of 3 or 4 levels of fighter? One gives me maneuvers and one a feat. 5 gives an extra attack, which can be pretty good to help hit/nova if assassin and from there the 6th level gives yet another feat, but more than 4 might stunt SA too much I figured.

I guess the big question at the end of the day is the dex/str thing. They yield pretty similar ACs so I guess the question is athletics checks for the shield bash vs another good common save (assuming I start fighter)

Oh, I hadn't even thought of EK as I wanted to stick mundane, but shield I knew was good, and a reaction to help with elemental spells is really good too. Hmm

[Corran]

Thanks Corran. Is Con considered a better save than Dex? That was part of the decision for sure. Certainly not as big as if I should go Dex or Str as my focus, but certainly there.
Generally con saves are considered more important than dex saves, yes. That is because failed con saves usually have some very nasty consequences, while failed dex saves are mostly associated with extra damage taken. Plus con saves are associated with keeping your concentration. Specificaly for you, no need for concentration, and seeing how you will be in melee and how your hp and resistances are not great (not bad either), dex saves might end up being as important as con saves for your characters. Or they might not on the other hand. What I am sure about though, is that the set of str & con is better than the set of dex & int, in regards to saves. Have a look at the first post of this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?491207-Re-examining-saving-throws), you will get a good idea about how often you should expect each save to occur.


I guess the big question at the end of the day is the dex/str thing. They yield pretty similar ACs so I guess the question is athletics checks for the shield bash vs another good common save (assuming I start fighter)
I would go dex based. Better saves, better initiative, better AC, better steath. Stick with a 10 to str (or raise it to 12-13 territory if you can spare the points or if you roll really good stats) and expertise athletics. You will be fine, expertise goes a long way.

Oh, I hadn't even thought of EK as I wanted to stick mundane, but shield I knew was good, and a reaction to help with elemental spells is really good too. Hmm[/QUOTE]

[Falcon X]

I'm playing one right now:
Rogue1/Oath of the Crown Paladin3
- Expertise in Athletics
- Mage Slayer Feat
- Sword and Board style, will take shield master.

If I can get with 30' of the caster, I can Compel Duel him.
If I can get beside him, I can punch him in the throat every time he tries to cast a spell.
Otherwise: Grapple, Knock him down, put him in some manacles. I'm kind've an officer of the law.

It's working pretty well so far.

[JumboWheat01]

So you will be dealing your sneak atttack damage twice during that round, hopefully.

Sneak Attack is once per TURN, not once per action. So even if you have multiple attacks or multiple actions, you can still only get one sneak attack during your turn. That, combined with a Rogue's bonus action abilities, devalues the ability to have a second action somewhat. Unless you're making a grapple rogue, with expertise in Athletics (though grappling doesn't stop a mage from casting.) Though can you sneak attack something you're grappling?

[Naanomi]

Rogue 1/Fighter 1/Rogue +18; Assassin Subclass, Archery Combat Style; Wood Elf or Variant Human
Sharpshooter, +2 Dex, +2 Dex, Mageslayer... (Lucky? Skulker? Martial Adept? Alert?)

The best way to kill a Mage is to do it before he notices you with one massive sniper attack, exploit those comparatively low HP. Also unparalleled at breaking Concentration once you get Mageslayer.

[mrumsey]

Sneak Attack is once per TURN, not once per action.

He is referring to Readying an Action. If the trigger occurs on an enemy's turn (it kind of HAS to), your Sneak Attack will apply twice in the combat round. The Rogue gets SA on his turn (SA #1) and additional SAs on all other characters' turns (up to 1/character turn, limited by Action Economy).

So for this scenario, getting a SA on the Rogue's turn and Readying an Action (Attack When X happens) could land 2 sets of SA bonus dice in a single combat round.

[JumboWheat01]

Ohh... I never thought of that. Clever, clever. I can see that being useful. Though you only have so many action surges, it's not like it's something you can continually use.

[Chronos Flame]

I hadn't thought of the readying an action thing before. I don't think it's limited uses will matter once when you consider mage slayer will already be giving out of turn attacks sometimes. It's more for filling the gaps. Knock somebody down, SA them, ready to attack if they stand/move. Seems really good. Still working on Dex vs Str, but Dex is winning out in my head right now... I like the idea of a higher athletics, but if the game goes long enough I could pick up resilient Wis and have proficiency in con and wis as well as a good dex save along with shield master making him pretty much immune to short range spells.

Also, what is the recommended method of actually getting sneak attack on readied/opportunity attacks out of turn? Other than just going swashbuckler.

[R.Shackleford]

Thanks, but yeah I am looking to stick to rogue/fighter. While I really like warlocks I kind of want the character to have no real magic of his own. Monk is an interesting idea that hadn't hit me, but I think I want to stay in the mundane martials mostly. Not really intending to make the BEST mage killer, just the best I can within the concept.

I'll know later this week if we are going core only, but yeah, I do like swashbuckler, and it fits my concept slightly better than assassin. That said, how do they have better burst potential? I know they can SA on all attacks while alone but with shield master and maneuvers I should already be able to do that as well as the occasional assassin crit right?

Forget the Fighter, go straight rogue.

You don't need high ability scores to be really effective.

Vhuman Rogue 1
Feat: moderately armored (eventually "pick up" a breastplate and use a shield)

Str: 16
Dex: 14
Con: 14
Int: 8
Wis: 12
Cha: 12

(Note: Cha and Int can be changed)

AC: 14 + 2 (dex) + 2 (shield) = 18
Melee: Rapier
Skills: Athletics and Stealth expertise

You will never raise your ability scores unless you really want to.

Level 3: Arcane Trickster (Invisibility), Swashbuckler (bonus way to sneak attack), or whatever one you like.

Level 4: Shield Master. Use your bonus action to knock a creature prone. Sneak attack.

Level 5: Uncanny Dodge, half damage yo

Level 6: Perception and Persuasion expertise.

Level 7: Evasion

Level 8: Alert or Mobile

Level 9: Charm with Persuasion (which you have expertise... by this level you should have +9... at level 11 this means minimum roll of 19)

Level 10: Sentinel or Mobile

Tactics:

1: Get to your mage, which is typically the hard part but you can bonus action dash. Charming the mage helps.

2: Prone mage (if used bonus action already or the mage is prone skip to step 3)

3: Stab mage with advantage OR neutral (defensive spells). Swashbuckler should allow for sneak attack.

4: Repeat until dead mage.


Edit

If you can't get to the mage in the first round, hide with your glorious expertise in stealth (breastplate offers no disadvantage) and sneak in for the kill.

You could use a thrown dagger to deliver your sneak attack. Hidden gives you advantage and you can go back into hiding with your move and bonus action.

By level 11 your Athletics should be a minimum roll of 21, things are falling down. Your initiative will be +8 with alert and Cha to initiative. Alert is also great versus sneaky casters.

You do have a weakness, Intelligence, but I feel if you don't then the DM would feel you are a bit more cheesy than you really are.

[Chronos Flame]

The only downside of that very solid build is the lack of the feat I kind of like as the basis of the character. The mage slaying, lightly armored knight meant to deal with mages. Sort of a lighter version of the templars from Dragon Age now that I think about it. I guess we'll have our proper character building in a day or so, and if we have another fightery character this is an option, where if we have a devoted rogue the fighter path may do better.

[RulesJD]

None of the suggested builds are optimal for Mage Slaying. They're close, but no cigar.

1. Shadow Monk 6 (obvious reasons)

2. Then BM Fighter 3 (take Precision and Disarming strike)

3. Then Cleric 3 (Silence) I would go Trickery for the Channel Divinity)

3a. Alternatively, Lore Bard 6 for Jack of All Tracks + Counterspell + Silence


That's about the best you're going to get. Precision to get you over the Shield spell, Disarming Strike for force the Mage to drop their spellcasting focus. Once you get that (in combat) it's at a huge disadvantage. Shadow Step can't be Counterspelled which is great.

[R.Shackleford]

The only downside of that very solid build is the lack of the feat I kind of like as the basis of the character. The mage slaying, lightly armored knight meant to deal with mages. Sort of a lighter version of the templars from Dragon Age now that I think about it. I guess we'll have our proper character building in a day or so, and if we have another fightery character this is an option, where if we have a devoted rogue the fighter path may do better.

Mage Slayer needs the caster to be casting spells at or around you... You want to mess them up hard enough, then go hide perhaps, and then come out and mess them up again.

You don't want to have to use mage slayer, that is the worst possibility for a mage slayer :).

Oh, at level 12 I would take Observant (Wis) and then 8 levels of barbarian since you are using strength and barbarian 1 - 8 is nice.

[CantigThimble]

Mage Slayer needs the caster to be casting spells at or around you... You want to mess them up hard enough, then go hide perhaps, and then come out and mess them up again.

You don't want to have to use mage slayer, that is the worst possibility for a mage slayer :).

The advantage on saves alone might be worth it though. It makes it really hard for the mage to stop you from killing them as most of the spells they use to make you stop stabbing them require you to fail a save. They could use their action to disengage or use misty step but then they aren't casting anything on your party and a rogue can run them down easily enough.

[R.Shackleford]

The advantage on saves alone might be worth it though. It makes it really hard for the mage to stop you from killing them as most of the spells they use to make you stop stabbing them require you to fail a save. They could use their action to disengage or use misty step but then they aren't casting anything on your party and a rogue can run them down easily enough.

The advantage is within 5' of the mage. Nice but not world breaking.

Disengage or Misty step is 30'. Movement is 30'. The Rogue has BA dash and their movement (this is why I like mobile on a rogue). Unless you are specifically designed for it... You aren't getting away from the rogue.

Also, mage slayer sucks because the effects of a spell happen before your attack... Shocking Grasp stops you from making your reaction attack (by CRAWford rules). The mage could just Misty Step away and then fire off their spell at you.

[CantigThimble]

The advantage is within 5' of the mage. Nice but not world breaking.

Disengage or Misty step is 30'. Movement is 30'. The Rogue has BA dash and their movement (this is why I like mobile on a rogue). Unless you are specifically designed for it... You aren't getting away from the rogue.

Also, mage slayer sucks because the effects of a spell happen before your attack... Shocking Grasp stops you from making your reaction attack (by CRAWford rules). The mage could just Misty Step away and then fire off their spell at you.

If they misty stepped all they can cast is a cantrip and if all they're doing with their turn is using shocking grasp on me then I feel like that Mage is pretty neutralized. If I'm playing a Mage slayer my goals are that the party not get fireballed and the barbarian not get hold-personed. The Mage slayer feat makes it really hard for the Mage to do either of those things so I don't really care too much about the other cases.

[R.Shackleford]

If they misty stepped all they can cast is a cantrip and if all they're doing with their turn is using shocking grasp on me then I feel like that Mage is pretty neutralized. If I'm playing a Mage slayer my goals are that the party not get fireballed and the barbarian not get hold-personed. The Mage slayer feat makes it really hard for the Mage to do either of those things so I don't really care too much about the other cases.

Mage Slayer doesn't really change anything though.

There is no need for the feat, the mage isn't getting away from you because of mage slayer, but because you have a pointy stick.

Actually, if they'll mage is hitting you at range with Frostbite or Vicious Mockery you can't pull off your sneak attack.

Mage Slayer is a nice idea, but totally not very mage slayer-ish.

[CantigThimble]

Mage Slayer doesn't really change anything though.

There is no need for the feat, the mage isn't getting away from you because of mage slayer, but because you have a pointy stick.

Actually, if they'll mage is hitting you at range with Frostbite or Vicious Mockery you can't pull off your sneak attack.

Mage Slayer is a nice idea, but totally not very mage slayer-ish.

Mage slayer means that if they hold the barbarian they're losing concentration immediately, not after whoever goes before you makes their autocrit attacks and if they fireball the party they die instantly without hurting you very much. And like I said, if a Mage is just using his lowest damage options to keep me off his back I consider that a win for the party.

[R.Shackleford]

Mage slayer means that if they hold the barbarian they're losing concentration immediately, not after whoever goes before you makes their autocrit attacks and if they fireball the party they die instantly without hurting you very much. And like I said, if a Mage is just using his lowest damage options to keep me off his back I consider that a win for the party.

Holding what barbarian? I built a rogue (barbarian levels are just an add on). Holding with what?

Mage Slayer changes nothing in the mage's tactics. Mages don't like to stay close to melee types, it has nothing to do with Mage Slayer.

Those low damage options are stopping you from dealing sneak attack damage. They aren't just dealing 2dx (mod damage depending on build) but also negating your d6's for sneak attack. That is a HUGE penalty.

Mage Slayer is a meh feat that doesn't really make you all that better at slaying mages. You have to rely on allowing the mage to do something in order for your feat to give you anything. It should be called "Defend Against Mages".

That sneak attack is your mage slayer, the expertise athletics/stealth is your mage slayer, and all your other goodies are your mage slayer. Hell, your charm ability is more of a mage slayer than that feat.

[CantigThimble]

I meant casting hold person on the party barbarian. (Or fighter or whatever's on the front lines taking hits)

It is true, if your goal is to kill the mage as quickly as possible there are better options, however, if your goal is to stop the Mage from destroying your party with spells like hold person, fireball, spirit guardians or dispel magic then it is quite useful. I'd rather kill the Mage over 4 turns with no opportunities to do real damage to the party than kill him over 2 with him unleashing all his most powerful spells in desperation.

[Spacehamster]

If I wanted to mess up enemy casters I would probably go for a high damage ranged build with the alert feat, lets you pick them apart before they can even act since they usually do not have that much hp. :)

[R.Shackleford]

If I wanted to mess up enemy casters I would probably go for a high damage ranged build with the alert feat, lets you pick them apart before they can even act since they usually do not have that much hp. :)

The Strogue can do that too, hiding gives you advantage on your shot so hitting won't typically be a problem versus NPC casters.

Sneak Attack makes a caster splode.

[RickAllison]

How about the Monster Hunter fighter archetype from the Gothic Heroes UA? One of the main criticisms I've heard of it was that it was really good not at hunting monsters, but mages. The unique superiority die options (adding it to mental saving throws, and adding it to certain Perception and Insight checks) help the Mage slayer find the Mage and survive any spells that he didn't get the advantage beforehand.

The Inquisitive from the same UA is also good for this kind of work. Insightful Fighting lets the rogue use Sneak Attack even when spells like Blur that inflict disadvantage are in play.