I just TWF'd with a Lore Bard :P

[Shiliam]

Hello, everyone.

Our party just got into a fight it were my character just did something we aren't sure it is possible RAW, but the DM allowed based on "it was too awesome", so I wanted to share and ask if you would consider this legal:

In Playing a Lvl 8 Lore Bard, that got Magical Secrets (SCAG Cantrips / Mage Armor), and picked Shillelagh and Searing Smite as his Lvl 6 Magical Secrets. As a Variant Human, Magical Secrets was lvl 1 Feat, then Mobile at 4 and Warcaster at 8.

As we entered the central chamber of a Mage's home by surprise, we had the upper hand during the fight, but as the turns passed, it was obvious that our frontline Fighter and Paladin wouldn't survive (the mage had downed the cleric first). As my friends fell, the Mage just looked at me and just laughed at the little Bard with a sword, and walked to finish the dying cleric. For my character, that was a great hit, he had been recruited because he proved himself fighting side-to-side with his comrades, and something within snapped.

As the Mage took his time walking and ignoring me, I drew a wooden sword with my left hand and casted Shillelagh on it, and drank a haste potion we just got for this task (everyone got just one). The mage then noticed something wasn't right, but it was already too late.

This is what happened:

* Casted Green-Flame Blade to hit with my main hand sword, not hitting the cleric, as the mage was still walking towards her.
* As a bonus action, Casted Searing Smite as a Lvl 4 spell.
* Used the Haste-given action with my left hand holding the wooden Shillelagh-enhanced sword to hit with Searing Smite.

A couple rolls later, the Mage burned on the floor, and the DM says he died by a 2-hp difference.

Stunned DM: "Man, that was awesome; you just made a Lore Bard Spellblade Two-Weapon fighting without having TWF feats or Class Features!".


-*-

It is obviously a very specific case, but we survived due to it, and my party later embarassed me at every bar asking to sing about "The Non-fighter/Bard Fighter".

The only reason the mage died because of the second hit enhanced by shilellagh, but we had this doubt; as the second hit was due to haste's extra attack, DM ruled that it wasn't TWF as per the rules, so the Shillelagh damage was added to the attack's damage.

Do you think this was valid per RAW? is there a way to enhance this combo-like attack to be a better melee Lore Bard?


Thank you for your time, and please excuse any misspelling, english is not my native tongue.

[Lunali]

The rules on two weapon fighting only allow you to make an extra attack using a bonus action. There is no restriction on using different hands/weapons with your normal attacks.

The only thing in this that I see as questionable is whether you can use shillelagh on a wooden sword. Assuming it isn't a special type of wood that can be used in place of metal for weapons, I would just consider it an improvised club and thus it would be eligible.

[Keravath]

I'm not sure what the issue is ...

Haste gives you one more attack. You can attack with any weapon you are holding.

A lore bard can take the attack action with his main hand weapon and then a hasted attack again with the weapon in his other hand. It isn't TWF, it is two attacks with different weapons. TWF fighting is a specific additional attack with an offhand weapon that uses a bonus action.

A fighter with two attacks holding two weapons could attack with either of the two weapons on the two attacks granted by the extra attack feature.

However from two weapon fighting:

"When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand."

In this case, since the melee weapons weren't light and you don't have the dual wielder feat you couldn't have actually made a two weapon fighting attack. On top of that you already used the bonus action to cast the smite spell so you couldn't have taken an extra TWF attack anyway.

The bottom line is that the rules do not require you to take any or all of your attacks with the weapon in your main hand. If you happen to be holding two weapons then you can use your choice for your attack, extra attack or hasted attack actions.

So it seems to me that you did everything just fine and that it worked out in a very fun and exciting way :)

[Keravath]

The rules on two weapon fighting only allow you to make an extra attack using a bonus action. There is no restriction on using different hands/weapons with your normal attacks.

The only thing in this that I see as questionable is whether you can use shillelagh on a wooden sword. Assuming it isn't a special type of wood that can be used in place of metal for weapons, I would just consider it an improvised club and thus it would be eligible.

Shillelagh says "The wood of a club or quarterstaff you are holding is imbued with nature's power." ... personally, I would say that the typical wooden sword is pretty much the same as a wooden club so I don't think there should be any issue there though it would ultimately be up to the DM. However, wooden club could be any tree branch ... there isn't much difference between a tree branch and a tree branch that has been carved to look a bit like a sword.

[Shiliam]

Thank you for all the input, I'm really glad it works by the rules; we like to see how much we can keep playing without homebrewing, and I was so used to see threads saying that lore bards could only had one melee attack that I instantly though i had done something wrong XD.

Im open to any ideas to see if i can get this idea further, I want to keep going melee as Lore Bard; I like to play classes differently to the original intention (fighters go melee, Mages cast from the back, etc).

[Palfatreos]

it fine technacly you dint actually do twf, you just used your action to hit with different weapons which is allowed.

[tieren]

May be an action economy problem, do you mean in one turn you drew a weapon, drank a potion cast shillelagh and searing smite and greenflame blade and made an attack?

[Brawnspear]

May be an action economy problem, do you mean in one turn you drew a weapon, drank a potion cast shillelagh and searing smite and greenflame blade and made an attack?

Yar the only problem I see here is how many rounds it took to do what you did. Shillelagh is a bonus action, as is casting searing smite. Then there's the drawing of the potion and the drinking of the potion and the drawing of a second weapon. I assume a haste potion doesnt require concentration, since haste and searing smite are both concentration spells. That all being said, it sounds like a cool thematic ending to the fight and is an awesome feeling. But if it was all done in 1 round, I'd say don't rely on it as a primary tactic :).

Also, I don't think there's anything stopping you from greenflame blading your shillelagh in the future, and I love the idea of doing both of those with a wooden sword.

[LtPowers]

Great, but what did you need the sword for? Why not just attack twice with your Shillelagh?


Powers &8^]

[Shiliam]

The potion, drawing the sword and casting Shillelagh were separate actions while the mage ignored me as he walked (really slowly as you can imagine :P) to the cleric, in the tipical "i'm evil and smart, and you can't do anything against me" brag. I even got to close the distance just as he was noticing something was amiss.

The things done in one turn were attacking with GFB, then casting Searing Smite as Bonus Action, then hitting with the Haste extra attack action.

[Shiliam]

Great, but what did you need the sword for? Why not just attack twice with your Shillelagh?


Powers &8^]

Actually, and to be honest.. it just didn't occurred to me XD; I had this cool idea out of the blue and just wanted to show-off in front of a mage that was about to kill my friends. Surely when I point that out to the group they're going to add that to the list of things to point about that moment in-character XD.

[Teaguethebean]

RAW is see no problems beyond maybe your DM should have had them react to you casting spells with verbal components but yeah it seems fine mechanically