Spellswords, Extra Attack, Cantrips & melee spells

[gkathellar]

So I've noticed that characters like the Bladesinger, Blade Pact Warlock, and Valor Bard don't actually do very well with the close-combat cantrips supplied in SCAG, due to action conflict between their Extra Attack and those same cantrips. Obviously I'm pretty late to the party, as this isn't a new revelation.

Since I have a player likely to be running a bladesinger, I want to address this issue in my house rules. I can see three obvious possible solutions:

Grant Bladesinger (and Bladelock and Valor Bard, I suppose) a 6th level ability allowing them to make a second attack whenever they use a cantrip (and maybe some spells) involving a melee attack. This seems like it's probably too much.
Grant them a 6th level ability allowing them to use their Extra Attack in concert with the types of spells mentioned above - i.e. if they use a melee attack spell, they can then throw one regular attack at the same target, all as a single action. This seems like it might be appropriate, but I'm not positive.
Kill the Extra Attack feature gained by these paths, and replace it with something better for each of them. Reasonable, but a lot more work, so ...


I dunno, what do people think? How bad are each of these ideas on a scale of 1 to Terrible? Has somebody already put together a functional solution to this issue that I can use? Why did the Owlbear cross the road?

[Giant2005]

Those options are all pretty terrible to be honest. Basically, those changes will cause a serious balance problem where there was none before.
If your player wants to do things like that, then tell him to play an EK - they can do what you want (well, a weaker version of what you want) at level 7. That is also why your ideas are pretty bad - generally, if your houserule turns a Wizard into a better Fighter than a Fighter, you can be fairly confident that your house rule isn't a good one.

[Grod_The_Giant]

You have, I think, two options:

The first would be to slightly increase said spells' damage increase. Adding an ability modifier or an extra die would get you pretty close to a second attack: d8+ability for your first attack, and d8+ability for your second.

The second would be to let them add the rider effects to the usual two melee attacks, but no bonus damage (and only once per a given target). So you could tag a guy with two sword hits, and have fire leap to two secondary targets. You could expand it to include other cantrips as well, if you do choose.

[JNAProductions]

Option 4-Accept that there's some opportunity cost and not everything is going to work perfectly. This is probably the best option, IF your players aren't unhappy. If they're perfectly happy playing as it is, then nothing is broken.

If, on the other hand, they've voiced complaints about this, then yeah, look into improving it. You want happy players, after all.

[Specter]

Valor Bards only get these cantrips at level 10, and I don't think they should.

Blades and Locks have a choice: to land two attacks or land one that deals more damage and controls/hits two. I think it's fair.

[ES Curse]

Current rules are fine. You get extra d8s as you level up, which is about the same damage die you'd use for your one-handed melee weapon. SCAG cantrips are all about battlefield control. Booming Blade keeps a target in place, Green Flame Blade hits a primary and secondary target, Lightning Lure lets you pull things in, and Sword Burst is for when you get surrounded.

[RickAllison]

Here is my proposal for alternate features to Extra Attack:

Valor Bards get nothing. They can pick it up, but it isn't a spell they should have synergy with as it isn't a bard spell.

Bladesingers can opt to apply spell modifier damage to the initial attack (IIRC, GFB only applies it to the tongue of flame, while BB doesn't apply it at all).

Blade locks are harder, because it should be more thematic and they already can add their spell modifier to damage. Maybe a fear effect on the recipient of the initial attack? Might be too powerful, thoughts?

[RSP]

Count me of the opinion of not changing anything; the cantrips provide the same option to gish builds any other spell does: am I going to use the cast a spell action or use the attack action.

You'll start encountering balance issues if you mess with the system, but whether these effects matter, is up to you and your table.

If your current PCs include a bladesinger, a bladelock and a valor bard, you don't need to worry about stepping on the toes of other martial characters and you can adjust your combats to the damage output of the PCs.

However, If you have a bladesinger, a barb, a fighter and a rogue as PCs, you may have 3 less-than-thrilled players when they see the at-will-damage-dealer-combined-with-full-caster monster your house rule created.

[Gastronomie]

First of all, ask the Bladesinger if he loves those spells or he's fine with the normal Extra Attack.

If he says he's not that interested in the two spells, well, that's that.

If he says he's interested, consider asking him about the idea of changing Extra Attack to War Magic (the ability Eldritch Knights have) that allows you to make an attack as a bonus action after you cast a Cantrip with your main action.

[Zman]

Lets examine the Melee Cantrips vs Attacks for a Bladesinger
Attacks vs Melee Spell
Lvl1: d8+Dex vs d8+Dex+potential rider = Advantage Melee Cantrip
Lvl5:d8+Dex vs 2d8+Dex+potential rider = Large Advantage Melee Cantrip
Lvl6: 2d8+2xDex vs 2d8+Dex+potential rider = Advantage Attack vs single enemy, advantage Melee Cantrip when rider activates
Lvl11: 2d8+2xDex vs 3d8+Dex+potential rider = Advantage Melee Cantrip
Lvl14: 2d8+2xDex+2xInt vs 3d8+Dex+Int+potential rider = Advantage Attack vs single enemy, advantage Melee Cantrip when rider activates
Lvl17: 2d8+2xDex+2xInt vs 4d8+Dex+Int+potential rider = Equal vs single enemy, advantage Melee Cantrip when rider activates

As you can see, both options are balanced around the same rough point, which makes sense. They added the Melee Cantrips as an effective at will damage in melee for a caster that doesn't quite keep up with a more martial class, but outperforms their standard ranged cantrip thanks to its rider effect. This doesn't always make them better than standard attacks, but spells have their own advantages say when you have only a mundane weapon and the cantrip ignores resistance or immunity of a creature. Look at an EK with one of these cantrips, they get to thematically make a magic melee attack then follow it up with a standard melee attack. There is also quite a bit of a progression that if you are against a single foe or your spell rider from Greenflame Blade isn't likely to kick in, or the foe has resistance to the element of your melee cantrip you are better off using your standard melee attacks. And if you don't pick up the Melee Cantrips, you are just fine as well and can rely on your bog standard attacks for relevant damage.

I look at them as competing actions that both have their place, neither is that much better than the other and both can be used to make an effective character. I know our Lore Bard is thrilled he picked up Greenflame Blade for those time he is near melee and that sweet rider damage would really help out or he would be slinging a firebolt into melee.

Based upon this I say that none of those proposed fixes are good. The Valor Bard is better of making sure he used the Melee Cantrip, but the Bladelock with Lifedrinker for +Cha to Damage and the Bladesinger with Song of Victor for Int to Damage are spending a good portion of the game in a spot where it is better for them to use their bog standard attacks. They are competitive options that are situationally better than the other. Both your first options add an additional attack which can cause the use of the Melee Cantrip to outsrip some martial classes in damage which really isn't right. I mean at 6th level the Bladesinger can toss out 3d8+2xDex+Rider (Potential d8+Int) vs 2d8+2xStr+4(Dueling) for a Dueling Fighter. I don't think a Melee Caster should be out damaging the super solid Dueling Fighter levels 6-10 and potentially with riders levels 11-13, and Definitely levels 14+. Just stripping Extra attack and replacing it doesn't feel right, these guys are basic martials and that kind of necessitates having extra attack.

[RSP]

Zman, I believe the melee attacks would also get the +Int to damage on the cantrip attacks once it applies for the bladesinger. I don't think it changes your point, but just throwing that out there for a complete comparison between the abilities.

[Zman]

Zman, I believe the cardio attacks would also get the +Int to damage on the cantrips attacks once it applies for the bladesinger. I don't think it changes your point, but just throwing that out there for a complete comparison between the abilities.

Haha, of course it does, thanks! I'll edit that in.

[gkathellar]

Lets examine the Melee Cantrips vs Attacks for a Bladesinger

Appreciate the math help. Looks about right, so ... problem annulled, I guess.


Just stripping Extra attack and replacing it doesn't feel right, these guys are basic martials and that kind of necessitates having extra attack.

That I'm still going to have to think about. Extra Attack just seems to lack synergy with just about everything else these kinds of characters do. One of these dedicated melee casters with Extra Attack doesn't seem like they have all that much going for them in comparison with a more traditional caster who has taken one or two melee spells or cantrips.

[RickAllison]

Appreciate the math help. Looks about right, so ... problem annulled, I guess.



That I'm still going to have to think about. Extra Attack just seems to lack synergy with just about everything else these kinds of characters do. One of these dedicated melee casters with Extra Attack doesn't seem like they have all that much going for them in comparison with a more traditional caster who has taken one or two melee spells or cantrips.

I feel that. My UA Artificer performs about as well in melee as a Bladesinger damage-wise. He would actually love the feature, though, as he could then get double the grapples in!

[Specter]

I believe the intention of adding Extra Attack to these guys is to make them viable with or without spells, more versatile. The only subclass that the melee-spell synergy you wish for in this case is the EK, but then again they aren't very good on spells.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Thanks for the math, Zman.

How 'bout something along the lines of Advantage, to increase the reliability of the cantrips to be comparable with two attacks? (Or maybe half effect on a miss, or the rider still activates on a miss or something)

Or maybe Duskblade/Magus style channeling? Make a melee attack instead of a spell attack, style of thing. Maybe require a spell slot one level higher than normal, to keep it from being a pure damage boost. (Or not and figure it's balanced out by increased risk and MAD)

You could also limit the melee cantrips to said subclasses. That would also keep them special, though I think in a less positive way.

[Cybren]

Appreciate the math help. Looks about right, so ... problem annulled, I guess.



That I'm still going to have to think about. Extra Attack just seems to lack synergy with just about everything else these kinds of characters do. One of these dedicated melee casters with Extra Attack doesn't seem like they have all that much going for them in comparison with a more traditional caster who has taken one or two melee spells or cantrips.

Valor Bards and Eldritch Knights get the ability to cast a spell and make an attack, so they do at some point get the ability to make a regular attack while casting a melee attack cantrip...

[gkathellar]

Valor Bards and Eldritch Knights get the ability to cast a spell and make an attack, so they do at some point get the ability to make a regular attack while casting a melee attack cantrip...

Right, and that's super cool, and I like it. But for Valor Bard, it's still mutually exclusive with Extra Attack.

Eldritch Knight is somewhat of a special case, since its attacks enhance its spells, leading to a cool back-and-forth rhythm from round-to-round. Very dynamic, good design.


Thanks for the math, Zman.

How 'bout something along the lines of Advantage, to increase the reliability of the cantrips to be comparable with two attacks? (Or maybe half effect on a miss, or the rider still activates on a miss or something)

Or maybe Duskblade/Magus style channeling? Make a melee attack instead of a spell attack, style of thing. Maybe require a spell slot one level higher than normal, to keep it from being a pure damage boost. (Or not and figure it's balanced out by increased risk and MAD)

You could also limit the melee cantrips to said subclasses. That would also keep them special, though I think in a less positive way.

I also want to avoid stepping on the Eldritch Knight's toes, since I actually do think it's pretty well put-together.

[RickAllison]

That Duskblade idea is kind of cool...

[Grod_The_Giant]

That Duskblade idea is kind of cool...
I would definitely rather see something like that as part of the Bladesinger than Extra Attack. The whole subclass is wonky; it's supposed to be all about graceful movement but it really just turns you into one of the biggest tanks in the game. I'd find it much more thematic if it had a Duskblade/War Magic type "sword and spell" ability as its main attack instead of the prosaic Extra Attack, if it had something like Mobility or Cunning Action instead of the AC boost, and maybe advantage on Acrobatics checks instead of Concentration saves. Dance in, stab the baddies with magic, dance out.

[Cybren]

Right, and that's super cool, and I like it. But for Valor Bard, it's still mutually exclusive with Extra Attack.

Eldritch Knight is somewhat of a special case, since its attacks enhance its spells, leading to a cool back-and-forth rhythm from round-to-round. Very dynamic, good design.


??? Provided they're not using their bonus action to hand out bardic inspiration (or doing something else with their bonus action), a 14th level bard can cast any level spell + also make an attack. If they use a melee attack cantrip they essentially upgrade extra attack into extra attack 1.5, as now they get scaling cantrip damage on one of their hits. It's more choices. Not everything has to pile on top of everything else.

[Klorox]

I'm not a huge fan of these cantrips for the reasons you noted in the initial post about action economy. I think these spells are no-brainers for single classed characters who will never earn multiple attacks.

Anyway, if it bothers you that much, allow these characters to switch out cantrips on level-ups. It's metagaming, but it isn't game-breaking.

[gkathellar]

and maybe advantage on Acrobatics checks instead of Concentration saves.

While I agree with your point in general, I feel the need to point out that it already does get advantage on Acrobatics checks. :P

(It gets +Int mod on Concentration saves, not advantage.)


??? Provided they're not using their bonus action to hand out bardic inspiration (or doing something else with their bonus action), a 14th level bard can cast any level spell + also make an attack. If they use a melee attack cantrip they essentially upgrade extra attack into extra attack 1.5, as now they get scaling cantrip damage on one of their hits. It's more choices. Not everything has to pile on top of everything else.

No, not everything has to pile on top of everything else, but generally a character's various moving parts should interact - see: why I like Eldritch Knight so much, because its has a whole suite of different options to take on its various turns, but they still relate to each other in various ways. Extra Attack doesn't really do that for the full casters it shows up on. It's another option, but it juts out to the side rather than forming part of a connected whole.

[Zman]

I'm not a huge fan of these cantrips for the reasons you noted in the initial post about action economy. I think these spells are no-brainers for single classed characters who will never earn multiple attacks.

Anyway, if it bothers you that much, allow these characters to switch out cantrips on level-ups. It's metagaming, but it isn't game-breaking.

Of course they are no-brainers for single classed characters that will never earn multiple attacks as they do slightly more damage than a ranged cantrip if you have a high attack ability, and are worse if you don't before the rider kicks in. I mean, they are the bare minimum damage scaling needed to remain relevant as a single quarterstaff attack just doesn't cut it, but a scaling magical cantrip keeps a melee attack an option if required and far less damage than a specialist. But, what cases are melee focused that have access to them and only have one attack.


Bards: Don't have access to Melee Cantrips, require Multiclass, Magic Initiate, or a Magical Secret.

Clerics: Don't have access to Melee Cantrips sans Arcane, great choice for Arcane Cleric. Requires good Str or Dex and Magic Initiate or Multiclass.

Sorcerer: Generally do not have the Dex or Str to effectively utilize these, will almost always default to Firebolt.

Wizards: Generally do not have the Dex or Str to effectively utilize these, will almost always default to Firebolt.

[the secret fire]

The SCAG melee cantrips change the calculus of the game a bit, don't they?

They seem to exist to make Arcane Tricksters and arcane Rogues of all stripes more awesome.

[Grod_The_Giant]

The SCAG melee cantrips change the calculus of the game a bit, don't they?

They seem to exist to make Arcane Tricksters and arcane Rogues of all stripes more awesome.
I really like they they let you be a magic swordsman type and do appreciable damage without having to pick up Extra Attack somewhere. But yeah, Booming Blade in particular is a bit too good for Rogues and their already best-in-class single attack damage.

On an unrelated note, this thread is inspiring me to write a bunch more melee cantrips for all the other elements so that such characters have more choice. So far, I've got:


Fire-- (Green Flame Blade)
Cold-- Target is slowed; next attack vs has Advantage
Lightning-- Target spasms; provokes AoO from all others
Acid-- Target is covered in acid; bonus action to wipe off or take extra damage
Thunder-- (Booming Blade)
Force-- Weapon counts as magic (the "generic" option)
Poison-- ?
Radiant-- Target is dazzled; takes Dis on AoOs until start of their turn
Necrotic-- Target is sickened/cursed; takes extra necrotic damage until start of their turn
Psychic-- ?

[Klorox]

X3 on booming blade being a super spell for arcane tricksters.

[RickAllison]

The SCAG melee cantrips change the calculus of the game a bit, don't they?

They seem to exist to make Arcane Tricksters and arcane Rogues of all stripes more awesome.

Booming Blade with Swashbuckler is just brutal for any melee opponents. You have someone who can attack for massive damage, dodge out of the way without reprisal, and punish anyone who would attempt to follow them. One of my favorite combos...

[eastmabl]

I really like they they let you be a magic swordsman type and do appreciable damage without having to pick up Extra Attack somewhere. But yeah, Booming Blade in particular is a bit too good for Rogues and their already best-in-class single attack damage.

On an unrelated note, this thread is inspiring me to write a bunch more melee cantrips for all the other elements so that such characters have more choice. So far, I've got:


...
Force-- Weapon counts as magic (the "generic" option)
...

There's a spell for this already. It's called "Magic Weapon."

I'd suggest a knockback feature if you want to create a force-based melee cantrip.

[MeeposFire]

Even for an EK those melee cantrips actually compete with extra attack fairly well so long as you can ensure you will get the extra damage (such as forcing a move with booming blade).

Even so you can just build around the one attack as well such as by going EK7/rogue which will give you two attack in which to hit (thus making sneak attack more likely to hit) and it boosts the damage of your attack.

[Rhaegar14]

I really like they they let you be a magic swordsman type and do appreciable damage without having to pick up Extra Attack somewhere. But yeah, Booming Blade in particular is a bit too good for Rogues and their already best-in-class single attack damage.

On an unrelated note, this thread is inspiring me to write a bunch more melee cantrips for all the other elements so that such characters have more choice. So far, I've got:


Fire-- (Green Flame Blade)
Cold-- Target is slowed; next attack vs has Advantage
Lightning-- Target spasms; provokes AoO from all others
Acid-- Target is covered in acid; bonus action to wipe off or take extra damage
Thunder-- (Booming Blade)
Force-- Weapon counts as magic (the "generic" option)
Poison-- ?
Radiant-- Target is dazzled; takes Dis on AoOs until start of their turn
Necrotic-- Target is sickened/cursed; takes extra necrotic damage until start of their turn
Psychic-- ?


I've considered a similar project recently, just to address some of 5e's problems with damage type favoritism. I'd also like to add weapon cantrips to the Cleric list, some ranged weapon cantrips, and some additional ranged spell cantrips to show Blue/Bronze and Green Dragon Sorcerer some love. However, I think your rider concepts are a little strong, especially lightning.

Generally speaking I find it problematic that something that should be MOSTLY a thematic choice (damage type, melee vs. ranged weapon to a lesser extent) is not at all in the current state of the game, and Clerics need a couple on their own list because as it stands Magic Initiate becomes a feat tax at a sufficiently high level for a melee cleric, and a ranged weapon cleric doesn't really have a comparable option.

[the secret fire]

I really like they they let you be a magic swordsman type and do appreciable damage without having to pick up Extra Attack somewhere. But yeah, Booming Blade in particular is a bit too good for Rogues and their already best-in-class single attack damage.

The other thing the SCAG cantrips do to (or for?) the Rogue is they push him towards finding something out-of-class to do with his off-hand because they aren't compatible with two-weapon fighting. So you end up having a really good reason for your AK to take a single level dip in cleric or fighter, or a two level dip as a bladesinger.

All of that is fine as far as I'm concerned (the fact that Rogues, and especially AKs, can be really effective is one of my favorite things about 5e), but it just goes to show that there are a number of weird mechanical side-effects which appear due to the addition of the SCAG cantrips.

[Cybren]

By AK I assume you mean AT, i.e., arcane tricksters? Why would they need to take a dip to learn a wizard cantrip?

Edit: oh I get what you're saying. Yeah, though having an empty hand would help with spellcasting

[the secret fire]

By AK I assume you mean AT, i.e., arcane tricksters? Why would they need to take a dip to learn a wizard cantrip?

Edit: oh I get what you're saying. Yeah, though having an empty hand would help with spellcasting

Heh...yeah, I meant AT.

You are right about having the hand free for in-combat spellcasting, which is why I would suggest a two level dip as a Bladesinger is a really excellent way to get your career rolling as an Arcane Trickster. This is pretty much restricted to high elves unless your DM is feeling generous, but the synergies are excellent.