How do the "Martial" Full Casters Fare?

[KOLE]

Out of mere simple curiosity, how do the stock martial subclasses for full casters fare, in your experience? I'm talking about Valor/Sword bards, pure Blade Pact/Hexblade sorcs, and Bladesinger Wizards, though I suppose this could include certain flavors of Cleric as well.

Did it "Gish" hard enough for you? Were you able to weave spells and step into melee? Was melee only a last resort that you were slightly better at than a different subclass?

I don't hear these options discussed much except as Multiclassing tools. It seems rare that somebody simply takes them 1-20 as their class. Is there a reason for this? Extra attack, decent armor, and eventually 9th level spells seems like the whole package. What's the catch other than smaller hit die?

Are these options simply outclassed by the potency of cantrips in 5e? If they're lackluster, what would it take to make them better, or is the balance just king here?

It seems like everybody wants to Gish, and with good reason: magic and swordplay are cool individually and even better together. Most Gish models seem to involve multiclassing or half caster chassis. The aforementioned subclasses, theoretically, allow one to have their cake and eat it too. Why aren't they discussed more?

I'm mostly interested in personal experience running/dming for these specific types of characters. How did it play? I'm strongly considering a Valor Bard for my next character, but a straight Hexblade without Pally/Sorc cheese seems like a lot of fun as well. It seems strange to me that these awesome options are rarely discussed around here. What's the catch that I'm missing?

[LudicSavant]

Out of mere simple curiosity, how do the stock martial subclasses for full casters fare, in your experience? I'm talking about Valor/Sword bards, pure Blade Pact/Hexblade sorcs, and Bladesinger Wizards, though I suppose this could include certain flavors of Cleric as well.

Did it "Gish" hard enough for you? Were you able to weave spells and step into melee? Was melee only a last resort that you were slightly better at than a different subclass?

I don't hear these options discussed much except as Multiclassing tools. It seems rare that somebody simply takes them 1-20 as their class. Is there a reason for this? Extra attack, decent armor, and eventually 9th level spells seems like the whole package. What's the catch other than smaller hit die?

Are these options simply outclassed by the potency of cantrips in 5e? If they're lackluster, what would it take to make them better, or is the balance just king here?

It seems like everybody wants to Gish, and with good reason: magic and swordplay are cool individually and even better together. Most Gish models seem to involve multiclassing or half caster chassis. The aforementioned subclasses, theoretically, allow one to have their cake and eat it too. Why aren't they discussed more?

I'm mostly interested in personal experience running/dming for these specific types of characters. How did it play? I'm strongly considering a Valor Bard for my next character, but a straight Hexblade without Pally/Sorc cheese seems like a lot of fun as well. It seems strange to me that these awesome options are rarely discussed around here. What's the catch that I'm missing?

You shouldn't put too much stock in how frequently a thing is discussed. To use 3.5e as an example, people used to make threads all the time saying that everything from Vow of Poverty Monks to Tome of Battle to Power Attack to psionics was overpowered. None of those assessments were accurate, and yet they were common at the time anyways.

[KOLE]

You shouldn't put too much stock in how frequently a thing is discussed.

You may have a point there, but my main goal for this topic is to generate discussion and hear people's experiences with this specific set of subclasses, which I don't see come up often.

[LudicSavant]

You may have a point there, but my main goal for this topic is to generate discussion and hear people's experiences with this specific set of subclasses, which I don't see come up often.

My experience from both DMing and playing these characters is that they can be very effective when built and played properly. However, they do have to be built and played properly; casters in 5e are abundant in both trap options and hidden gems.

[sophontteks]

Some of them aren't really gishes at all. From previous editions it'd typically be a push and pull. You gain martial prowess at the cost of spellcasting. This isn't the case for many of these examples, and for some playing them as a gish actually hurts them.

The valor bard is the best example. Its one of the best bard archtypes, but it is not a gish. It's a spellcaster who has extra defenses thanks to medium armor and a shield, and this just makes them an even better spellcaster. The extra attack is really just fluff in comparison. Its nice, but its not what makes them good.

Honestly I'm surprised you haven't heard of pure valor bards. Bards typically have terrible defenses, and valor completely compensates for this weakness without compromising their spellcasting potential. Its a full caster with the AC of a tank.

[dejarnjc]

Out of mere simple curiosity, how do the stock martial subclasses for full casters fare, in your experience? I'm talking about Valor/Sword bards, pure Blade Pact/Hexblade sorcs, and Bladesinger Wizards, though I suppose this could include certain flavors of Cleric as well.

Did it "Gish" hard enough for you? Were you able to weave spells and step into melee? Was melee only a last resort that you were slightly better at than a different subclass?

I have a player with a valor bard in one of the games I run and they perform quite well on the front line beside the battlemaster. He's kind of the jack of all trades in the group. He can heal (the only one actually), he can hold the line with a high AC, he can cast control spells, inspiration being added to the PCs AC sometimes makes it next to impossible for my MOBs to hit since I like running combats with large numbers of low CR creatures. He's a very versatile character.

I also played a bladesinger in a series of one shots from level 4-20, though we level skipped between each one shot so it was no more than like 20 hours of total gaming time on the character. Extraordinarily fun as a gish, particularly with shadowblade and the bonus damage at level 14. Song of Defense is probably one of the most underrated aspects of this archetype. I hear all the time from people whom say "yeah Bladesingers AC is awesome but if you hit em with AOE effects or if they get crit then its all over"... Nope, not the case after level 10. Biggest consideration here however is that by the time you get 9th level spells you're going to spend a lot more time casting spells than swinging that shadowblade. Extremely awesome being an ancient brass dragon (shapechange) with a 23 AC (from blade song) and up to 28 with shield.

[MaxWilson]

I don't hear these options discussed much except as Multiclassing tools. It seems rare that somebody simply takes them 1-20 as their class. Is there a reason for this? Extra attack, decent armor, and eventually 9th level spells seems like the whole package. What's the catch other than smaller hit die?

Opportunity cost.

There's no catch, but that doesn't mean pure class is ideal. E.g. Bladesinger is fine, but Roguesinger is better (Rogue 2/Bladesinger 18): you get all the fightery and wizardy goodness of tanking/True Polymorphing/etc., plus now you can exploit things like Extra Attack + Athletics Expertise to cheaply grapple/prone enemies, or Fog Cloud + Cunning Action (Hide) + Stealth Expertise, or just plain Find Familiar + Invisibility III + Stealth Expertise + Cunning Action + Dimension Door-if-necessary for scouting without dying. (I.e. you turn yourself and your familiar invisible and then sneak around the enemy base identifying threats and scouting out enemy movement patterns. Then you use the information gained to help the party prep for a full assault later, or a smash-and-grab, or whatever your goal is.)

If you've got the stats to be a good Bladesinger, you've got the stats to be a good Roguesinger, so I would probably never play a pure Bladesinger. But it's not because pure Bladesingers are bad; it's just that Roguesingers are better.

[Skylivedk]

Don't agree on the Roguesinge > Bladesinger, but that's off topic.

I'm currently playing a pure Hexblade in my last gone brew campaign (home brew critical failures and successes).

GWM since level 4 and Armour of Agathys plus the Wizard often turning my Memento/Spawn inspired character into a murder cloud ever so often. Had I gone for heavy optimization, I would probably have started with a level of Sorcerer for the Con saves and go Sorc 3+ later for the quickened cantrips maybe splash in some Paladin for more Smite Nova.

I'm only saddened by the Mystic Arcanum (lvl 6+) spells being on the lower end of the high level spell power and fun spectrum... And I often feel that two spell slots is very restrictive. I would have absolutely loved being able to split one of them into smaller ones.

[lperkins2]

If you include UA, the stone sorcerer is pretty darn neat. Between BB, con based natural armour, crowd control spells, and +1 hp/level, it's reasonably tough (AC 18 at level 1 easy, 19 if you roll well). Needing 3 stats hurts a bit, but not too bad.

[Theodoric]

Just because a build isn't optimal doesn't mean it's not effective. 5e's a forgiving enough system for that. But obviously, you're not going to see that in char-op.

[MrStabby]

As a DM, I have found them to be really powerful although thy sometimes need a bit of system mastery to get the most from.

Essentially they get a pretty good attack action. Knowing when to use that and when to use your spell slots is key.

The most powerful dynamic I have seen is from a valor bard: use a bow and sharpshooter for most actions. This is good enough to not fall too far behind with damage for the rest of the party. Given you are using your actions to take the attack action you want spells that provide a powerful benefit without conflicting. This pushes spell selection towards:

1) Niche spells that are awesome of useless. Sometimes they are awesome; at other times you take the attack action. Bringing people back to life for example

2) Long concentration spells that can go up before a fight do not compete for actions

3) Bonus action and reaction spells

4) Spells that are so good that you are happy to use an action to cast them

This gives a character that has awesome utility because they no longer need spells for damage or to have a useful action so they can know and have prepared a much deeper set of utility spells. Furthermore they will also be more likely to have the spell slots left to cast them. Dimension door when a battle goes badly, featherfall for when jumping off the roof seems the best escape, fairy fire when attacked by the invisible...


Sometimes you can also go for a build that is focused on combat using spells for support. Hexblades do this well with spells like shield and wrathful smite (although I like to multiclass as at higher levels this is a horrific use of spellslots). Clerics (or combat bards with magical secrets) can go for spirit guardians to reinforce their melee presence. Bards with swiftquiver.

At other times you just pick the option with a desire to not use the abilities. You want more armour but you don't want to be attacked. You want melee options but don't want to get into melee. These abilities are a contingency.


In my experience the order I have listed here is their order of effectiveness; some is campaign dependant of course.

[RSP]

Playing a pure Hexblade right now. I like it a lot: it’s effective as both a caster and as a melee combatant. The character is almost level 8.

Really, you just need to build correctly and go in with your eyes open about the 2 slots per SR, and it’s fine.

I usually run Hex early and, so long as my Conc lasts, keep it up throughout the day. This hopefully lets me use other slots on AoA for added damage and damage mitigation.

I took Resilient (Con) at 4 (definitely needed), and don’t use other Conc spells, but it works.

The other option I’ve used (mostly for boss fights) is AoA and Shadows of Moil, which is effective, particularly if you can precast AoA somehow.

Fear is used when facing a lot of creatures (because it’s one of the best spells in the game for a Gish), but unless it looks like we’re going to be overwhelmed, I don’t use it; the other PCs are all martials and first time 5e players so I like to let them do their thing.

He does fine with damage, has good AC and defenses, and has some cool Gish tricks between invocations and spells.

Really, the only downside is all the stuff that competes with bonus actions; I feel this is true of any Warlock but moreso for the Hexblade Gish. Hexblades Curse and Hex each can use some fun stuff like a Relentless Hex or Maddening Hex, but all four of those each use BAs. There’s no reason, really, to take something like PAM as either you’re never using your PAM BA attack, or not using all your cool Warlock toys.

[sophontteks]

From the list Valor bards, martial clerics, and hexblades are all considered top-tier picks. They aren't just good, they are considered the top archtypes for the class. I haven't seen a bladesinger, but I'm sure they play fine too.

[Chronos]

One of the guys in my group plays a war cleric, and he finds that he hardly ever ends up swinging his warhammer. It's almost always a better use of his action to cast a spell, even just a cantrip. The only one of his subclass abilities he uses on a regular basis is giving an ally +10 to an attack (which can be a big deal when that attack carries Sharpshooter, Colossus Slayer, and Hunter's Mark).

Well, OK, he also uses his heavy armor proficiency, but most cleric subclasses get that.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Bladesingers in my experience are very good, just... not really gishes, at least at most levels. They play very well as basically conventional mages with better defences and mobility, but generally their attacks aren't good enough and are still too squishy to use melee as anything more than a backup option. (The exceptions to this are at very low and very high levels - in the former, the differences between their capabilities and dedicated martials aren't so great, and in the latter Song of Victory + Spell Mastery (shield) really turn things around. Additionally, they are lethally effective with bladesong+shapechange.)

[Bloodcloud]

The gishy class will shine more on longer adventure day, given they have a better at-will than cantrips (warlock being the exception I'd say). They will shine even more with proper spell selection to avoid overly competing the attack/cast a spell action, which is probably the bladesinger's bigger problem.

[Snowbluff]

Bladesingers in my experience are very good, just... not really gishes, at least at most levels. They play very well as basically conventional mages with better defences and mobility, but generally their attacks aren't good enough and are still too squishy to use melee as anything more than a backup option. (The exceptions to this are at very low and very high levels - in the former, the differences between their capabilities and dedicated martials aren't so great, and in the latter Song of Victory + Spell Mastery (shield) really turn things around. Additionally, they are lethally effective with bladesong+shapechange.)
Having played a paladin bladesinger and also seen a straight bladesinger, I agree with this.

I think a big things to note is that Bladesong is a strong defensive ability, meaning that you don't really need to worry about being attacked as much. So even if you're not always using weapon attacks you're still better off in some cases.

[Guy Lombard-O]

As a DM, I have found them to be really powerful although thy sometimes need a bit of system mastery to get the most from.

Essentially they get a pretty good attack action. Knowing when to use that and when to use your spell slots is key.

The most powerful dynamic I have seen is from a valor bard: use a bow and sharpshooter for most actions. This is good enough to not fall too far behind with damage for the rest of the party. Given you are using your actions to take the attack action you want spells that provide a powerful benefit without conflicting. This pushes spell selection towards:

1) Niche spells that are awesome of useless. Sometimes they are awesome; at other times you take the attack action. Bringing people back to life for example

2) Long concentration spells that can go up before a fight do not compete for actions

3) Bonus action and reaction spells

4) Spells that are so good that you are happy to use an action to cast them

This gives a character that has awesome utility because they no longer need spells for damage or to have a useful action so they can know and have prepared a much deeper set of utility spells. Furthermore they will also be more likely to have the spell slots left to cast them. Dimension door when a battle goes badly, featherfall for when jumping off the roof seems the best escape, fairy fire when attacked by the invisible...

Amen to this. I played a Valor Bard to 12th level, with Sharpshooter as my main weapon attack. He certainly didn't use it all the time, but at really long range (150'+) he was one of the most effective characters in the party. At closer ranges, he'd usually fire off a solid concentration spell, then hang toward the back and use up his BA on inspirations while firing solid sharpshooter arrows (unless the initial spell was Heat Metal, in which case he'd use his BA for slowly killing the gimped enemy tank while playing keep-away and pelting tank with arrows). Used later ASI for Res(Con) to keep the BC and buffs spells going longer.

Can't contribute anything to the other gishes, but Valor Bards can be effective if played correctly. But I still didn't find my VB particularly effective in actual melee combat.

[Tanarii]

Str-based Valor bard (of which I've seen plenty), War/Tempest Clerics, and Hexblade (which is flat out broken, and after extensive testing the only XtGE archetype I don't allow) are GISHes. Bladelock and Bladesinger are not. They are casters with an extra drop of martial power. Which puts them in about the same place as a Life/Nature/Trickery Cleric.

EKs are also GISHes

[ad_hoc]

Valor Bards are the strongest Bards.

People love Lore because it's fun to pick out 2 spells, but they aren't as strong.

2 attacks are just stronger than a cantrip (esp. vicious mockery if you don't take one from outside your list).

Medium armour and shields is better than skill proficiency, esp. with jack of all trades.

Cutting Words is a bit stronger than Combat Inspiration, but then the default inspiration is very good on its own and combat inspiration works with it.

The majority of people probably find lore or swords to be more fun, but from just the raw power perspective valor is strongest.

[RSP]

What makes a Gish a Gish is how you play it: if all you do is cast spells, then you’re not really a Gish, regardless of subclass choice. I feel, at least for 5e, being a Gish is more about dedicating your playstyle to mixing it up then anything else.

[Solusek]

Hexblades make a really great gish. I play it mostly like a melee character in combat, and then like a sorcerer out of combat. My most used spells are things that come into play during the exploration and social pillars of the game. Suggestion, Invisibility, Major Illusion, Dispel Magic, Remove Curse, Dimension Door. Then add in Beast Speech and Water Breathing from Invocations.

When you have the ability to be effective in combat just by swinging a sword it frees up spell casting slots to influence the game world during all the other times. You could play a valor bard similarly, though they wouldn't be quite as effective with DPS since stacking charisma doesn't help a bard swing their sword harder, sadly.

[Throne12]

I have a player that's build characters that are hard to hit and he use his spells on himself. So one campaign he built a bladesinger. He was a tough PC most of the times it was near impossible to hit him. So I would switch to save spells or abilities. They worked better but I still had trouble with in. The party would walk into a deadly encounter most of the party would come out limping while carrying a ko'ed PC. Where this bladesinger Barely had a scratch on him.

Elfs have adv on charmed effects and cant be put to sleep. Mage armor is 13+dex then add on blade song and shield ya high AC. Now if it was aoe he had absorb elements. Then he would use mirror image and blink, haste.

He would use his spell slots on buffing his melee Survivability.

[JNAProductions]

I have a player that's build characters that are hard to hit and he use his spells on himself. So one campaign he built a bladesinger. He was a tough PC most of the times it was near impossible to hit him. So I would switch to save spells or abilities. They worked better but I still had trouble with in. The party would walk into a deadly encounter most of the party would come out limping while carrying a ko'ed PC. Where this bladesinger Barely had a scratch on him.

Elfs have adv on charmed effects and cant be put to sleep. Mage armor is 13+dex then add on blade song and shield ya high AC. Now if it was aoe he had absorb elements. Then he would use mirror image and blink, haste.

He would use his spell slots on buffing his melee Survivability.

But they've still a Wizard's bony butt. Level(4+Con Mod)+2 HP only goes so far.

[Throne12]

But they've still a Wizard's bony butt. Level(4+Con Mod)+2 HP only goes so far.

Yes your right but it doesnt matter if the DM cant get to there hp.

Thing are vastly different from white room theory crafting. Then what plays out at the table.

[Foxhound438]

I don't hear these options discussed much except as Multiclassing tools. It seems rare that somebody simply takes them 1-20 as their class. Is there a reason for this? Extra attack, decent armor, and eventually 9th level spells seems like the whole package. What's the catch other than smaller hit die?

Are these options simply outclassed by the potency of cantrips in 5e? If they're lackluster, what would it take to make them better, or is the balance just king here?


The only "catch" aside from the smaller hit die, which often doesn't matter itself, is that these casting classes have so much of their overall power locked up in their spells, while a proper martial or half caster has a long, long list of abilities that directly support weapon use and tanking. Yes, your bladesinger has just as many attacks as a fighter from level 6 to 10, and post Xanathar's guide they do have a nice easy damage boost in shadow blade, but they lack the fighting style, they lack the maneuvers, their spells for the most part aren't as directly helpful in weapon use as something like ensnaring strike or wrathful smite or stunning strike, and they don't have nearly as good of short rest recovery. Yes, they can be functional fighters, but they won't be better fighters than the fighters are.

They're definitely not outclassed by cantrips, with the exception of warlocks and eldritch blast.

As for specific thoughts on the various options:

Bladesinger is by far the most powerful of them, and while it's still not quite a fighter it's pretty close anyways. The reason is probably that it came out of a book made by a third party which had balance issues all over the place, and this class is the OP one of the bunch. I don't think it's so bad that it should be banned or anything, I've never seen one totally outshine a barbarian or fighter in terms of doing those fightery things.

Blade pact warlocks generally have the issue of armor proficiency, which hexblade does some work to alleviate, but before Xan's guide the build in single class just doesn't tank well enough to justify going into melee, especially when you can instead just be using eldritch blast. I haven't seen a hexblade warlock in play yet, largely because my group had become somewhat disillusioned to the warlock as a whole well before hexblades were a thing, and I hear good things about them, but they still look like they'd be better off just casting eldritch blast if they aren't getting heavy armor somehow and going for a polearm or something.

I see a lot of buyer's remorse on Valor bards, because you are in fact not that great at fighting still. People often say on forums and in theory crafting that "a bard can do anything but better", and that's just not true. Valor bards in particular have an even more serious case of the lack of fighting synergy syndrome than the other fighty caster classes do because bards have fewer subclass abilities than other casting classes to begin with, and for valor bards you spend most of your career with either zero or one feature that directly improves your ability to fight (not counting the armor proficiency- it helps you survive in melee, but existing next to an enemy isn't exactly the same as being a fighter if you don't have anything specifically fightery to do against it). Swords bards do a much better job of it in my opinion, giving you a fighting style and a way to use your inspiration as pseudo superiority dice right away, but you're still a long way off of a proper master of battle.

Obviously in all cases, you're right that they have a huge benefit thanks to having full casting, but while those spells are powerful in their own right, a fireball doesn't make you any better at swinging steel. You run into this issue where you want to run up and fight because you kind of built your character to be able to do that, but often the more useful thing to do with your action is going to be a spell anyways.

[dejarnjc]

But they've still a Wizard's bony butt. Level(4+Con Mod)+2 HP only goes so far.

Song of defense is great for this. If a bladesinger is only spending slots on concentration spells then they have plenty to spare to reduce damage taken.

[JNAProductions]

Song of defense is great for this. If a bladesinger is only spending slots on concentration spells then they have plenty to spare to reduce damage taken.

Which makes them basically a Fighter... But worse.

If you want to spend all your time as a Wizard pretending to be a Fighter, be my guest. I'd just play a Fighter.

[Talionis]

I find that these full caster martials often benefit from dips in martial classes. Heavy Armor helps when you have a casting stat and can’t also max Dex. None of the full caster Gishes have Constitution proficiency so you need to start something with Con proficiency or get Resilient Con. Often a dip of two or three levels helps a lot to turn those classes from tough casters into actual Gishes and you still get ninth level spells.

Otherwise they feel like they are skirmishes who can mix it up in melee but often fall back or cast spells.

The action economy also hurts Gishes in 5E because you often spend time buffing the Gish and lose a round. It’s another reason action surge from the Fighter dip feels good.

I am not complaining, it feels balanced. I wish they would have spread Hexblade martial abilities out so that they didn’t get armor and attack with Charisma at level one. They work out fair for pure Warlocks but feel unfair when dipped by Sorcereres.

[RSP]

Which makes them basically a Fighter... But worse.

If you want to spend all your time as a Wizard pretending to be a Fighter, be my guest. I'd just play a Fighter.

This just isn’t true though as BSs have the option of spells in and out of combat.

If the BS gets swarmed? Maybe it’s the right time to cast Fear and clear out a bunch of space.

Obstacles during adventuring? Maybe levitate helps.

Gishes aren’t going to fight as well as fighters (though, yes, a SB BS comes very close), it’s their versatility that makes them good, and fun to play.

[Agent-KI7KO]

A War Cleric can make very good use of two handed weapons at lower levels, up to ludicrous amounts with Vuman and GWM.

They suffer by not getting extra attack though, so really, they fall back to heavy armor caster at mid levels.

[Deathtongue]

I'm interested in trying out a Cleric with one of those Bracers from the Ravnica guide that let you re-cast Cantrips.

Imagine if you're a 13th-level STR / WIS Arcana Cleric (splashing in a level of Hexblade or Sorcerer for the Shield Spell) with, say, Holy Weapon and GMW. An attack routine with Booming Blade could look something like:

2 x (2d8 (holy weapon) + 2d6 (greatsword) + 4 (STR) + 5 (WIS) + 2 (enhancement) + 10 (GMW) + 2d8 (thunder)) = 8d8 + 4d6 + 42 = 92 DPR.

Note that you wouldn't have to get Arcana Cleric, especially since you're multiclassing anyway. Going Tempest or War cleric would only mean a slight reduction in damage.

[Frozenstep]

Honestly so far in my group's homebrew campaign, the main thing picking Bladesinger has done for me is discourage the DM from hitting me because my AC is relatively high. That alone is pretty huge, I can be a lot braver then I would be as any other kind of wizard. Other then that though, having attack options hasn't really changed my life. It's partially because I'm not using spells to help it out with haste or something, but in my campaign my concentration has been better served on other things so far.

It'd probably feel a lot better if we had more combats in a day. As it stands we end up resting with a lot of spell slots leftover.

[Willie the Duck]

Overall, I think it's mostly a question of forum attention. The gish builds are solid, but outside of Cha-synergy multiclassing, fairly straightforward: they are casters who don't have to flee melee and use weapon attacks instead of cantrips. 'nuff said. I like 'em. I play a lot of them. I get why there's not a lot said about them.


I don't hear these options discussed much except as Multiclassing tools. It seems rare that somebody simply takes them 1-20 as their class. Is there a reason for this? Extra attack, decent armor, and eventually 9th level spells seems like the whole package. What's the catch other than smaller hit die?

It's certainly not just the HD. Martial builds are not just 2+1/HD or 4+2/HD extra HP or whatever. Nor are they just better AC and extra attack (therefore, for a gish build to be effective, they have to be more than that as well). What these gishes get is an opportunity to approach what fighters or barbarians get to do, before you add in their class abilities (and having at least one more stat with which to distributes ASIs, hexblade notwithstanding). That's... actually pretty nice, compared to spamming cantrips, and one of the reasons why you are willing to give up the opportunity cost (what lore bard gets instead of a valor bard's stuff, for example). However, it's not exciting, over the top, or gives one all that much to talk about.


...but a straight Hexblade without Pally/Sorc cheese seems like a lot of fun as well. It seems strange to me that these awesome options are rarely discussed around here. What's the catch that I'm missing?

I think that that pally/sorc (and pally/hexblade) cheese is the primary reason why pure gish classes are squeezed out of the discussion space. There is just so much contemplation and knobs and levers and when to dip what and what are you gaining for what opportunity cost and so on and so forth that it just kind of has overshadowed much of the rest of potential gish-dom. Is a paladin6Hexbladelock3Sorc11 or the like strictly better than simply grabbing a straight hexblade or straight paladin (with PAM/GWM/Sentinel, for instance) or the like? I'm not sure, but there's sure a lot more to talk about.


One of the guys in my group plays a war cleric, and he finds that he hardly ever ends up swinging his warhammer.


A War Cleric can make very good use of two handed weapons at lower levels, up to ludicrous amounts with Vuman and GWM.
They suffer by not getting extra attack though, so really, they fall back to heavy armor caster at mid levels.

War Domain Cleric seems to suffer on a few fronts. The Wis/day extra attack competes with other bonus actions (of which Spiritual Weapon is a notable spell most other clerics would already be using, making this more of a 2nd-level-slot-saver rather than a unique ability). The class, while decent as its own thing, is phenominal as a ~2 level dip for a high-wis fighter (say your GWM Vuman fighter would like to get a ranged cantrip for something to do other than throw a javelin, plus the light spell to see in the dark? you could take Magic Initiate, or just dip into war cleric). Beyond that, I think that Tempest domain cleric gets most of the same role (cleric who might swing a weapon) but a lot more flavor (and synergizes really well with SCAG cantrips, which is a great thing to pick up to offset a cleric's one attack).

[Deathtongue]

Bladesinger is at its best when you take advantage of its high defenses to do tricks that normal wizards wouldn't do.

You can also spec for damage as well if you're into that. The problem isn't that the Bladesinger doesn't do good damage, it's just that its unique forms of damage aren't appreciably better than other wizards, especially if you're doing short workdays. Animate Objects and Conjure Elemental will get you further than Haste and Tenser's Transformation and Shadow Blade.

As noted, Bladesinger has these weird spikes where it does large amounts of damage in the low levels, drops like a rock in the mid levels, then shoots back up again with Simulacrum / True Polymorph(ing the Simulacrum) / Shapechange at very high levels.

[Kane0]

I've seen a sword bard in my party, and he does a decent job of half-and-halfing between casting and melee. He prefers to inspire rather than flourish but will regularly alternate between casting and attacking from round to round. He's a bit glassy though, despite being an orc he has to be careful of getting dropped as he is one of our secondary healers.

[thrdeye]

War Domain Cleric seems to suffer on a few fronts. The Wis/day extra attack competes with other bonus actions (of which Spiritual Weapon is a notable spell most other clerics would already be using, making this more of a 2nd-level-slot-saver rather than a unique ability). The class, while decent as its own thing, is phenominal as a ~2 level dip for a high-wis fighter (say your GWM Vuman fighter would like to get a ranged cantrip for something to do other than throw a javelin, plus the light spell to see in the dark? you could take Magic Initiate, or just dip into war cleric). Beyond that, I think that Tempest domain cleric gets most of the same role (cleric who might swing a weapon) but a lot more flavor (and synergizes really well with SCAG cantrips, which is a great thing to pick up to offset a cleric's one attack).

Definitely agree. I played a Tempest Cleric with a Hexblade dip to pick up the SCAG melee cantrips, the Shield spell, and a few other goodies. Very enjoyable, and quite versatile. The key was to not play it like a Fighter though. Sure, you could burn a couple mid/high level spell slots on Spirit Guardians and Spiritual Weapon and somewhat approach the damage output when you need but if that's all you want just play an actual melee class. The strength of Tempest is being able to Bless your party, heal, do a bit of blasting, and drop some nasty battlefield control spells all in the same day, while being reasonably effective in both melee and ranged combat. You're not as good as a build dedicated to any given situation, but whatever the situation is you likely have an answer for it.

[Citan]

Out of mere simple curiosity, how do the stock martial subclasses for full casters fare, in your experience? I'm talking about Valor/Sword bards, pure Blade Pact/Hexblade sorcs, and Bladesinger Wizards, though I suppose this could include certain flavors of Cleric as well.

Did it "Gish" hard enough for you? Were you able to weave spells and step into melee? Was melee only a last resort that you were slightly better at than a different subclass?

I don't hear these options discussed much except as Multiclassing tools. It seems rare that somebody simply takes them 1-20 as their class. Is there a reason for this? Extra attack, decent armor, and eventually 9th level spells seems like the whole package. What's the catch other than smaller hit die?

Are these options simply outclassed by the potency of cantrips in 5e? If they're lackluster, what would it take to make them better, or is the balance just king here?

It seems like everybody wants to Gish, and with good reason: magic and swordplay are cool individually and even better together. Most Gish models seem to involve multiclassing or half caster chassis. The aforementioned subclasses, theoretically, allow one to have their cake and eat it too. Why aren't they discussed more?

I'm mostly interested in personal experience running/dming for these specific types of characters. How did it play? I'm strongly considering a Valor Bard for my next character, but a straight Hexblade without Pally/Sorc cheese seems like a lot of fun as well. It seems strange to me that these awesome options are rarely discussed around here. What's the catch that I'm missing?


Opportunity cost.

There's no catch, but that doesn't mean pure class is ideal. E.g. Bladesinger is fine, but Roguesinger is better (Rogue 2/Bladesinger 18): you get all the fightery and wizardy goodness of tanking/True Polymorphing/etc., plus now you can exploit things like Extra Attack + Athletics Expertise to cheaply grapple/prone enemies, or Fog Cloud + Cunning Action (Hide) + Stealth Expertise, or just plain Find Familiar + Invisibility III + Stealth Expertise + Cunning Action + Dimension Door-if-necessary for scouting without dying.
Funny that you would speak about opportunity cost because imo pure Bladesinger is much better in the long run: not only can you get Expertise from a feat or a spell (which is often enough), you get Wish and free Shield and Mirror Image much, *much*, MUCH earlier by not multiclassing. So basically you pick Rogue for big qualify of life from (char) level 3 to 11, then it stats biting you in the *** every day hereafter.

I'd agree for a gish the dip can be a better choice for endpoint around char level 10-11. After that? I'll argue with every level pure Bladesinger is better at the very least for that split you suggest. I'd actually understand better a case about Bladesinger 11 / Arcane Trickster 9 being "better" than pure Wizard...

Back on topic.

I played a few times (one shots, I have too little time to play) Bladesinger (level 5 / level 11), AT/Bladesinger (level 8 / level 15), Swords Bard (from level 3 to 8), Fiendblades (level 1 to 9).
They fare well enough imo. I played all of them mostly like I'd play a Rogue though, aka *not standing still* (to be fair, I never stand still anyways unless I'm a Bear Barbarian, a tailored niche Shepherd Druid or a martial with a Warding Bond or similar).
The only one I played differently (sometimes) was my Fiend Bladelock. Started out with Eldricht Blast + Hex, picked Moderately Armored at level 4, started going into melee at 5 with Thirsting Blade, and went "reflect tank" at 7 by learning both Fire Shield and Armor of Agathys. This was an awful nova use of resources, so I used it only on a few select occasions, but when it worked, it worked wonders. XD If I could have continued this character, I would probably have picked three levels in Bear Barbarian to build upon that, or some Sorcerer to Extend it.

Of course, times came where I had to accept and take my share of attacks. On that regard, Bladesinger has definitely an edge at low levels thanks to Mirror Image, but Swords is decent once you get BI on a short rest. Warlock is either much better or far worse than Bladesinger since gets the same spells, all depending on short rest management. I was satisfied myself, usually getting a short rest at least before the most dangerous fight, but I had a few times being out of juice. Not that big a deal though with Repelling Blast. :)
Overall Bladesinger gets more tools to adjust, in theory at least. In practice limited number of spell known still restricts you a bit unless you go 120% on the gish concept and forego any "classic" spell, but I wouldn't go *that* far myself.

As far as offense goes, nothing bests Bladesinger. You just have too many built-in spells available, on top of an outstanding 18/20 AC unarmored. When under Bladesong obviously, which is not a guarantee, but in broad strokes I'd say I could have one popped up on ~70% of all encounters, which is pretty good imo. Warlock can be better in a party that manages several short rests though.

Things can even out or not at level 7 depending on your taste: if both use Greater Invisibility, I'd say Bard may actually have an edge thanks to the bonus AC which comes damn close on average to a Shield, except it doesn't eat reaction.

Note that both points lose much truth at level 10, time at which all Bards get Magic Secrets. Even if it's just 2 spells, this can make an awesome difference, whether you take low-level spells that Wizard has been using long before you (Shadow Blade, Mirror Image)

As far as versatility goes? No clue, I guess it's completely YMMV here (mainly how much present skill checks are).

[MaxWilson]

Funny that you would speak about opportunity cost because imo pure Bladesinger is much better in the long run: not only can you get Expertise from a feat or a spell (which is often enough), you get Wish and free Shield and Mirror Image much, *much*, MUCH earlier by not multiclassing.

I'm a long-term thinker: I don't optimize for "early" at the expense of "eventual." Sure, when a pure Bladesinger 9 is throwing down Wall of Force, a Roguesinger 2/7 will be playing with Greater Invisibility + Cunning Action instead, and there are situations where Wall of Force is clearly better... but there are also plenty of situations where having a good, cheap grapple/prone option and superior recon and Cunning Action (Hide) is better. Overall I think the opportunity cost of staying pure Bladesinger is not worth it, and if your rejoinder is that "pure Bladesingers get spells earlier," well, that's not convincing to someone with a long-term mindset.

Spell Mastery (Shield) is less exciting when you've got good at-will defensive abilities anyway, like Cunning Action. Not being attacked is better than a +5 bonus to AC. Spell Mastery (Mirror Image) is a waste.

From a short-term perspective, Barbarian 1/Moon Druid X is much, much better than pure Moon Druid, but in the long run you lose the best part of Moon Druid, and that's no fun for me. The OP asked why pure Bladesingers aren't more popular, and I gave my answer. Obviously you have a different explanation.

P.S. RE: "can get Expertise from a feat or spell," Bladesingers can't get Expertise from a feat, because Prodigy isn't available to elves or half-elves. Getting it from a spell is very expensive in spell slots and concentration, which is the opposite of what you want. And they can't get Cunning Action equivalent from a race, because goblins aren't eligible to be Bladesingers, leaving multiclassing as the best way of getting Rogue abilities. In the long run you miss out on a couple of spell slots and some short-rest spells, but eh, who cares? Small price to pay. Missing out on a feat is more painful but still overall worth it.

[CantigThimble]

I played a valor bard in one game and he was very solid. He used shield master (athletics expertise) and spent most of his time setting things up for the PAM sorcadin. Granted, this was back when most people thought you could shove before rolling your attacks so YMMV but regardless he had strong buffs and debuffs to use and held the party together. Warding wind and hold person are solid low level options. It was kinda annoying to have shield bash, bardic inspiration and healing word competing for bonus actions, but I often handed out inspiration before combat and shield master more than pulled it's weight despite that.

[GlenSmash!]

Bladesingers can't get Expertise from a feat, because Prodigy isn't available to elves or half-elves..

Prodigy is actually available to Half-Elves.

And Half-Orcs too!

[dejarnjc]

I'm a long-term thinker: I don't optimize for "early" at the expense of "eventual." Sure, when a pure Bladesinger 9 is throwing down Wall of Force, a Roguesinger 2/7 will be playing with Greater Invisibility + Cunning Action instead, and there are situations where Wall of Force is clearly better... but there are also plenty of situations where having a good, cheap grapple/prone option and superior recon and Cunning Action (Hide) is better. Overall I think the opportunity cost of staying pure Bladesinger is not worth it, and if your rejoinder is that "pure Bladesingers get spells earlier," well, that's not convincing to someone with a long-term mindset.

I actually found that my pure build bladesinger had too many bonus actions aleady in combat to even consider a rogue. Between bladesong, shadowblade, and the occasional misty step... I don't think I ever would have had much use for cunning action. The expertise would've been nice though.

IMO, If I were going to have a 2 level dip for a bladesinger then it'd be a fighter for dueling and action surge.23232323232323

[Mjolnirbear]

Don't agree on the Roguesinge > Bladesinger, but that's off topic.

I'm currently playing a pure Hexblade in my last gone brew campaign (home brew critical failures and successes).

GWM since level 4 and Armour of Agathys plus the Wizard often turning my Memento/Spawn inspired character into a murder cloud ever so often. Had I gone for heavy optimization, I would probably have started with a level of Sorcerer for the Con saves and go Sorc 3+ later for the quickened cantrips maybe splash in some Paladin for more Smite Nova.

I'm only saddened by the Mystic Arcanum (lvl 6+) spells being on the lower end of the high level spell power and fun spectrum... And I often feel that two spell slots is very restrictive. I would have absolutely loved being able to split one of them into smaller ones.

This is largely my experience with the hexblade. It was a lot of fun but I didn't feel like a caster. It feels like an EK, actually, without enough spells cast to really feel magical.

Of course, all my characters end up casters on the rare occasion I don't have to DM. One of my fave chars, a Love paladin, still caused me to feel restricted, spell-wise. My bias is therefore obvious

[MaxWilson]

Prodigy is actually available to Half-Elves.

And Half-Orcs too!

Huh. I stand corrected.


I actually found that my pure build bladesinger had too many bonus actions aleady in combat to even consider a rogue. Between bladesong, shadowblade, and the occasional misty step... I don't think I ever would have had much use for cunning action. The expertise would've been nice though.

IMO, If I were going to have a 2 level dip for a bladesinger then it'd be a fighter for dueling and action surge.23232323232323

It's a playstyle difference. Like other defensive abilities, Cunning Action is most valuable in small parties or when the party is widely dispersed or even split--being unkillable doesn't mean much if the monster can just kill someone else, so when squishies are in range of the monster you are forced to play offense. As a player, I value the capability to cheaply conduct a recon-in-force with a couple of PCs while other PCs prepare a fallback position. As a DM, I love it when players split the party because it automatically shifts the spotlight and gives more opportunities for interesting choices. When I can I try to design scenarios that make staying together vs. splitting up an interesting dilemma.

[Luccan]

Prodigy is actually available to Half-Elves.

And Half-Orcs too!

Also, Bladesingers only "have to" be restricted in Forgotten Realms. I think racial restrictions for subclasses should be given as wide a berth as possible, personally.

[Yunru]

It's not a Gish, but my "Martial" Full Caster is doing great.
Gotta love the Moon Druid.
2x a rest going from full caster to full martial.

[Tanarii]

This is largely my experience with the hexblade. It was a lot of fun but I didn't feel like a caster. It feels like an EK, actually, without enough spells cast to really feel magical.
What level did you mostly play with the Hexblade? How often were you getting short rests?

If you were playing in the 7-10 range, even with 2 short rests per day, I can see how you might get that feeling. EKs are rocking 6 spells per day at level 7 or 8 I believe, while Hexblades are doing the same, albeit far more powerful spells. So in terms of frequency ...

(Discounting at-will cantrips here, which make EKs 'more magical' than Paladins and Rangers in some regards.)

[Citan]

I'm a long-term thinker: I don't optimize for "early" at the expense of "eventual."
Sorry to break it to you, you contradict yourself just right here.

And you also directly contradicts the post when you say that Rogue 2 / Wizard 18 is better than Wizard 20.

Unless you consider that...
- Ability to restore another 5th level for the day on a short rest with Arcane Recovery (Conjure spell, Steel Wind Strike, Skill Empowerment, Hold Monster for crits, Dominate Person for action economy, etc): because Arcane recovery is half caster level, rounded down, so best you can crank otherwise is one 5th and one 4th. Maths count sometimes. ^^
- Another 6th level spell per day (upcast Shadow Blade, Tenser's Transformation, True Seeing, Mental Prison, Mass Suggestion, Eyebite, Contingency because the last one was used, etc),
- Another 7th level per day (Power Word Pain which I just discovered and is a real treat, Magnificent Mansion, Symbol, Teleport, Force Cage, Crown of Stars, upcast Hold/Dominate/ShadowBlade/etc),
- Ability to learn 4 additional additionel spells without needing DM fiat so you can have Foresight AND Wish AND Timestop AND True Polymorph AND Invulnerability for exemple),
- And *access to TWO 3rd-level spells that refresh on every short rest* (Haste? Slow? Thunder Step? Fireball? Fly? Haste? Hypnotic Pattern)...

Unless you consider that ALL OF THAT IS LESS THAN... What?
- 1d8 extra damage per turn on hit (just lol).
- light armor proficiency (which you don't care about amounting to a 1 AC difference at best compared to Mage Armor even early on).
- Expertise on two skills (get one permanently being a Human or Half-Elf if you want to Grapple/Shove, get any other one when you need with Skill Empowerment).
- ability to Dash as bonus action (confer free Longstrider, confer Bladesong bonus speed, confer Mobile feat, confer short-rest Haste)
- ability to Disengage as bonus action (confer Mobile feat, confer short-rest Haste, confer free Invisibility or Mirror Image for emergencies, confer more sustainable Greater Invisibility)
- ability to Hide as a bonus action... For which indeed you have no way to replicate *as a bonus action* as a Wizard. But at high level Hiding is overall plain impossible in fight usually considering all detection tools enemies have (Blindsight/Truesight/Tremorsense, Scrying, etc). And you have no use for Hiding anyways in fight when you can instead use Greater Invisibility or higher resilience spells. So Hiding is just a tool to avoid fights or prepare ambushes, and those two situations rarely benefit from being able to try in one second instead of 6.

Yeah right, obviously the dip is the better choice when aiming for a level 20 character...

That's some impressive long-term thinking indeed.
...
...
...
Or not at all.

Just be honest with us, and with you, and simply say you prefer immediate benefits for down the road even if you'll pay the price later, that is a perfectly legitimate approach after all (that is just another way to project in the long term, just with a reverse curve for benefit/investment ratio). :)
All it takes to be truthful is a change and a swap in your phrase.

"I'm a short-term thinker: [I]I don't optimize for "eventual" at the expense of "early."

[MaxWilson]

Sorry to break it to you, you contradict yourself just right here.

You are mistaken. Long-term benefits >>> short-term benefits. That's exactly what I have said and am saying.


And you also directly contradicts the post when you say that Rogue 2 / Wizard 18 is better than Wizard 20.

Rogue 2/Bladesinger 18 is better than Bladesinger 20, from my perspective. Taking the long-term benefit is what long-term thinking is all about. Adding a whole new dimension of awesome at-will in-and-out-of-combat capabilities is better than adding a couple of extra spell slots, some short-rest 3rd level spells, and a feat.

IME, running out of spell points/slots isn't a serious problem anyway, partly because I'm a cheapskate about spending them, which is why I love at-will abilities like Cunning Action.

Your post makes no sense to me unless I postulate that you didn't see the word "don't" and therefore read my sentence backwards.

[Citan]

You are mistaken. Long-term benefits >>> short-term benefits. That's exactly what I have said and am saying.



Rogue 2/Bladesinger 18 is better than Bladesinger 20, from my perspective. Taking the long-term benefit is what long-term thinking is all about. Adding a whole new dimension of awesome at-will in-and-out-of-combat capabilities is better than adding a couple of extra spell slots, some short-rest 3rd level spells, and a feat.

IME, running out of spell points/slots isn't a serious problem anyway, partly because I'm a cheapskate about spending them, which is why I love at-will abilities like Cunning Action.

Your post makes no sense to me unless I postulate that you didn't see the word "don't" and therefore read my sentence backwards.
Nice way to avoid recognizing you had no real arguments to demonstrate that the dip was still worth at level 20.

Because I in the contrary demonstrated how 80% of the benefit of that 2-level dip aka Sneak Attack, Expertise and Cunning Action dip was (or rather became) either useless, redundant or obtainable in other ways as a pure Bladesinger as you progress in levels.

The big difference being that it would require some spells use or feat investments so you'd have to get them one after the other, whereas the Rogue dip gives a much smaller package, but all-in-one, consistent and early.

Hence, you don't plan to maximize long-term benefits. You plan to maximize short-term and middle-term benefits. Just don't try and pretend the otherwise.

I'm not criticizing, I do the same in many builds. And I'd rather play a Rogue 2/ Bladesinger 7 than a Bladesinger 9 too. That does not prevents me from recognizing that if I just went straight Bladesinger from here onwards, that would not be the optimal choice, whatever way you look at it.

Things could be different if you were talking about 7/13 or 9/11 splits because those actually bring features and tactics that a pure Wizard would have much trouble to reproduce.
Which is just plain untrue for a 2/18.
Which you, by the way, further stress and validate for you when saying that running out of spell slots does not happen often in your experience (which means you'd have no trouble using a few of them when really needed to emulate high skill or mobility, or use a slot on a more situational out-of-combat spell).

[Kejgar]

I played a College of Valor Bard in Curse of Strahd but I did not have too great of an experience. I joined fairly late in the campaign and found my spell selection almost useless as I thought the campaign would be different, so I relied on my class abilities mostly. The martial weapon itself was probably what I used the least, but the bonus armor and shield proficiency is really helpful for a full caster. The Combat Inspiration helped a few times for adding AC against an attack and bonus damage but was not too noticeable.
Overall, my experience is not one to judge the Valor Bard fairly as my poor choice of spells took away that important part of the class and I was not using magical weapons. I think those "Martial" Full Casters work best when not trying to use the weapon most of the time.

[MaxWilson]

Nice way to avoid recognizing you had no real arguments to demonstrate that the dip was still worth at level 20.

Stop being nasty. I already gave my reasons in the post you quoted, #39, although it's hard to tell if you read it because you snipped everything but the first sentence. It's not my fault if you didn't read it or didn't agree, but don't pretend I didn't explain myself because I did.

I will respond to one point, your attempt to examine alternatives to Cunning Action:


- ability to Dash as bonus action (confer free Longstrider, confer Bladesong bonus speed, confer Mobile feat, confer short-rest Haste)
- ability to Disengage as bonus action (confer Mobile feat, confer short-rest Haste, confer free Invisibility or Mirror Image for emergencies, confer more sustainable Greater Invisibility)
- ability to Hide as a bonus action... For which indeed you have no way to replicate *as a bonus action* as a Wizard. But at high level Hiding is overall plain impossible in fight usually considering all detection tools enemies have (Blindsight/Truesight/Tremorsense, Scrying, etc). And you have no use for Hiding anyways in fight when you can instead use Greater Invisibility or higher resilience spells. So Hiding is just a tool to avoid fights or prepare ambushes, and those two situations rarely benefit from being able to try in one second instead of 6.

It's very strange that you assume that all enemies will have Blindsight/Truesight/Tremorsense/etc. but then you also get excited about Spell Mastery (Mirror Image). I hate to break it to you, but Mirror Image (1) takes an action to cast, (2) doesn't work against things with Blindsight/Truesight (and arguably not against Tremorsense, but ask your DM). You name a bunch of other stuff like "free" Longstrider (it's not free) and short-rest Haste (which eats your concentration and makes you lose an action when it goes down) and Greater Invisibility (which again doesn't work against Blindsight/Truesight/Tremorsense) which can kind of sort of compete with Cunning Action... but the very act of listing what it takes to compete is its own refutation. I shouldn't need to point out to you that these things eat your concentration--you should have thought of that yourself before you even hit Send.

What's better, a shapedchanged Pit Fiend, a shapechanged Pit Fiend with Bladesong, or a shapechanged Pit Fiend with Blade Song & Stealth and Athletics Expertise & Cunning Action? You can't concentrate on Greater Invisibility while maintaining Shapechange, but you can Cunning Action all day long. Yes, Mobile feat is great if you've got it, but Mobile + Cunning Action is even better.

You name a bunch of "free" spells ("free Longstrider", "free Invisibility or Mirror Image for emergencies") on top of the Spell Mastery (Shield) you've already highlighted, and obviously that doesn't work. A Bladesinger 20 has exactly the same Spell Masteries as a Roguesinger 20 (2/18), and you only get two of them, not 4+--and you're not even choosing the best ones. ("For emergencies" you just use spell slots, not Spell Mastery. Spell Mastery (Mirror Image) is a waste.) I hate to even type that because it's so obvious and I hate repeating the obvious, and people tell me that I sound really condescending when I do start repeating the obvious, so it's time for me to stop typing.

[Klorox]

My experience from both DMing and playing these characters is that they can be very effective when built and played properly. However, they do have to be built and played properly; casters in 5e are abundant in both trap options and hidden gems.

Care to elaborate on how to build and play them properly?


As a DM, I have found them to be really powerful although thy sometimes need a bit of system mastery to get the most from.

Essentially they get a pretty good attack action. Knowing when to use that and when to use your spell slots is key.

The most powerful dynamic I have seen is from a valor bard: use a bow and sharpshooter for most actions. This is good enough to not fall too far behind with damage for the rest of the party. Given you are using your actions to take the attack action you want spells that provide a powerful benefit without conflicting. This pushes spell selection towards:

1) Niche spells that are awesome of useless. Sometimes they are awesome; at other times you take the attack action. Bringing people back to life for example

2) Long concentration spells that can go up before a fight do not compete for actions

3) Bonus action and reaction spells

4) Spells that are so good that you are happy to use an action to cast them

This gives a character that has awesome utility because they no longer need spells for damage or to have a useful action so they can know and have prepared a much deeper set of utility spells. Furthermore they will also be more likely to have the spell slots left to cast them. Dimension door when a battle goes badly, featherfall for when jumping off the roof seems the best escape, fairy fire when attacked by the invisible...


Sometimes you can also go for a build that is focused on combat using spells for support. Hexblades do this well with spells like shield and wrathful smite (although I like to multiclass as at higher levels this is a horrific use of spellslots). Clerics (or combat bards with magical secrets) can go for spirit guardians to reinforce their melee presence. Bards with swiftquiver.

At other times you just pick the option with a desire to not use the abilities. You want more armour but you don't want to be attacked. You want melee options but don't want to get into melee. These abilities are a contingency.


In my experience the order I have listed here is their order of effectiveness; some is campaign dependant of course.

I-Hsien?


Valor Bards are the strongest Bards.

People love Lore because it's fun to pick out 2 spells, but they aren't as strong.

2 attacks are just stronger than a cantrip (esp. vicious mockery if you don't take one from outside your list).

Medium armour and shields is better than skill proficiency, esp. with jack of all trades.

Cutting Words is a bit stronger than Combat Inspiration, but then the default inspiration is very good on its own and combat inspiration works with it.

The majority of people probably find lore or swords to be more fun, but from just the raw power perspective valor is strongest.

I must admit: I’ve only ever seen Lore Bards played, and I just assumed they were the superior college. My interest is certainly piqued to Valor Bards now!

[LudicSavant]

Care to elaborate on how to build and play them properly? That's not really the sort of thing that I can sum up in a sentence or two, especially since there are so many different types of gishes and the answer is different for each of them (and the answer for any given one could fill a guide thread). Perhaps it would help if you narrowed the scope of the question?

If I had to give a brief, overgeneralized answer right now, I'd say that they're basically a lot like any other good full caster, who just so happen to have some tools that involve weaponry in their Batman toolbelt. Also they usually aren't doing martial things or caster things, they do both at the same time.

For example, an Arcana Cleric is still a sweet Cleric, and still walks around using Animate Dead and Spirit Guardians and Spiritual Weapon and Sanctuary and Warding Bond and Spellbreaker Heal, but also might hit you with a particularly nasty War Caster OA if you try to move away from them (in the form of Booming Blade + rider + 3*Wis). And can have all of those things going in the same round.

Edit: Perhaps this will help too:


When it comes to the theoretical white room shenanigans you mention, I wouldn't say that's what I'm talking about with the mention of the "master planner." I just mean someone who takes advantage of all of the clever little tactical tools a Wizard has. If anything, pointing to any single tactic as the strength of the Wizard is, to me, sort of missing the point of the class (though they do have some really bloody strong single tactics). The Wizard's strength lies in their versatility, resourcefulness, and ability to do a whole lot of things at a time.

It's not going to make you a master Wizard just by knowing that, for example, Magic Mouth earpieces are amazing, or that Continual Flame gives you permanent magical Darkness repellant if you upcast it to third level, or that you can have your familiar administer Goodberries or potions to fallen allies (who needs Healing Word? Also, both uses have been confirmed to work on Sage Advice), or that you can cast rituals while moving and thus keep everyone on phantom steeds in travel segments, or that you can cast Water Breathing as part of your morning routine every day and have it affect the entire party essentially in perpetuity. Or that you can do all of these things and have some animated minions and a Contingent 5th level spell that you can cast without an action... all while you still haven't cast any spell slots today.

It's no single trick, it's the fact that there are a bajillion of these cool little techniques and they all add up. So, I could say something like "hey, I can use an Overchanneled Magic Missile as a Hexblade 1 / Evoker X to deal 112 damage that can't miss with a 5th level slot," and that'd be a neat trick, but it's just one more for the ever-growing bandoleer.

The reason that this might not get across easily in many forum discussions is because the range of creative tactics available for even a single spell can potentially take up entire threads, and you know a lot of spells, and can use a lot of them together. And while none of them is an answer to everything, there's a good chance that one of the things in your Batman toolbelt is an answer to whatever you wanna deal with.I wish people responded to LudicSavant instead of debating about how a glyph of warding works.

This is how good wizards play. This is not the if I have x, y, z and the DM allows me to do A, B, C then look at all my power!

And yes, they are not as broken as they were, but they are still good. A lot of other classes are one trick ponies. A wizard can fit different niches at different times and it's because of spell versatility.

[Son of A Lich!]

That's not really the sort of thing that I can sum up in a sentence or two, especially since there are so many different types of gishes and the answer is different for each of them (and the answer for any given one could fill a guide thread). Perhaps it would help if you narrowed the scope of the question?

In my read of the situation, I think that Played and Built properly is different from table to table.

A Gish in the Underdark and a Gish slaying dragons have vastly different needs. Hell, I had a monstrosities game with lower level players and found that using lower initiative bonuses and Popcorn initiative makes Dex bonuses a diminishing return (Not really on topic for Gishes, as I had a Life cleric in the party and he wasn't that 'Gishy' but... y'know the point is that efficiency will change based on whats going on in game). Where normally Assassins want to get the first hit in for the auto crit, without set up for sneak attack die to really capitalize on the extra damage, the only real bonus to a high Dex was securing a first turn in case of a bad roll (If they put that dex into strength instead, they could hit just as reliably and the AC was never a problem for the monsters to hit the players).

Since most of the monstrosities I was using had low initiative bonuses and keen senses, an assassin with too much Dex would outpace the Monk and squander his auto-crit. He ended up taking a level in paladin so that he could (In the future) get another level and start smiting to exploding his damage.

So I think to answer this question would require a level of systems mastery initially, but also to have a keen idea of what you will be reliably facing and tailoring your build and tactics to suit the needs of the situation at hand and a cooperative DM who isn't going to abuse player trust in a failed attempt to nerf a player to 'Challenge' them (Ala, these enemies are immune to your favorite tactic and follow up tactic).

I think trying to build such a guide would be hard pressed in being relevant to all situations.

[LudicSavant]

In my read of the situation, I think that Played and Built properly is different from table to table.

A Gish in the Underdark and a Gish slaying dragons have vastly different needs

Indeed. And knowing how to adapt to different situations is much of what makes an expert caster player.