New Cleric Cantrip (critiques needed)

[Malifice]

Preface:

Im sick to death of almost every single cleric in my games being either:

A) a variant half (high) elf or an actual high elf,
B) grabbing the Magic initiate (Warlock or Sorcerer) feat,
C) dipping a single level of Warlock, Wizard or Sorcerer, or
D) being Arcana domain clerics...

...in order to pick up either the Booming blade or Greenflame blade cantrip.

For those that are unaware both spells provide a nifty damage buff to the Cleric of up to 3d8+Wis (plus rider effects of either move and get hurt, or splash damage). This damage stacks with the +1/2d8 damage that many clerics get from their domains via the divine strike class feature at 8th and 14th level.

17th level Clerics get 'at will' damage of 1d8 (weapon)+2d8 (divine strike) + 3d8 (cantrip) + Str damage. Plus 4d8 more if the target moves (booming blade), or splashing 3d8+Cha to an adjacent creature (greenflame blade).

Rant over. I'm now reconciled with this fact, and am done fighting it. So I figure 'If you cant beat them, join them'.

I present to you (with a nod to ToB for those of you with a sharp eye) a new Cleric cantrip:


Crusaders Strike
Evocation cantrip (Cleric)
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 5 feet
Components: S, M (a weapon)
Duration: Instantaneous

Divine energy surrounds your weapon as you strike. This power washes over you as your weapon finds its mark, mending your wounds and giving you the strength to fight on.

As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spells range and whose alignment has at least one component different from yours. This foe must pose a threat to you or your allies in some direct, immediate way. On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and you or an ally within 10 feet heals damage equal to your spellcasting ability modifier.

At 5th level, the melee attack deals an extra 1d8 radiant damage (if you are good or neutral) or 1d8 necrotic damage (if you are evil) and the target heals an extra 1d8 damage. The damage dealt by this cantrip, and the bonus healing increases to 2d8 at 11th level and to 3d8 at 17th level.

It's on par with GFB (instead of dealing damage, it heals damage). It plays nice with the Clerics role, it gives a nod back to similar abilities in several earlier editions, and it stops every damn cleric being a ******* Elf or Half Elf, or dabbling in Arcane arts.

Thoughts?

[lunaticfringe]

Prepare for Rangers, Monks, & Druids grabbing MI for crusader strike?

Edit: Just disallow the spells, that's what I do sometimes.

[Sigreid]

Few thoughts.

1. Restricting it's use to other alignment or hostile opponents will make it less attractive to more violent party members as it may be unreliable.
2. If all the restrictions are met, that's a lot of healing packed into a cantrip as you level up. Free healing is a greater benefit than extra damage in my opinion.

[JNAProductions]

Make it give THP. Much, much less abusable.

Because right now, it fails the bag of rats test.

[Luvia]

Make it give THP. Much, much less abusable.

Because right now, it fails the bag of rats test.

whats the bag of rats test? I have a guess about it. In this case you can heal buy killing the rats.

[JNAProductions]

whats the bag of rats test? I have a guess about it. In this case you can heal buy killing the rats.

Indeed. Basically, ask yourself, "Can a player abuse this by carrying around a bag of rats with them?"

In this case, yes they can. Unlimited out of combat healing.

I notice it's been edited though, to require them to be hostile and have alignment differentiation. I would get rid of the alignment bit-5E doesn't use that mechanically-but the hostile bit is good.

Honestly, though, I'd really consider just making it Temporary HP.

Edit: Wait, it hasn't been edited. That was just me being dumb reading it-it actually DOES pass the bag of rats test. Huh.

Well, color me derp.

[Luvia]

Indeed. Basically, ask yourself, "Can a player abuse this by carrying around a bag of rats with them?"

In this case, yes they can. Unlimited out of combat healing.

I notice it's been edited though, to require them to be hostile and have alignment differentiation. I would get rid of the alignment bit-5E doesn't use that mechanically-but the hostile bit is good.

Honestly, though, I'd really consider just making it Temporary HP.

Edit: Wait, it hasn't been edited. That was just me being dumb reading it-it actually DOES pass the bag of rats test. Huh.

Well, color me derp.

SO shake the bag of rats really good first =D.

[Malifice]

Because right now, it fails the bag of rats test.

Maybe in your games you consider a rat to fulfill the prerequisite of 'Posing a threat to the Cleric in a direct and immediate way'.

If your party are genuinely threatened by a single rat they've been carrying around in a bag, then they should give up adventuring like forever.


Prepare for Rangers, Monks, & Druids grabbing MI for crusader strike?


None of them get Cleric cantrips. So they would have to learn it via Magic Initiate (and they could simply learn GFB or BB the same way). In fact its harder for them to learn seeing as Half Elves and Elves cant learn this cantrip with their cantrip racial trait.


Edit: Just disallow the spells, that's what I do sometimes.

They're AL legal, as are all the methods to acquire them (High elves, Variant high elves, Magic Initiate, Arcane domain and dipping).

And I dont have a problem with the spells in and of themselves - I just have a problem with the 'flavor' of every single bloody Cleric I DM at some stage dabbling in Sorcery via Magic Initiate, or being Elves

Those spells make Elf and Half Elf 'THE' go-to Cleric race, and make Magic Initiate mandatory in any Cleric build. Churches in Faerun must be packed with high elven clerics.

Its less of a problem with Rogues, as making two attacks with TWF has its own advantages over a single GFB/ BB, so there is an opportunity cost attached to spamming those cantrips.

Clerics OTOH have no reason not to take them.

[JNAProductions]

I completely derped when reading it, so that's my bad!

At the same time, I truly would consider making it THP, not actual healing, because it encourages, for instance, picking fights with weak but still somewhat dangerous people in order to heal.

[Malifice]

I completely derped when reading it, so that's my bad!


Thats cool mate; it was just a joke!


At the same time, I truly would consider making it THP, not actual healing, because it encourages, for instance, picking fights with weak but still somewhat dangerous people in order to heal.

Which would be... you know pretty evil. Starting a fight with something just to kill it for healing. Also seeing as the creature needs to be (DMs call) a direct and immediate threat, wailing on a lone Kobold at 10th level wont cut the mustard.

The healing is (Wisdom) at levels 1-4, adding 1d8 at levels 5, 11 and 17. Its 1/round and the Cleric needs to hit. A monster worth its salt and that the DM considers poses 'a direct and immediate threat' is every chance to deal more damage than the spell heals in a stand up fight.

Also, Temp HP are actually more powerful as they still bring you back from being at 0 HP, plus you get advantages from them at Max HP. If the HP are temp, there is even more motivation to 'Bag o rats' it or beat up on a snivelling kobold to buff your teamates.

[JNAProductions]

Not really, since they do not stack. So once you get the buff, there's no point attacking again until you've lost the THP. But let's say you're down 30 HP-you have every motivation to keep attacking until you're healed.

In addition, since there's no no negative HP in 5E, any healing brings you back up. But I'm not even sure THP does-I think that's outside RAW. But even if it does, that's the same as regular healing, only regular healing stacks.

The sole advantage THP has is that it works over and above your regular max, so it'll be a nice start of the day boost. In pretty much every other way, true healing is better.

[Slipperychicken]

I don't like the idea of a cantrip that straight upgrades a clerics' attack and is useful every single turn of combat. Maybe a first level spell could do something like this.

Also, I'd consider either making it temp hp or not restoring health at all. That way you don't have to force the GM into a balancing act of deciding exactly when the players are in enough danger that they're not at risk of abusing it for free healing. Also, healing multiple hit points of real damage is far too useful for a cantrip, even one that requires an attack roll in combat.



In addition, since there's no no negative HP in 5E, any healing brings you back up. But I'm not even sure THP does-I think that's outside RAW. But even if it does, that's the same as regular healing, only regular healing stacks.

It doesn't stabilize or restore consciousness, but it's still there and can eat some damage.


"lf you have O hit points, receiving temporary hit points doesn't restore you to consciousness or stabilize you. They can still absorb damage directed at you while you're in that state, but only true healing can save you."

[nickl_2000]

I don't like the idea of a cantrip that straight upgrades a clerics' attack and is useful every single turn of combat. Maybe a first level spell could do something like this.

Also, I'd rather make it temp hp. That way you don't have to force the GM into a balancing act of deciding exactly when the players are in enough danger that they're not at risk of abusing it for free healing.

I agree that this seems to powerful as is for a cantrip. If I were a cleric, especially a life cleric, I would pretty much never again need to cast cure wounds or healing word. I'm a level 3 life cleric, I hit most of my attacks because I'm a decent attacker. I'm healing 6 HP a turn and I can continue to heal it over and over again.

Temp HP would not give an advantage to life cleric, and temp HP can only replace not stack. Also, I would make the temp HP only last 1 minute or something like that (again to neuter it a little more). This is certainly still powerful as I can keep more people alive, but you would still need to have your cure wounds and healing words ready.

[Biggstick]

Personally I feel like both the healing granted (no matter the stipulations put on it's use) on a cantrip is going to be abused. I'm also not a fan of of your alignment restrictions either. I am intrigued though by this idea of creating a Cleric specific weapon cantrip.

How about granting the Cleric resistance to damage until the start of the Cleric's next turn from the creature struck by the cantrip, as well as the standard 1d8-2d8-3d8 damage progression? This doesn't allow for THP or actual HP abuse, and gives the Cleric a little bit more of a tankiness that the Cleric lacks.

[Kryx]

I agree with the other posters that temporary hit points are a much better choice.

I also agree with the theme of the other posters that this cantrip is too strong.

I do wish for more cleric cantrips, and this cantrip would probably be fine without the healing, but with it I wouldn't allow it.

[Zman]

This is significantly stronger than GFB or BB, it is also a useable.

Firstly, Radiant/Necrotic is better than fire or Thunder, so dropping the die to a d6 seems appropriate.

Now, using an attack cantrip as a form of healing is vastly overpowered. Compare it to a first level cure light wounds. It should under no circumstances be out performing a healing leveled spells like this.

Cantrips should not be healing real HP.

Now, granting temp hp is much better that straight up healing, but obviously it cannot scale using a d8. Even being Ability Mod, then d4 additional for 5/11/17 it'd still be too good, but less obnoxious and probabaly workable. Honestly even Ability Mod and add just +1/+2/+3 more temp Hp at 5/11/17 seems better to me. Best it gets is +3d6 Radiant and gives 8 temp HP. Seems like a reasonable cantrip.

Plus, Clerics already are often given extra melee damage.

I'd also keep it 5'.

[Malifice]

Temp HP would not give an advantage to life cleric

You might want to read Life clerics again. You only get + Wis when casting a healing spell of 1st level or greater.

Wont work with the cantrip. I already thought of that.


I also agree with the theme of the other posters that this cantrip is too strong.


Its not a question of whether its too strong; the question is 'Is it too strong compared to a cleric GFB and BB'

Assume for a second I play in a game where every Cleric is an Elf with Booming blade.

Is this cantrip noticeably stronger than that Cantrip?

[Malifice]

This is significantly stronger than GFB or BB, it is also a useable.

Firstly, Radiant/Necrotic is better than fire or Thunder, so dropping the die to a d6 seems appropriate.

Now, using an attack cantrip as a form of healing is vastly overpowered. Compare it to a first level cure light wounds. It should under no circumstances be out performing a healing leveled spells like this.

Cantrips should not be healing real HP.

Now, granting temp hp is much better that straight up healing, but obviously it cannot scale using a d8. Even being Ability Mod, then d4 additional for 5/11/17 it'd still be too good, but less obnoxious and probabaly workable. Honestly even Ability Mod and add just +1/+2/+3 more temp Hp at 5/11/17 seems better to me. Best it gets is +3d6 Radiant and gives 8 temp HP. Seems like a reasonable cantrip.

Plus, Clerics already are often given extra melee damage.

I'd also keep it 5'.

I guess Im not seeing choosing between:

A) Greenflame Blade (+3d8 damage to target,+ deal 3d8+Cha damage to a secondary target),
B) Booming blade (+3d8 to target, + another 4d8 if he moves) or
C) This spell (+3d8 to target, + heal companion of 3d8+Wis)

...as being pretty much a wash.

What if I limited the healing and damage to d6's AND made the healing only work on a target at half HP or less.

Im worried thats nerfing it too much, and it wont solve my problem of 'all clerics are Elves' although the consensus seems to be its too strong otherwise.

[Malifice]

That said, +3d6 damage isnt that different from 3d8 in the long run.

At the sweet spot (levels 9-10) its an extra +1d6 with a weapon attack (instead of +1d8) and a pretty insignificant (1d6+Wis) healing per round (instead of 1d8+Cha damage to a second target).

Having a restriction of 'Must be within 10' and must 'be at half or lower HP' works as would a limitation that it cant restore someone from 0 HP (spare the dying is still relevant and useful and it stops whack a mole being made easier).

[Arcangel4774]

Consider having the scaling upgrade thp to hp. Could look like this
1-4: mod thp
5-10: mod hp or thp
11-16: mod hp or thp + mod thp
17+: mod hp or thp + mod hp or thp

[Malifice]

Consider having the scaling upgrade thp to hp. Could look like this
1-4: mod thp
5-10: mod hp or thp
11-16: mod hp or thp + mod thp
17+: mod hp or thp + mod hp or thp

Thats a bit overly complicated for me Im afraid.

From 1st to 4th level, our cleric can use this 1/round (hitting every other round usually) healing 3 HP at a time.

Thats 3 HP healing every other round, only as long as they are within 10' and not at 0HP.

From 5th-10th its adding 1d6 to the clerics damage, and healing 1d6+4 every other round (as opposed to GFB dealing an extra 1d8 damage, and dealing 1d8+4 splash damage).

It looks about balanced at that level of healing and damage compared to GFB I reckon.

I mat put 'One ally that can hear you' is healed so it doesn't work in silence.

[ATHATH]

Personally I feel like both the healing granted (no matter the stipulations put on it's use) on a cantrip is going to be abused. I'm also not a fan of of your alignment restrictions either. I am intrigued though by this idea of creating a Cleric specific weapon cantrip.

How about granting the Cleric resistance to damage until the start of the Cleric's next turn from the creature struck by the cantrip, as well as the standard 1d8-2d8-3d8 damage progression? This doesn't allow for THP or actual HP abuse, and gives the Cleric a little bit more of a tankiness that the Cleric lacks.
This seems like a good fix.

[Malifice]

This seems like a good fix.

It does but I'm trying to keep the cleric focused on a party buffing role, and not a tanking role.

Plus resistance to all damage from one target, is arguably more potent than healing 1d6+4 (at levels 5-10) or 2d6+4 (at levels 11-17).

[Honest Tiefling]

I'm confused. Being a High Elf would make the cantrip be Intelligence based, not wisdom. Dipping or using Magic Initiate would make the spell Charisma based if nabbed from the Sorcerer/Warlock list, and Intelligence if nabbed from Wizard. This would leave Arcana Cleric as the only viable option, as far as I know. Did I miss something?

I'm not a fan of the alignment restriction or the 'pose a direct threat' bit...This doesn't even fit most clerics. A cleric of trickery would actively try to avoid such situations, a cleric of warfare might select a target aiming for a siege weapon. True neutral clerics would not be able to fend off wild animals with this cantrip. I get that it is supposed to pass the bag o' rats, but it would be severely limiting for sneaky or aggressive/evil clerics.

[Biggstick]

This seems like a good fix.

Thanks!


It does but I'm trying to keep the cleric focused on a party buffing role, and not a tanking role.

Plus resistance to all damage from one target, is arguably more potent than healing 1d6+4 (at levels 5-10) or 2d6+4 (at levels 11-17).

But it's not open to being abused by a PC in healing one's self up without using resources.

If you're worried that it's too tanky, limit it to standard damage types, like bludgeoning/slashing/piercing.

If you'd prefer buffing, make it like a mini Bless for the next ally to make an attack roll against the creature. So standard 1d8-2d8-3d8 progression, and the next ally to make an attack roll against the creature gets to add 1d4 to their attack roll. No need to put scaling on it, as it provides the "buff" you're looking for. It also stacks well if you as a Cleric are already running Bless. It also encourages teamwork.

[suplee215]

I'm confused. Being a High Elf would make the cantrip be Intelligence based, not wisdom. Dipping or using Magic Initiate would make the spell Charisma based if nabbed from the Sorcerer/Warlock list, and Intelligence if nabbed from Wizard. This would leave Arcana Cleric as the only viable option, as far as I know. Did I miss something?
While this is true, Booming Blade does not use your spell modifier for any part of damage (Green Flame Blade does but only on the extra target damage).

[Malifice]

I'm confused. Being a High Elf would make the cantrip be Intelligence based, not wisdom.

The Int damage is the minor part of the ability. Its the +Xd8's (starting at 5th level) that is the meat of those abilities.

And you get to use Magic initiate Sorcerer to have them run of Charisma (which a ton of melee clerics have at 13 for the mandatory Paladin dip for divine smite).

Arcana clerics have it run off Wisdom (and get to add Wisdom twice thanks to Potent Cantrip from 8th).

Ability Modifier doesnt even enter the picture with BB, and its a minor part of the spell with GFB (not at levels 1-4 granted, where it forms the only advantage of the spell).

Having this spell run off Wisdom means Clerics are much more likely to want it over those choices (plus it lets them play races other than Elves).


I get that it is supposed to pass the bag o' rats, but it would be severely limiting for sneaky or aggressive/evil clerics.

Not really. Walking up to a Good aligned guy and whacking him is perfectly fine. As long as he isnt some weakling that isn't a challenge for you. And Im prepared to accept those cases in any event, to stomp down on any bag o rat suggestions for good.

[Malifice]

But it's not open to being abused by a PC in healing one's self up without using resources.

Neither is this spell. You need to use it in a combat encounter. You know - while in one of those 6-8 medium-hard encounters per adventuring day, when you're not stabilizing downed allies, turning undead, casting other spells and so forth.

I mean, if you're badly wounded and want to start a fight with a dangerous encounter (in order to try and heal 1d6+Wisdom before the thing kills you) be my guest. You'll lose more HP that you'll gain.

Personally, Id head off somewhere and rest.


If you'd prefer buffing, make it like a mini Bless for the next ally to make an attack roll against the creature. So standard 1d8-2d8-3d8 progression, and the next ally to make an attack roll against the creature gets to add 1d4 to their attack roll. No need to put scaling on it, as it provides the "buff" you're looking for. It also stacks well if you as a Cleric are already running Bless. It also encourages teamwork.

Thats.... not a bad idea at all!

Im working on a similar cantrip (buff + up DPR) for Bards (whose at will DPR is shockingly bad), and I think you just helped me kill two birds with one stone!

[suplee215]

healing of any type on a cantrip is extremely dangerous. Might be easier for your own personal game as you can always tell the players exactly how they can and cannot use it but most people on here will critique as if it was from the book and imagine rules lawyering power gamers abusing the **** out of it. I would try to find something other than healing for the cantrip to do. perhaps making the entire party resist the damage from the target will be too much for boss fights but that type of thing might work.

[Zman]

I guess Im not seeing choosing between:

A) Greenflame Blade (+3d8 damage to target,+ deal 3d8+Cha damage to a secondary target),
B) Booming blade (+3d8 to target, + another 4d8 if he moves) or
C) This spell (+3d8 to target, + heal companion of 3d8+Wis)

...as being pretty much a wash.

What if I limited the healing and damage to d6's AND made the healing only work on a target at half HP or less.

Im worried thats nerfing it too much, and it wont solve my problem of 'all clerics are Elves' although the consensus seems to be its too strong otherwise.

Cantrip healing is the problem, and being far more effective than than Cure Light wounds.

Potential and often not triggered rider damage to an enemy, is a whole lot different than healing a PC.


Radiant is better, plus Clerics won't be required to be High self or spend a Feat for a cantrip. It's on the cleric list, they'll choose it, and just being reasonable for additional damage means you'll get more variety in characters.

The rider should be relatively minor, and often difficult to trigger reliably. Real actual healing every single hit is too good for a cantrip. Temp HP works better. Look at how often Booming Blade's rider is irrelevant, or how often your against one monster and so is GFBs. Your suggested one is much much better than those riders.

[nickl_2000]

It does but I'm trying to keep the cleric focused on a party buffing role, and not a tanking role.

Plus resistance to all damage from one target, is arguably more potent than healing 1d6+4 (at levels 5-10) or 2d6+4 (at levels 11-17).

What about giving the person attacked disadvantage until the end of their next turn? This is a pretty normal effect with two official cantrips that do it? Then at higher levels give a bonus to damage 1d6 at level 5 radiant damage

[Malifice]

healing of any type on a cantrip is extremely dangerous. Might be easier for your own personal game as you can always tell the players exactly how they can and cannot use it but most people on here will critique as if it was from the book and imagine rules lawyering power gamers abusing the **** out of it.

Not an issue in my own game as I both know how the Cantrip is supposed to work, and players who attempt bag of rats or rules lawyering get shown the door quick-smart.

The intent is you need to use it in a combat. One of those 6-8 medium to hard encounters per day. When the DM says 'roll initiative'. Not just walking up to a lone sleeping Kobold and clobbering him.

My question is limited to comparing it to GFB/BB on a cleric.

It needs to be potent enough for a Cleric to choose it (and not bother taking the other Cantrips, which requires some effort) but not be OP compare to those cantrips.

Like I said, assume those cantrips exist (and that I broadly speaking dont have an issue with clerics having them or cantrips like them, barring the fluff/ flavor issues of it forcing them to be Elves or taking the Magic Initiate (Sorcerer) feat).

Assume also that Im a competent enough DM that if players will not be allowed to bag-o-rats it or similar stupidity without being told 'No' or tossed from the game, and that it gets used only as intended.

[Malifice]

What about giving the person attacked disadvantage until the end of their next turn? This is a pretty normal effect with two official cantrips that do it? Then at higher levels give a bonus to damage 1d6 at level 5 radiant damage

Too strong a debuff. And I dont want it carrying a saving throw (which it would need at a minimum with disadvantage to attacks at will).

And im less cool with Clerics debuffing. Id rather channel them more into buffing.

[Malifice]

I might even just ban BB and GFB.

Thats probably the best solution. Im gonna wind up buffing Bards, Druids and Clerics too much to compensate them otherwise.

It does solve my problem in a much more elegant (and final) way.

[suplee215]

Another possibility could be just making a cantrip that does the extra damage but no secondary effect. Honesty seems good enough for clerics to take without going to the extra effort. Also, clerics are encouraged to hit more often than the other magic casters so you don't need to entice them as much.

[Malifice]

Another possibility could be just making a cantrip that does the extra damage but no secondary effect. Honesty seems good enough for clerics to take without going to the extra effort. Also, clerics are encouraged to hit more often than the other magic casters so you don't need to entice them as much.

Removing GFB and BB actually pretty much just fixes the issues (there are unforeseen issues with adding these extra spells in). Stripping them out causes less issues, and arguably fixes a few (tome locks being better gishes than bladelocks, and rogue/ cleric pilfering of those cantrips).

It might hurt EK's a bit, but it only really helps them for a few levels, and Ive re-worded true strike so that it functions on the same turn to compensate a little (although they're probably still better off just extra attacking)

I may look at a bonus action Wizard 1 spell that functions like Paladin smite spells.

Ive fixed my Bard DPR problems by giving them sneak attack +1d6 at 7th and 11th level (mirroring cleric Divine strike).

I can add to focussing Bards on buffing by adding in a new Bard 1st level spell that provides similar AoE buffing like a bardic version of bless (but different).

I might reword the cantrip and turn it into a Paladin spell (probably as a bonus action smite type one)

[Isaire]

I might even just ban BB and GFB.

I think if I was DM'ing, I would do the same. I don't think they are at all balanced compared to other cantrips on offer, or to the spirit of caster / martial balance. But hey..

[MeeposFire]

Removing GFB and BB actually pretty much just fixes the issues (there are unforeseen issues with adding these extra spells in). Stripping them out causes less issues, and arguably fixes a few (tome locks being better gishes than bladelocks, and rogue/ cleric pilfering of those cantrips).

It might hurt EK's a bit, but it only really helps them for a few levels, and Ive re-worded true strike so that it functions on the same turn to compensate a little (although they're probably still better off just extra attacking)

I may look at a bonus action Wizard 1 spell that functions like Paladin smite spells.

Ive fixed my Bard DPR problems by giving them sneak attack +1d6 at 7th and 11th level (mirroring cleric Divine strike).

I can add to focussing Bards on buffing by adding in a new Bard 1st level spell that provides similar AoE buffing like a bardic version of bless (but different).

I might reword the cantrip and turn it into a Paladin spell (probably as a bonus action smite type one)

Yea even if you made it no concentration on top of what you already changed true strike would be a terrible choice. Think about it true strike with war magic at best gives you two chances to hit with one attack. But if you use your attack action at level 8 you get 2 actual attacks so still two chances at a crit but also two potential hits. So the attack action is always better in that case and that is before level 11 hits and you get a third attack.

Sadly in terms of war magic outside of multiclassing warlock for agonizing blast the only way for a fighter to compete with their attack action with war magic are GFB and BB. With those cantrips war magic is competitive with the attack action+one feat if you can be sure you get the secondary bonus damage (moving with BB or a second target with GFB). I did not do the math for without one feat but I would imagine that the reduction in damage would mirror fairly with a booming blade without the target moving for bonus damage.