Request to double check rules - seemingly OP battle sorcerer

[Knoth89]

Hi guys, I’ve got a stone sorcerer playing in my campaign and he’s outputting quite a bit of damage at level 6. Would appreciate some help just to make sure he’s not breaking any rules.

This is a typical combo he uses, assuming two enemies A and B:
1. Use 3rd level shadow blade (SB) before battle
2. Green flame blade (GFB) attack with quickened spell
3d8 + mod (SB) + 1d8 (GFB) on A and 1d8 + mod (GFB) on B
3. Booming blade (BB) attack with twinned spell
3d8 + mod (SB) + 1d8 (BB) on A and B
4. Activate Stone Aegis feature as reaction
3d8 + mod (SB) + 1d10 on A or B

Assuming he lands all attacks (which he often does due to shadow blade’s advantage because of dim light in dungeons), he’s able to put out something like 17d8 damage (not counting modifiers and booming blade triggers, crit etc), all magical. The cost is 1 3rd lvl spell slot and 3 sorc points.

Am I missing something, or is this just a good combo?

[Unoriginal]

Can't Quicken a cantrip and cast another cantrip in the same turn.

[OvisCaedo]

That all... sounds about accurate to me. There probably won't always be valid targets to twin booming blade onto. I can't see any rule that would forbid casting two cantrips in a turn using quicken; in fact, it's one of the most commonly discussed sorcerer combat options I've seen.

Stone sorc could be noted as being UA and not necessarily having been though out thoroughly, for that particular attack. I don't even remember what the trigger on it is.

[Haydensan]

Can't Quicken a cantrip and cast another cantrip in the same turn.

i think you're getting mixed up. Bonus action cantrip and action cantrip are fine.

@OP yeah it seems fine. Uses a lot of resources and eats up reaction for stuff like shield and absorb elements though.

[Contrast]

I'd point out that a Fireball spell will usually be a more damaging option than this if there are more than a couple of people in the room. This combo really only works when you're exactly fighting two people standing right next to each other.



1. Use 3rd level shadow blade (SB) before battle

This step seems a little dubious - Shadow Blade only lasts a minute and is a bonus action. I'd be very wary of casting in preemptively in case something delays matters and I burned a level 3 spell slot for no reason. Doesn't really make much difference because it just means the full combo goes off turn 2 rather than turn 1 but typically you should be rolling initiative before combat actions start getting declared.

Edit - looking at Stone Sorc their reaction ability is also a bonus action 1 min ability. Maybe reduce the potential for the team to spend multiple rounds casting spells/abilities to prep for a combat without disruption prior to fights? Or at least give the enemies equal opportunity to set things up.

Also worth mentioning many people feel the Stone Sorc was a bit overtuned and don't allow it *shrugs*

[BarneyBent]

It is unclear how twinning Booming Blade functions. It allows you to target two enemies with the spell, but Twin does not allow you to target two enemies with a weapon attack. And (I’ve made this mistake before), the melee weapon attack is a prerequisite for the spell to work, it is not an inherent part of the spell.

Therefore, a strict ruling would be that twinning Booming Blade achieves nothing, as you can still only target one enemy with the weapon attack. A more lenient ruling would be that you can only target one enemy with the weapon attack, but the damage from the cantrip (e.g. additional d8s) can affect a second target if the first target is hit (fluff it like them being caught up in the area of effect of the spell). You could choose to let them apply all damage, or just the rider effect.

So from least powerful to most, your options for rulings are:

1. Twinning Booming Blade is useless because you can’t make two weapon attacks

2. Twinning Booming Blade lets you apply the rider effect to a second target

3. Twinning Booming Blade lets you apply all cantrip damage to a second target

4. Twinning Booming Blade lets you literally make two Booming Blade attacks against two different targets

I would personally pick option 3, which allows the build to still function similarly to how it currently does, but not quite so broken. It’s absolutey supported by the rules and is honestly generous, since people can and do make a very good argument for option 1.

[DeTess]

It is unclear how twinning Booming Blade functions. It allows you to target two enemies with the spell, but Twin does not allow you to target two enemies with a weapon attack. And (I’ve made this mistake before), the melee weapon attack is a prerequisite for the spell to work, it is not an inherent part of the spell.


I think you're mixing up booming blade with the paladin smite spells. The paladin smite spells just give you a bonus on your next attack, and don't come with a weapon attack. Booming blade has the melee attack as part of the spell, which means it is included. Otherwise, by the same ruling, a spell like ray of frost couldn't be twinned either because it requires an attack roll, and I highly doubt that's the intention.

Edit: @OP, do keep in mind that this combo costs him 3 sorcery points, or the equivalent of a second level spell slot every turn, in addition to the 3rd level spell slot for the shadow blade. It might seem powerful, but he's basically just turned himself into a more squishy paladin here. He could easily be doing more damage in massed fights with mainstay spells like fireball.

[Spiritchaser]

Also keep in mind that UA material, even if published in its exact form, may well be overtuned if combined with material from outside the PHB.

I’m not generally a fan of the PHB + 1 rule, but there’s no question that it does eliminate some of the monster builds out there.

In short, even if published, stone sorcerer and shadow blade (Edit: and SCAG weapon cantrips) would never coexist at some tables. Maybe think long and hard if you want it at yours.

[Unoriginal]

i think you're getting mixed up. Bonus action cantrip and action cantrip are fine.

You are right, I was incorrect.

[RSP]

I think you're mixing up booming blade with the paladin smite spells.


I think he’s accurately describing BB:

“As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails.”

The melee attack with a weapon is part of the casting, not part of the spell effect, which is the Thunder damage.

[Haydensan]

I think he’s accurately describing BB:

“As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails.”

The melee attack with a weapon is part of the casting, not part of the spell effect, which is the Thunder damage.

Bold in quotes is me.

I think the weapon attack falls under the spell effect, remember it sheathes your weapon in "booming energy" that only lasts long enough for the attack, or manifests as part of the attack. Either way it's fine.

[DeTess]

I think he’s accurately describing BB:

“As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails.”

The melee attack with a weapon is part of the casting, not part of the spell effect, which is the Thunder damage.

So in that case you'd rule that any spell that requires and attack roll can't be twinned? Because I see very little difference between the method of delivery of booming blade or firebolt/ray of frost/etc.

[Keravath]

Allowing the character to pre-cast shadow blade ... unless for some reason they know combat is going to start in the next 6 seconds but hasn't already for some reason .. is giving the sorcerer a head start on damage that they don't need and probably shouldn't have.

Shadow blade is also a bonus action so this prevents one of the attacks on that turn.

Stone Aegis takes a bonus action to apply. It is applied to an ally, not you, and allows you a melee attack when and if the designated ally is actually hit. This means that A or B actually have to attack the sorcerer's ally AND hit before the reaction gets to be used. However, after reading it, that ability is significantly OP since the additional damage scales and the extra reaction attack remains as long as opponents attack and hit the designated ally.

Finally, you are allowing the UA stone sorcerer, cantrips from SCAG and the shadow blade spell from Xanathar's. Next thing you know the stone sorcerer is a yuan-ti pureblood from Volo's to add icing to the cake ... or perhaps aging to the cheese :)

However, mechanically, the combination does work and the player has likely searched through the books to find the best combination they could by combining various sources.

On the topic of booming blade:

Booming blade includes the melee weapon attack as part of its casting ... the material component to the spell is also a weapon:

"As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails. On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and it becomes sheathed in booming energy until the start of your next turn. If the target willingly moves before then, it immediately takes 1d8 thunder damage, and the spell ends."

The target becomes sheathed in energy - not the weapon - and the casting of the spell REQUIRES a melee weapon attack. Since the spell is single target then it can be twinned onto two targets within 5' of the caster ... each casting then requires its own melee attack with a weapon.

[NaughtyTiger]

As Kevarath pointed out:

Your use of stone aegis appears incorrect.
My interpretation is that you MUST use a bonus action to apply the effect to yourself.
Once active, you can use your reaction to apply the teleport.



PHB+1 is not a 5e rule

[Felyndiira]

The only issue I can see is that Stone Aegis requires a bonus action to activate first. That means that this combo has two bonus action stuff it needs to activate (Shadow Blade, Stone Aegis) before we can even get to the quicken GFB.

[Merudo]

Hi guys, I’ve got a stone sorcerer playing in my campaign and he’s outputting quite a bit of damage at level 6. Would appreciate some help just to make sure he’s not breaking any rules.

This is a typical combo he uses, assuming two enemies A and B:
1. Use 3rd level shadow blade (SB) before battle
2. Green flame blade (GFB) attack with quickened spell
3d8 + mod (SB) + 1d8 (GFB) on A and 1d8 + mod (GFB) on B
3. Booming blade (BB) attack with twinned spell
3d8 + mod (SB) + 1d8 (BB) on A and B
4. Activate Stone Aegis feature as reaction
3d8 + mod (SB) + 1d10 on A or B


Very interesting build.

The Stone Sorcerer is not going to be available at most tables though. UA is typically not allowed precisely because it often leads to that kind of abuse. I guess a player could instead go for Dragonic (extra damage through Elemental Affinity) or the usual Divine Soul / Shadow origin.

The weaknesses of the build are weak defenses for a melee character, & a much lower damage potential against a single enemy (8d8 + 2*mod, instead of 13d8 + 4*mod).

Still the damage is quite amazing. For comparisons, a quicken + twinned Firebolt with Elemental Affinity will only do 6d10 + 3*mod - plus the roll is not at advantage. You can use your concentration on something else but nothing really compares to the raw extra damage of Shadow Blade.

[RSP]

Bold in quotes is me.

I think the weapon attack falls under the spell effect, remember it sheathes your weapon in "booming energy" that only lasts long enough for the attack, or manifests as part of the attack. Either way it's fine.


So in that case you'd rule that any spell that requires and attack roll can't be twinned? Because I see very little difference between the method of delivery of booming blade or firebolt/ray of frost/etc.

So it’s two different things: casting a spell, and it’s effect.

Look at the Ready Action:

“When you ready a spell, you cast it as normal but hold its energy, which you release with your reaction when the trigger occurs.”

So if you Ready a Spell, it can’t be Countered on the Reaction when it’s released because it’s already been cast.

The rules of targeting are such that you don’t need a target when you cast a spell, only when it’s effects take hold, such as casting Eldritch Blast at level 5+ and then deciding on changing target(s) between blasts. (Ready reinforces this).

Now when looking at twin, is the spell cast twice or is it one casting, but two effects?

If you twin a spell with gp valued material components, do you need two sets to twin?

If you’re casting twice during twin, do you need a free hand for each S and M component (and somehow duplicate and V components)?

If the answer is “you cast the spell twice during twin” then the answer to the above two questions is “Yes.”

If the answer is “no, it’s one casting with two effects,” then it would seem the answer to those questions is “no,” as is the answer to the weapon attack made “as part of the casting.”

Note: this also means, RAW, you can’t Ready BB as you would “cast [it] as normal” on your turn, including the Attack made as part of the casting, then hold it for the trigger, which wouldn’t include that attack.

Again, though, this is just the RAW answer.

Randuir, to answer the Attack roll question, you would need to see how each spell is worded. As BB specifically states the attack is part of the casting, I’d say it’s not twin-able if going by the RAW.

[bc56]

As Kevarath pointed out:

Your use of stone aegis appears incorrect.
My interpretation is that you MUST use a bonus action to apply the effect to yourself.
Once active, you can use your reaction to apply the teleport.



PHB+1 is not a 5e rule

It's an AL rule, and quite a good one. It prevents ridiculous OP combos which are created by plucking features from a dozen different sourcebooks.

[Merudo]

4. Activate Stone Aegis feature as reaction
3d8 + mod (SB) + 1d10 on A or B


Another thing: the DM is not playing the monsters rationally.

Once the Sorcerer use Stone Aegis on a party member, the enemies should stop attacking that party member with melee attacks. This will prevent the reaction ability from triggering.


It's an AL rule, and quite a good one. It prevents ridiculous OP combos which are created by plucking features from a dozen different sourcebooks.

I think it's a pretty unfun rule - everyone wants to use Xanathar's Guide, so all the other WotC books are made essentially useless.

[Felyndiira]

It's an AL rule, and quite a good one. It prevents ridiculous OP combos which are created by plucking features from a dozen different sourcebooks.

AL+1 also has the weakness of turning most of the game into PHB+Xanathars, since those offer the most options. Only occasionally will you see SCAG on a rogue/bladesinger or Volo if someone really wants to be a special race. AL Eberron actually dispensed with the +1 rule and just listed out sources you can use (excluding, specifically, SCAG).

EDIT: Swordsage'd.

[NaughtyTiger]

It's an AL rule, and quite a good one. It prevents ridiculous OP combos which are created by plucking features from a dozen different sourcebooks.

Right, It's an AL rule, not a 5e rule. and i disagree with your opinion that it is a good one for a home game.

It is in place for AL because the DM's are hamstrung how they can address power concerns. (AL consistently blames the DMs for dev issues and takes away their authority)

In a home game, DMs have the final authority, and can address power issues as they arise at the table.

The idea that it is universally a good idea, implies that DMs have no control over their table.

[Willie the Duck]

Anyone using UA material had better be prepared to police overpoweredness in general, so PHB+1 or not, the DM better roll up their sleeves (which is what the OP is doing here, asking us about the matter).

To the OP--I think people have pointed out various rules issues about how this works. I will point out more of the meta-issues.
1) you are judging this as overpowered, yet the PC is spending a huge amount of resources (both in terms of long rest-recharging effects, but also in character build resources), all for the privilege of doing a relatively powerful melee attack... as a sorcerer with 1d6+1+con hp per level and AC 15+Dex modifier (assuming non-magical shield). This is in line with valor bards, pre-hexblade bladelocks, bladesinger wizards, and other full casters who would like to devote their archtype to being able to pinch hit as a marginally to moderately good melee combatant (with a high rate of nova-burndown). This is sorcadin, but not as good. In and of itself, I do not see it as overpowered.
2) The real issue (to me) seems to be how much pre-prep seems to be normal in your combat situations. Why is it routinely possible for your players to get rounds ahead of (right ahead of, given that these are 10-round duration effects) time to prepare for combat... specifically situations where it wouldn't be more prudent for the party to get in another round of attacking instead of this prep-work? That should come up occasionally, not so often as to build a signature combo around.

Hope this helps.

[Merudo]

This is sorcadin, but not as good.

A 2 levels Paladin dip is fully compatible with OP's build.

[Man_Over_Game]

That's an interesting problem, interpreting Booming Blade can't be twinned since you can't twin a weapon attack.

With that interpretation, would you require the caster to be wielding two different weapons? Would the fact that you have a second weapon to attack with make you eligible to attack with both weapons at the same time?

[Willie the Duck]

A 2 levels Paladin dip is fully compatible with OP's build.

But they aren't a paladin 2 dip. If they were, they would be a different build, not this one (as an aside, they'd also need a 13+ str, as an additional concern). They would have fewer sorcery points (and spell slots to convert into sorcery points) to make this combo work. They would also have less need to do this specific build to go about being a melee-gish (base AC, in particular, is a place where paladin and this sorcerer archetype overlap instead of stacking).

My larger point was--if you want to set up the situation where a spellcaster (sorcerer specifically, or just in general) spends a whole bunch of build-decision resources to be somewhat good at melee combat (decent nova damage, less at-will damage and more fragile that most pure martial builds)-- we already have something like that (that, IMO, does it better), and have been figuring out the limits thereof for 4+ years.

Thus, in my mind, that specifically is not the point of concern for this situation. The routine situation of multiple rounds of pre-prep, right before combat, seems more in line with the campaign-specific nuance which is making this a problem for the OP's game. Although it could well be that a sorcadin would also be a problem in their game. We should enquire about how well the police the 5 minute workday.

[mephnick]

The cost is 1 3rd lvl spell slot and 3 sorc points.

Am I missing something, or is this just a good combo?

Good combo. He can do that twice a day. What does he do for the other 5 encounters?

[JNAProductions]

Good combo. He can do that twice a day. What does he do for the other 5 encounters?

Seconded. He's putting out a lot of resources, and getting a lot of return. Working as intended.

Well-it does appear he's using Stone Aegis wrong, but aside from that...

[RSP]

That's an interesting problem, interpreting Booming Blade can't be twinned since you can't twin a weapon attack.

With that interpretation, would you require the caster to be wielding two different weapons? Would the fact that you have a second weapon to attack with make you eligible to attack with both weapons at the same time?

If you’re asking me, the Attack is part of the casting, so it’s just not twinable, in the same way the DM wouldn’t be going by the RAW if they required 2 of whatever the gp value M component.

[Rukelnikov]

Hi guys, I’ve got a stone sorcerer playing in my campaign and he’s outputting quite a bit of damage at level 6. Would appreciate some help just to make sure he’s not breaking any rules.

This is a typical combo he uses, assuming two enemies A and B:
1. Use 3rd level shadow blade (SB) before battle
2. Green flame blade (GFB) attack with quickened spell
3d8 + mod (SB) + 1d8 (GFB) on A and 1d8 + mod (GFB) on B
3. Booming blade (BB) attack with twinned spell
3d8 + mod (SB) + 1d8 (BB) on A and B
4. Activate Stone Aegis feature as reaction
3d8 + mod (SB) + 1d10 on A or B

Assuming he lands all attacks (which he often does due to shadow blade’s advantage because of dim light in dungeons), he’s able to put out something like 17d8 damage (not counting modifiers and booming blade triggers, crit etc), all magical. The cost is 1 3rd lvl spell slot and 3 sorc points.

Am I missing something, or is this just a good combo?

Considering that he started the fights with his prep up, and that monsters are placed in the optimal way for him, compare it to the archetypical Hexblade:

Vhuman Hexblade6:

Feats: PAM/GWM
Invocations: Devil's Sight, IPW, Thirsting Blade
Concentration: Darkness

Starts with his stuff up:

Action: 2* 1d10+17 (+3 Cha +3 Curse +1 IPW +10 GWM)
BAction: 1d4+17
Reaction: 1d10+17
Specter: 3d6

3d10+3d6+1d4+51 = 16.5 + 10.5 + 2.5 + 51 = 80.5

Less total damage, more damage against a single enemy, enemies attack with disadvantage, better sustain.

[Mad Max]

I would say that, if you feel it's necessary, you're well within your rights to say "You can't Twin Booming Blade because it requires more attacks than you can use per action.". Also, again, the Aegis ability requires a bonus action.

I think the greater problem is that the sorcerer has time before a battle to cast 1 minute duration buffs, but not enough time that they'll wear out. Shadow blade only has a 1 minute duration, so if the Sorcerer casts it before going into a dangerous situation (i.e. entering a dungeon room) you should keep track of how long it takes them to reach the next combat encounter.

Also, if the sorcerer is trying to squeeze the spell in before initiative starts (i.e. if they shout out "I cast Shadow-blade" seconds before you call for initiative), it's totally reasonable to say that they were too slow (or to call for a dexterity check), and they have to cast in on their turn.

Ultimately though, all that matters is that you feel like it's OP. If it's causing trouble in the campaign, it should be addressed, but if not, then the sorcerer is probably fine.

[Malifice]

A 2 levels Paladin dip is fully compatible with OP's build.

Requires a strength of 13 and a 2 level dip for smites.

Renders the PC better able to nova so the natural counter by the DM is simply to enforce the 6 encounter adventuring day.

Sorcerer wants to blow his load on encounter 1, more luck to him.

[OverLordOcelot]

I think the greater problem is that the sorcerer has time before a battle to cast 1 minute duration buffs, but not enough time that they'll wear out. Shadow blade only has a 1 minute duration, so if the Sorcerer casts it before going into a dangerous situation (i.e. entering a dungeon room) you should keep track of how long it takes them to reach the next combat encounter.

I agree, this sounds like a pacing issue. If the party is only getting one or two encounters per day (he has only 2 3rd level slots at 6th level) and he can always precast shadow blade safely, IMO you're handing too much to the players. The party should be involved in multiple encounters per day, should not always know at the start 'this is definitely the one to go full nova on', and should sometimes be surprised or have a delayed start. If your sorcerer pre-casts shadow blade upon seeing a dozen hobgoblins and it turns out the hobgoblins they spotted are defectors who want to give the party information about their former boss, will only fight if attacked, and aren't much if a challenge if they do, he's going to regret casting it. Similarly if the acolyte with his bodyguards turns out not to be the main boss, but instead is more of a speed bump who's got the key you need to get to the room where the biggest fight is, your sorcerer might not have wanted to burn 50% of his top level spells on it. If the party sees what might be some enemies but it turns out they are just a distraction, or if they want to talk before fighting, that one minute spell is going to tick down very quickly.

And none of this is some kind of player-specific metagaming, these are all realistic situations that routinely occur in published modules.


Also, if the sorcerer is trying to squeeze the spell in before initiative starts (i.e. if they shout out "I cast Shadow-blade" seconds before you call for initiative), it's totally reasonable to say that they were too slow (or to call for a dexterity check), and they have to cast in on their turn.

For me, once characters start casting spells or launching attacks while there are hostile creatures in the room, I roll initiative and start going in initiative order, with some chance that the enemy is surprised depending on circumstances. There isn't some kind of dex check to go outside of initiative, the best you get is surprise, and that has to make sense (if you break a door down, the people on the other side are not going to be surprised that you're hostile).

[Paeleus]

On the legality of Twininng Booming Blade, I believe the only legal way to Twin the cantrip is having access to an ability such as Horde Breaker, having your character under the effects of Haste, or a situational extra weapon attack as a bonus action (a la EK's War Magic). I wonder if GWM's crit/kill inducing bonus action attack would work...

[Knoth89]

Thanks for the ideas! I think discontent first started to grow at the table when the fighter found it outrageous that a sorcerer could out damage him in melee combat at lvl 6 AND still get to do cool spells at higher levels. But I guess it should be pointed out that action surge recharges after a short rest

[mephnick]

But I guess it should be pointed out that action surge recharges after a short rest

That's only meaningful if you run the game in a way that makes resting meaningful. Just telling him that it's a short rest ability is meaningless.

If a player is nova'ing every encounter, you need to review how you pace your games.

[Man_Over_Game]

Thanks for the ideas! I think discontent first started to grow at the table when the fighter found it outrageous that a sorcerer could out damage him in melee combat at lvl 6 AND still get to do cool spells at higher levels. But I guess it should be pointed out that action surge recharges after a short rest


That's only meaningful if you run the game in a way that makes resting meaningful. Just telling him that it's a short rest ability is meaningless.

If a player is nova'ing every encounter, you need to review how you pace your games.

Agreed with Mephnick. A Fighter only stands out when everyone has ran out of resources. If that's not a possibility, then the Fighter will always be less.

Consider the fact that a level 5 Paladin has the same number of attacks, same weapons, and same fighting styles as a Fighter. Yet, the Paladin can smite for 6 straight turns, constantly outperforming the Fighter in any day that has less than 6 combat rounds. Likely, I'd budget over twice that.

Rather, for the Fighter to stand out, fit in about 15 rounds of combat before the players are allowed to Long Rest, and you'll find that the party will rely on the Fighter at the end of the day.

[Amdy_vill]

Can't Quicken a cantrip and cast another cantrip in the same turn.

yes you can. the rules say you can cast two spells with levels in the same turn. cantrips don't count as spells with levels

[JNAProductions]

Fighter heals with a Bonus Action, rather than an Action.
Fighter has Action Surge, to double their number of attacks in a round, allowing them to hit more targets or just increase their single target DPR.
Fighter has a generally more potent archetype at this level.

I do agree that, in general, a Paladin is better than a Fighter (assuming the days don't drag on TOO long). But that's because Paladin is probably the most powerful class in 5E. The Fighter does just fine.

[thrdeye]

Bold in quotes is me.

I think the weapon attack falls under the spell effect, remember it sheathes your weapon in "booming energy" that only lasts long enough for the attack, or manifests as part of the attack. Either way it's fine.

This is correct, according to Crawford. The weapon attack is part of the spell's effect. https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/05/22/if-my-green-flame-blade-is-counterspelled-do-i-still-get-to-make-a-normal-melee-attack/

[Rukelnikov]

Agreed with Mephnick. A Fighter only stands out when everyone has ran out of resources. If that's not a possibility, then the Fighter will always be less.

Consider the fact that a level 5 Paladin has the same number of attacks, same weapons, and same fighting styles as a Fighter. Yet, the Paladin can smite for 6 straight turns, constantly outperforming the Fighter in any day that has less than 6 combat rounds. Likely, I'd budget over twice that.

Rather, for the Fighter to stand out, fit in about 15 rounds of combat before the players are allowed to Long Rest, and you'll find that the party will rely on the Fighter at the end of the day.

At lvl 5 a Paladin gets 14d8(63 avg) in extra damage if he spends all of his daily allotment in it. If the day only has 3 fights and a short rest between each, the fighter got effectively 3 more actions than the Paladin (3 action surges), which means 6 attacks more:

63/6 = 10.5

Vanilla S&B longsword dueling style averages that damage per attack, and if it happened to be a BM those were another 12d8 extra damage potentially.

Its not so much the number of encounters as the number of rests in this case.

DPR wise, Paladin and Fighter are pretty even at 2 short rests, BM is actually ahead.


Fighter heals with a Bonus Action, rather than an Action.
Fighter has Action Surge, to double their number of attacks in a round, allowing them to hit more targets or just increase their single target DPR.
Fighter has a generally more potent archetype at this level.

I do agree that, in general, a Paladin is better than a Fighter (assuming the days don't drag on TOO long). But that's because Paladin is probably the most powerful class in 5E. The Fighter does just fine.

While I agree with the Paladin being better than the fighter overall, and think its maybe the best designed class in the game, I strongly disagree though with Paladin being the most powerful class.

Full casters are still on a tier of their own for the simple reason that while Fighter or Paladin may hit things with a stick really damn well, they are incapable of creating an army of T-Rexes from stones, being in almost any part of the multiverse in mere seconds, or reducing a keep to rubble in a minute, just to scratch the tip of the iceberg.

[Willie the Duck]

I do agree that, in general, a Paladin is better than a Fighter (assuming the days don't drag on TOO long). But that's because Paladin is probably the most powerful class in 5E. The Fighter does just fine.

It's strange, about 1/3rd of the people I meet with opinions on such things think this, about a third think 'why would you take paladin past level 6 (7 for ancients), when you can jump off into sorcerer or bard, maybe with some warlock?,' and 1/3rd seem to think 'paladins do everything well except ranged combat, which is the most powerful thing in the game.' I'm not sure which is correct (maybe all of them?).


Full casters are still on a tier of their own for the simple reason that while Fighter or Paladin may hit things with a stick really damn well, they are incapable of creating an army of T-Rexes from stones, being in almost any part of the multiverse in mere seconds, or reducing a keep to rubble in a minute, just to scratch the tip of the iceberg.

It's amazing how many times the hitting things really hard is more applicable to the situation at hand.

[Rukelnikov]

It's amazing how many times the hitting things really hard is more applicable to the situation at hand.

When the situation at hand is crawling your way through a dungeon? Sure!

All the rest of the time, controlling the very fabric of the universe is much more useful.

[Willie the Duck]

When the situation at hand is crawling your way through a dungeon? Sure!

All the rest of the time, controlling the very fabric of the universe is much more useful.

In the game fiction, or within the actual play? That someone who can do 'the impossible' would be actually more useful than someone who can merely do 'the possible' is so obvious as to be self-evident.

Once you start playing by the mechanics of the game, it is not so clear cut. A number of spells are so specifically worded as to not really match the spellcaster's supposed ability to have 'a solution for any problem.' Wall spells of dimensions that work great for walling off combatants, but not to divert a river, or the like. Using your example of 'creating an army of T-Rexes from stones, being in almost any part of the multiverse in mere seconds, or reducing a keep to rubble in a minute,' well, how many of those things do you need to do during a normal adventure*? I'm not saying that spellcasters are not great, but if you've only found that martials are useful specifically in actual dungeon crawls, then boy have your martials not been imaginative.
*Other than the T-Rex one in a combat situation, which is just another avenue of hitting things with other things, in which case the wizard wins if the DM does not push encounters/day too heavily, and the martial does if they do.

[Rukelnikov]

In the game fiction, or within the actual play? That someone who can do 'the impossible' would be actually more useful than someone who can merely do 'the possible' is so obvious as to be self-evident.

Once you start playing by the mechanics of the game, it is not so clear cut. A number of spells are so specifically worded as to not really match the spellcaster's supposed ability to have 'a solution for any problem.' Wall spells of dimensions that work great for walling off combatants, but not to divert a river, or the like. Using your example of 'creating an army of T-Rexes from stones, being in almost any part of the multiverse in mere seconds, or reducing a keep to rubble in a minute,' well, how many of those things do you need to do during a normal adventure*? I'm not saying that spellcasters are not great, but if you've only found that martials are useful specifically in actual dungeon crawls, then boy have your martials not been imaginative.
*Other than the T-Rex one in a combat situation, which is just another avenue of hitting things with other things, in which case the wizard wins if the DM does not push encounters/day too heavily, and the martial does if they do.

You can be very imaginative, but are still limited by what is majorly a "mortal" character, what can a lvl 20 BM do that a lvl 1 fighter couldn't with the same level of imaginativesness? And for that matter that a clever/charming commoner couldnt?

On the other hand, a druid might wanna live in a magical forest instead of a regular one, and start awakening the plants and animals of it.

Wanna have your own dungeon? Mold earth + Stone Shape + Animate Dead! Boom! Adventurer Training Grounds opens today! (we literally did this in 3rd ed as training for members of a Knightly Order)

Villages aren't getting enough food because crops have been bad for last seasons? Plant Growth, Control weather.

The impact a full caster, mainly the ones not limited by spells known (Wizard, Cleric and Druid), can have on any given setting is on a completely different level from what martials can.

[RSP]

This is correct, according to Crawford. The weapon attack is part of the spell's effect. https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/05/22/if-my-green-flame-blade-is-counterspelled-do-i-still-get-to-make-a-normal-melee-attack/

RAW is sometimes different than RAI, which is one way to take JC’s tweet (they are no longer considered official).

[Blood of Gaea]

Good combo. He can do that twice a day. What does he do for the other 5 encounters?
100% agreed. Nothing wrong with Nova builds, they're only broken if the DM is not properly balancing their encounters with rests.

[RSP]

compare it to the archetypical Hexblade:

Vhuman Hexblade6:

Feats: PAM/GWM
Invocations: Devil's Sight, IPW, Thirsting Blade
Concentration: Darkness

Starts with his stuff up:

Action: 2* 1d10+17 (+3 Cha +3 Curse +1 IPW +10 GWM)
BAction: 1d4+17
Reaction: 1d10+17
Specter: 3d6

3d10+3d6+1d4+51 = 16.5 + 10.5 + 2.5 + 51 = 80.5

Less total damage, more damage against a single enemy, enemies attack with disadvantage, better sustain.

The OP’s build averages about 74.5 (not counting the Reaction and assuming twin BB is allowed) but I’m not sure it’s a fair comparison of giving one build 2 feats to play with vs the other just using class abilities, but, regardless, this Hexblade Build will do less damage than you have listed here for a number of reasons:

-This assumes even more prep than the OP’s, casting Darkness, using Hexblades Curse, and having the Specter all up prior to combat starting; as well as assuming having an enemy approach to get the PAM Reaction Attack.

-The OP had Adv assumed due to SB, this build assumes it due to Darkness, but this build still has a -5 to hit that the OP’s doesn’t. That’s going to negatively impact ability to hit even with Adv.

-Due to the Darkness spell, the Specter attacks at Disadvantage making it far from a safe assumption that it hits.

[MaxWilson]

Agreed with Mephnick. A Fighter only stands out when everyone has ran out of resources. If that's not a possibility, then the Fighter will always be less.

Consider the fact that a level 5 Paladin has the same number of attacks, same weapons, and same fighting styles as a Fighter. Yet, the Paladin can smite for 6 straight turns, constantly outperforming the Fighter in any day that has less than 6 combat rounds. Likely, I'd budget over twice that.

It gets much better for the fighter at level 6 though when the Fighter picks up an extra feat for e.g. +50% to his number of attacks per round. Neglecting subclasses for a minute, and comparing a level 6 GWM PAM Fighter (Str 18 for the sake of argument) vs. a level 6 GWM Paladin (Str 18), I find that vs. AC 15 Gargoyles and Mind Flayers, etc.,

The Paladin normally averages 28.00 DPR, (+14 on any round when he gets a bonus action attack), and can add a total of 14d8 (63) points of damage via Divine Smite every long rest.

The Fighter normally averages 36.75 DPR, (+2.1 on any round when his bonus action attack is made with d10 instead of d4 haft attack), and can add +25.9 points of damage every time he action surges. He also has tactical flexibility to do things like knock prone + attack twice at advantage + retreat out of attack range to avoid attack (except for one opportunity attack at disadvantage), which does slightly less damage but also helps teammates and reduces damage taken.

Since the fighter is doing roughly 9 points more damage than the Paladin on normal rounds, but the Paladin starts out about 63 - 26 = 37 points ahead, it takes about five rounds of combat for the fighter to catch up in raw damage terms.

This is a good illustration BTW of why Divine Smite is a pretty terrible way for Paladins to spend spell slots. You just blew all of your spellcasting on 63 points of damage that will probably end the combat a round sooner than otherwise and might save the party 50 HP of damage at most even in the most favorable circumstances (smiting at the start of a huge battle). If you instead cast six Paladin spells like Wrathful Smite, Thunderous Smite, Protection From Evil, Compelled Duel, Magic Weapon, (Devotion) Sanctuary, (Vengeance) Hunter's Mark, etc. you would have more impact than just 63 HP of damage.


-Due to the Darkness spell, the Specter attacks at Disadvantage making it far from a safe assumption that it hits.

It also has advantage due to being unseen by the target, and advantage + disadvantage = nothing.

As an aside: highly-mobile incorporeal creatures like Specters make spectacular scouts. If you want to be able to cast a spell just before you meet monsters, like the Stone Sorcerer in the OP, it would help to have a Hexblade on your side. In some ways it's even better scout than a Shadow Monk or a Chainlock's Sprite.

[Rukelnikov]

The OP’s build averages about 74.5 (not counting the Reaction and assuming twin BB is allowed) but I’m not sure it’s a fair comparison of giving one build 2 feats to play with vs the other just using class abilities, but, regardless, this Hexblade Build will do less damage than you have listed here for a number of reasons:

OP's build averages 74.5 indeed, but divided between two creatures (44/30.5) not counting the reaction. I made the build with feats, because that's what usually happens, and I stuck to a fairly "standard" build, so I don't think its unfair to have those feats there. I did counted OP's build with 18 main attribute and mine with 16 since I assumed that ASI. The fairest thing to do would be to round OP's build with a feat (if vhuman), or changing that ASI. I don't think there's one that would change it significantly, but I can be wrong.


-This assumes even more prep than the OP’s, casting Darkness, using Hexblades Curse, and having the Specter all up prior to combat starting; as well as assuming having an enemy approach to get the PAM Reaction Attack.

Its the other way round, OP assumes dim lightning for advantage, and two enemies standing side by side, neither of those thing are under his control since he did nothing to generate that. He also assumes 2 BA. Darkness + Hexblade's Curse can be done in a single round, the spectre lasts until long rest if it isn't killed, and is created by the Hexblade, I didn't assume anything that is a decision of the DM.


-The OP had Adv assumed due to SB, this build assumes it due to Darkness, but this build still has a -5 to hit that the OP’s doesn’t. That’s going to negatively impact ability to hit even with Adv.

Yes this build does have less chance to hit if we're fighting in a dimly lit area, one of the many assumptions of OP's build.

If I can choose to assume more stuff for this build to compensate for that, I choose to assume 5 encounters with a short rest between each.


-Due to the Darkness spell, the Specter attacks at Disadvantage making it far from a safe assumption that it hits.

Nope, spectre's disadvantage is countered by its foe being unable to see it, so it rolls normally (and with +3 from Lock's Cha). Note that it also can attack and fly upwards without generating AoO since enemies cant see him.

[RSP]

It also has advantage due to being unseen by the target, and advantage + disadvantage = nothing.


Good catch! Thanks

[RSP]

He also assumes 2 BA. Darkness + Hexblade's Curse can be done in a single round, the spectre lasts until long rest if it isn't killed, and is created by the Hexblade, I didn't assume anything that is a decision of the DM.

If you’re assuming the 1st turn of combat is Darkness+HC, then that turn does 0 damage. The OP only assumed the casting of SB, pre-combat. Adjusting to within combat, the OP loses out on the BA Attack from Quicken, but can still do the Twin BB (again assuming it’s allowed).



Yes this build does have less chance to hit if we're fighting in a dimly lit area, one of the many assumptions of OP's build.

If I can choose to assume more stuff for this build to compensate for that, I choose to assume 5 encounters with a short rest between each.

Dim lighting is fairly common and easy to work with in most cases, in my experience at least. The -30% change (-5 from GWM and -1 for choosing the feat over an ASI) in to hit die roll success is a fairly big difference.

I’m not going to do anything to stop your assumptions, if that helps you out. Though, again, your assumptions seem to be:

-Will be approached w/in 10’ for Reaction Attack

-Will have already slain a Humanoid that day and the resulting Specter is still around to contribute.

vs

2 enemies standing within 5’ of OP’s build

Will be in dim or dark lighting

So unless I’m missing something, they seem to be even in assumptions (not counting the assumption that BB is allowed as if it’s not, this is a moot discussion).



Nope, spectre's disadvantage is countered by its foe being unable to see it, so it rolls normally (and with +3 from Lock's Cha). Note that it also can attack and fly upwards without generating AoO since enemies cant see him.

Forgot about that w/ Darkness