Why BB if you have GFB?

[Brenoli]

Hi all,

When you are level 5 (when your main target also gets 1d8 extra damage with GFB), I was wondering in what situations you would want to choose booming blade over greenflameblade. As far as I can see, GFB always does more or at minimum the same amount of damage as of level 5.

I mean, if single target: with GFB the main target gets 1d8 on hit, whereas with BB the main target only get weapon damage and only the extra 1d8 when it willingly moves. So always 1d8 with GFB vs sometimes an extra 1d8 with BB.

That's not even factoring in the possible extra damage of secondairy targets with GFB.

Please enlighten me!

Thx.

[Malifice]

Hi all,

When you are level 5 (when your main target also gets 1d8 extra damage with GFB), I was wondering in what situations you would want to choose booming blade over greenflameblade. As far as I can see, GFB always does more or at minimum the same amount of damage as of level 5.

I mean, if single target: with GFB the main target gets 1d8 on hit, whereas with BB the main target only get weapon damage and only the extra 1d8 when it willingly moves. So always 1d8 with GFB vs sometimes an extra 1d8 with BB.

That's not even factoring in the possible extra damage of secondairy targets with GFB.

Please enlighten me!

Thx.

Mobility Feat or Rogue [cunning action disengage] or Swashbuckler.

On your turn you move - attack [with BB] - move out of reach.

On the monsters turn it either stays where it is, or takes extra damage (more than GFB) to chase after you.

Plus, thunder is often better than fire damage (due to resistances).

[leogobsin]

I think you may be reading GFB wrong. At level one, the target you hit with the weapon attack as part of GFB just takes the damage from the weapon attack, and then a second creature takes fire damage equal to your spellcasting ability modifier. At 5th level, the target hit with the weapon attack takes an extra 1d8 fire damage and the secondary target damage becomes 1d8+Spellcasting ability mod. At 5th level BB is dealing weapon damage+1d8 thunder, plus 2d8 thunder if the target moves. So BB is always matching GFB for single target damage.

[Saggo]

I think you might be misunderstanding the damage. Both Booming and Greenflame have +1d8 at level 5 on the main hit. Both have the same damage on the main hit.

You pick BB if you want control on a single target as pointed out above or if they have fire resistance.

You pick GFB if there's two targets or if they have thunder resistance.

[Brenoli]

I think you may be reading GFB wrong. At level one, the target you hit with the weapon attack as part of GFB just takes the damage from the weapon attack, and then a second creature takes fire damage equal to your spellcasting ability modifier. At 5th level, the target hit with the weapon attack takes an extra 1d8 fire damage and the secondary target damage becomes 1d8+Spellcasting ability mod. At 5th level BB is dealing weapon damage+1d8 thunder, plus 2d8 thunder if the target moves. So BB is always matching GFB for single target damage.Haha, indeed I've misread BB wrong all this time. Amazing how that goes..but thanks for pointing that out.

Hmmm, I am a sorcerer and I think that with Shillelagh and twin spell, this BB cantrip can be quite interesting!

[CTurbo]

Also GFB is dependent on your spell casting mod to a degree whereas BB does not in any way.

[LudicSavant]

I was wondering in what situations you would want to choose booming blade over greenflameblade. Most of them.


As far as I can see, GFB always does more or at minimum the same amount of damage as of level 5. Well, you'd be wrong. At level 5, Booming Blade does +1d8 Sonic (enemy doesn't move) or +3d8 Sonic (enemy moves), while GFB does +1d8 fire (solo enemy) or +1d8 fire / +1d8+Stat fire (if a second enemy is correctly positioned).

In general, the former option is superior. Why?
1) Thunder damage is resisted far less often than Fire.
2) An enemy willfully staying still is good for you even if you don't actually deal the damage. It's very easy to make this a lose/lose proposition for the enemy.
3) Bursting down one enemy is generally tactically superior to spreading similar-ish damage across multiple ones, even when you are in a situation with many enemies.
4) In order to compete against foes who don't just straight up have Thunder resistance or Fire vulnerability, GFB requires there to be at least 2 enemies and for you to be able to see the second enemy and for them to stand shoulder to shoulder... something there is little reason for them to do in most cases (clustering is generally bad for your health in D&D world, unless you specifically have an ability that rewards standing adjacent to your ally), and something that an intelligent foe can and will play around.

It's also worth noting that Booming Blade combines very well with some other features, like War Caster. Suddenly getting engaged by then moving away from a level 5 Arcane Trickster, for example, potentially means taking something like 8d8+6d6+8 damage.

[Brenoli]

I think you may be reading GFB wrong. At level one, the target you hit with the weapon attack as part of GFB just takes the damage from the weapon attack, and then a second creature takes fire damage equal to your spellcasting ability modifier. At 5th level, the target hit with the weapon attack takes an extra 1d8 fire damage and the secondary target damage becomes 1d8+Spellcasting ability mod. At 5th level BB is dealing weapon damage+1d8 thunder, plus 2d8 thunder if the target moves. So BB is always matching GFB for single target damage.


Most of them.

Well, you'd be wrong. At level 5, Booming Blade does +1d8 Sonic (enemy doesn't move) or +3d8 Sonic (enemy moves), while GFB does +1d8 fire (solo enemy) or +1d8 fire / +1d8+Stat fire (if a second enemy is correctly positioned).

In general, the former option is superior. Why?
1) Thunder damage is resisted far less often than Fire.
2) An enemy willfully staying still is good for you even if you don't actually deal the damage. It's very easy to make this a lose/lose proposition for the enemy.
3) Bursting down one enemy is generally tactically superior to spreading similar-ish damage across multiple ones, even when you are in a situation with many enemies.
4) In order to compete against foes who don't just straight up have Thunder resistance or Fire vulnerability, GFB requires there to be at least 2 enemies and for you to be able to see the second enemy and for them to stand shoulder to shoulder... something there is little reason for them to do in most cases (clustering is generally bad for your health in D&D world, unless you specifically have an ability that rewards standing adjacent to your ally), and something that an intelligent foe can and will play around.

It's also worth noting that Booming Blade combines very well with some other features, like War Caster. Suddenly getting engaged by then moving away from a level 5 Arcane Trickster, for example, potentially means taking something like 8d8+6d6+8 damage.Hmm, I do not think BB is always better, especially not for a draconic fire sorcerer.

1) In case of fire resistence then obviously BB is better.
2) This makes is sounds like the enemy almost always wants to move, why is that? I mean, the enemy might as well just attack you. Now if there is a situation where you'd expect that the enemy wants to move, then yes, BB is the way to go.
3) See 3, if the enemy/enemies have no inclination to move, they do not take the extra damage and GFB does more damage then.
4) Well, again, it depends on whether you think the enemy wants to move (instead of just attacking you). Note that a fire sorc deals an additional char modifier to one attack roll. So on a non moving single target BB does weapon damage plus 1d8, whereas GFB does weapon damage plus 1d8 plus char modifier (which with 20 char is on average more then an extra 1d8 in itself). Also, in the game I play, there are often many enemies, so hitting more then one is not that exceptional.

So as far as I see it now, whether BB or GFB is better, depends on class and build and situation.

[JellyPooga]

Hmm, I do not think BB is always better, especially not for a draconic fire sorcerer.

1) In case of fire resistence then obviously BB is better.
2) This makes is sounds like the enemy almost always wants to move, why is that? I mean, the enemy might as well just attack you. Now if there is a situation where you'd expect that the enemy wants to move, then yes, BB is the way to go.
3) See 3, if the enemy/enemies have no inclination to move, they do not take the extra damage and GFB does more damage then.
4) Well, again, it depends on whether you think the enemy wants to move (instead of just attacking you). Note that a fire sorc deals an additional char modifier to one attack roll. So on a non moving single target BB does weapon damage plus 1d8, whereas GFB does weapon damage plus 1d8 plus char modifier (which with 20 char is on average more then an extra 1d8 in itself). Also, in the game I play, there are often many enemies, so hitting more then one is not that exceptional.

So as far as I see it now, whether BB or GFB is better, depends on class and build and situation.

The primary reason BB is touted as being better is because if you move away after using it (so they can't "just" attack you), the enemy is forced to either take the extra damage, or remain in place. The single-target damage is better IF they move and if they don't move, they lose their turn (effectively).

The main argument against this is that it assumes the enemy only has melee attacks. Against an archer or spellcaster, BB does not pose the same lose/lose choice. This renders arguments, like yours for Draconic Sorcerer getting a bonus to Fire damage, relevant.

Both have their Pro's and Con's and which one will suit you will depend on a number of factors. You just have to decide which is better for you.

[LudicSavant]

In general, the former option is superior.
Hmm, I do not think BB is always better

:vaarsuvius: In general does not mean "always." :vaarsuvius:


2) This makes is sounds like the enemy almost always wants to move, why is that? Because veteran players who take Booming Blade tend to use tactics that actively create situations that punish enemies for not moving.


3) See 3 You mean "see 2."


Also, in the game I play, there are often many enemies, so hitting more then one is not that exceptional.
As I just explained, it's more situational than "there are two enemies."

[Brenoli]

:vaarsuvius: In general does not mean "always." :vaarsuvius:

Because veteran players who take Booming Blade tend to use tactics that actively create situations that punish enemies for not moving.

You mean "see 2."


As I just explained, it's more situational than "there are two enemies."Ah ok mate, I got the impression that you thought that GFB was rarely the better choice.

Hmm casting BB and then moving away does provoke OoA, but I suppose that may sometimes be better. For example for fighter types with extra attacks.

[MaxWilson]

Also, in the game I play, there are often many enemies, so hitting more then one is not that exceptional.

In this case you may want to look into Sword Burst or Word of Radiance, especially if you happen to have Spell Sniper. At-will 10' radius AoE can kill lots of stirges/goblins/whatnot. (Up to 25' diameter depending on how your DM interprets effects that radiate from a creature: radiating from a point gets you 20', but some DMs rule that it radiates from the creature's entire controlled space, so 25'+.)

[CaptAl]

Ah ok mate, I got the impression that you thought that GFB was rarely the better choice.

Hmm casting BB and then moving away does provoke OoA, but I suppose that may sometimes be better. For example for fighter types with extra attacks.

I played a Bladesinger/Arcane Trickster with BB and the mobile feat. Smack the melee brute with booking blade, then skip away while shooting him a raspberry and daring him to come hit me. Thanks to the mobile feat he couldn't take an aoo, and that usually meant he either ate the extra damage or wasted a round. Both are fantastic options in my book. Honestly, I prefer he just stand there and waste the turn rather than possibly rolling high enough to hit me and forcing me to burn resources.

[LudicSavant]

Hmm casting BB and then moving away does provoke OoA, but I suppose that may sometimes be better. For example for fighter types with extra attacks.

What you really want to do is things like the following:

1) An enemy is in a hazard or a hazardous location, be it one created by the environment or by your team's actions. Move up and Booming Blade them, and stay there. They now either have to stay in the hazard or take Booming Blade and OA damage. You can also get them into a hazard between the point where they're hit and when their turn comes up.

2) Be a tank. Move up and Booming Blade them, and stay there, while your allies stay out of range for the enemy's better attack options (This can even work on ranged enemies, you just need to take advantage of cover. Even a creature makes for decent cover if the enemy isn't moving; they'll still be able to target you but at a penalty). They now either have to stay and try to hurt you or take Booming Blade and OA damage. Using your attacks on a tank prepared to take said attacks is generally a lose. Doubly so given that many BB users have retaliation effects like Riposte or Armor of Agathys (or have payback effects cast on them by their allies).

3) Be a skirmisher that disengages without provoking OAs. Move up and Booming Blade them, and leave without provoking any retaliation. Alternatively, have the enemy be knocked away (such as by your friendly neighborhood Warlock who does that with every Eldritch Blast). Yet another possibility for separating while avoiding OAs is to prevent the enemy from seeing you. Yet another way is if they have already used their OA, or if their Reaction has been disabled (which is a thing some abilities do).

4) Your enemy needs to move someplace to accomplish a tactical goal (such as plugging a choke point, interrupting a caster's concentration, or getting to the macguffin). Move up and Booming Blade them, and stay there. Now they can't accomplish that goal without taking an OA and Booming Blade damage.

5) If you have War Caster, you don't even need to use your action on Booming Blade at all. In fact, players will sometimes do things like just walk up to an enemy and use the Dodge action (especially if they have something like Spirit Guardians going, which incidentally is a pretty good way of creating a hazard for #1). Either the victim tries to hit the War Caster and likely fails, wasting their action, or they try to leave and explode.

[PeteNutButter]

Another thing worth noting is if you or your team can can cast more than one BB a round, when there is only one target it is redundant. A single foe can’t have multiple booming blade effects on them.

So if your doing it twice a round via quicken, after that first one hits the second is redundant. If instead you can get some damage on a secondary target via GFB that’s obviously better. Same is true if a teammate can cast BB.

[Aaron Underhand]

Ah ok mate, I got the impression that you thought that GFB was rarely the better choice.

Hmm casting BB and then moving away does provoke OoA, but I suppose that may sometimes be better. For example for fighter types with extra attacks.

Some classes only get one attack, and have features or feats which make BB vastly superior to gfb reliance on two adjacent enemies.

For example
Rogues with sneak attack and bonus action disengage
Anyone with casting on an opportunity attack specifically warcaster. you gain the ability to prevent enemies running past you, and instead of an AoO being d4+2 for a typical dagger wielding wizard you have an attack that does rrsal damage for your level, and threatens the same again if the move past you.

Actually I have an arcana cleric with mobile planned :-)...

[JackPhoenix]

In this case you may want to look into Sword Burst or Word of Radiance, especially if you happen to have Spell Sniper. At-will 10' radius AoE can kill lots of stirges/goblins/whatnot. (Up to 25' diameter depending on how your DM interprets effects that radiate from a creature: radiating from a point gets you 20', but some DMs rule that it radiates from the creature's entire controlled space, so 25'+.)

Doesn't work. Spell Sniper only works with spells that require attack rolls. Both Sword Burst and Word of Radiance are save-based.

[Laserlight]

In our CoS campaign right now, the arcane trickster has BB. Strike and bonus action disengage. Now the target is standing there without anyone around to swing at.
Alternately, the rogue can BB a foe and I can Thunderwave it so it can't reach anyone.

And my tempest cleric has BB also (elf cantrip). The foe either stays and attacks my high AC (and gets my reaction Rebuke if it hits) or moves to attack our squishy and gets BB damage plus an OA.

Or I hit it, step back and take a single melee attack OA instead of its multiattack, Rebuke it if it hits but it probably misses, and let it decide whether to come after me.

[MaxWilson]

Doesn't work. Spell Sniper only works with spells that require attack rolls. Both Sword Burst and Word of Radiance are save-based.

Argh, you're right.

Still, the basic 10' or 15' AoE may be worth looking into in a campaign with lots of enemies.

[Arathryth]

One thing to note, depending on how your DM interprets the description in GFB, it's possible to unintentionally hurt yourself or one of your party members. That is if there is no other enemy within 5ft of your target, and your DM interprets the description to mean that the flame has to jump to another creature that's within 5ft.

[thrdeye]

One thing to note, depending on how your DM interprets the description in GFB, it's possible to unintentionally hurt yourself or one of your party members. That is if there is no other enemy within 5ft of your target, and your DM interprets the description to mean that the flame has to jump to another creature that's within 5ft.

According to Crawford, the caster gets to choose whether or not this happens. https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/662433813956444160

[Arathryth]

According to Crawford, the caster gets to choose whether or not this happens.

I get that, and that's how it works at my table, I was just saying that there's enough ambiguity in the wording that some DM's might interpret it differently.

[Brenoli]

Oh noes , I now realise shillelagh would use wisdom, rendering the idea of using that for my sorcerer useless.

Which brings me to my following question;

BB and GFB are sorcerer/wizard cantrips, but since they require a melee attack, they seem really usefully for about any class except sorcerer/wizard...or am I overlooking something again?

[leogobsin]

Oh noes , I now realise shillelagh would use wisdom, rendering the idea of using that for my sorcerer useless.

Which brings me to my following question;

BB and GFB are sorcerer/wizard cantrips, but since they require a melee attack, they seem really usefully for about any class except sorcerer/wizard...or am I overlooking something again?

So if your DM would allow Unearthed Arcana, one of the more recent ones is Giant Soul Sorcerer, which can get you Shillelagh as a Sorcerer spell.

You're not entirely wrong about BB/GFB though. They're also Warlock cantrips, and Warlocks are generally better suited for melee combat than Wiz/Sorc. Wizard also has Bladesinger which makes them viable for melee, and being on the Wizard list means they're available to Eldritch Knights/Arcane Tricksters, who can get use out of them. For Sorcerers though, they're generally pretty sub-par choices.

[Potato_Priest]

Oh noes , I now realise shillelagh would use wisdom, rendering the idea of using that for my sorcerer useless.

Which brings me to my following question;

BB and GFB are sorcerer/wizard cantrips, but since they require a melee attack, they seem really usefully for about any class except sorcerer/wizard...or am I overlooking something again?

No, you're right about that... although there are exceptions of course, and it's worth noting that both Eldrich Knights and Arcane Tricksters can get a lot of mileage out of them. (AT especially).

But it's not better for barbarians or higher level fighters, since barbs can't cast in rage and high level fighters get enough extra attacks to blow a cantrip out of the water.

[Rixitichil]

I've had some reasonable success with a Mountain Dwarf Sorcerer who uses GFB/Booming Blade with a Hammer. Dragon Soul, (well, houseruled to Azerblooded for our campaign, but mechanically almost identical, with elementals replacing references to dragons,) and the right spell selection does a reasonable job in making a sorcerer slightly sturdier in melee.
Paladin 2/Sorcerer X gets similar use out of the cantrips from what I hear

[thrdeye]

I get that, and that's how it works at my table, I was just saying that there's enough ambiguity in the wording that some DM's might interpret it differently.

Sure. I just wanted it to be clear that, should the DM do so, they would be overriding the official ruling and creating a house rule.

[Willie the Duck]

I now realise shillelagh would use wisdom, rendering the idea of using that for my sorcerer useless.

Which brings me to my following question;

BB and GFB are sorcerer/wizard cantrips, but since they require a melee attack, they seem really usefully for about any class except sorcerer/wizard...or am I overlooking something again?

Not overlooking per se, but perhaps missing the overall point -- BB/GFB are really powerful spells if thought of in a vacuum (they make a 1 attack/round combatant and make them roughly comparable to a multi-attacking class). They have, however, the opportunity cost that those who get it for free* are still not optimally suited for melee combat, and those who could most easily abuse them do not get them for free.
*excluding Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters (and arcana domain clerics).

[thrdeye]

Not overlooking per se, but perhaps missing the overall point -- BB/GFB are really powerful spells if thought of in a vacuum (they make a 1 attack/round combatant and make them roughly comparable to a multi-attacking class). They have, however, the opportunity cost that those who get it for free* are still not optimally suited for melee combat, and those who could most easily abuse them do not get them for free.
*excluding Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters (and arcana domain clerics).

Making a single attack also means you're putting all your eggs in one basket. If you miss, you miss everything. If your target had 5hp left, you can't switch targets for the remainder of your attacks and the excess is wasted. You're also only adding your attack stat modifier once and you can't effectively use feats like GWM, which scales with extra attacks, or PAM which requires the Attack action.

As you say, they are very nice for boosting the melee capabilities of classes/specs without Extra Attack but they come with their own drawbacks and limiting factors.

[Crgaston]

Argh, you're right.

Still, the basic 10' or 15' AoE may be worth looking into in a campaign with lots of enemies.

Distant Spell metamagic works, though. I have a Sorcerogue who will be making use of this + Cunning Action Disengage when he hits L5

[Willie the Duck]

Making a single attack also means you're putting all your eggs in one basket. If you miss, you miss everything. If your target had 5hp left, you can't switch targets for the remainder of your attacks and the excess is wasted. You're also only adding your attack stat modifier once and you can't effectively use feats like GWM, which scales with extra attacks, or PAM which requires the Attack action.

I should expand. When I said 'they make a 1 attack/round combatant and make them roughly comparable to a multi-attacking class,' I mean just that -- a (ex.) 7th level valor bard getting two 1d8+stat attacks is roughly-vaguely comparable to a 7th level sorcerer getting a 2d8+stat (plus occasionally 2d8 more on the trigger) Booming Blade. Specialized martial types, be they paladin nova-smiters or Sharpshooters or PAM 'every round I get a bonus- and reaction- attack as well' -types are going to outcompete either of those two options in combat (and deservedly so, since both of these are merely combat options for spellcasting classes*).
*again, EKs and ATs being an exception