How well would a Melee Sorcerer work?

[No1ofIntrst]

If you were to take 5 levels of Sorcerer (grabbing Twin and Quicken), as well as a couple of levels of a class that gets melee capabilities (say fighter 6 or warlock 6). You could (theoretically) Twin Booming Blade on two targets in melle (3d8 (1d8 weapon and 2d8 BB) to each, and 3d8 when they move) and then Quicken another for 3d8+3d8 more damage. This would give the class a (theoretical) damage of 15d8 at 11th level, at a cost of 3SP. The only question, is this even viable to try to do?

[Dork_Forge]

If you were to take 5 levels of Sorcerer (grabbing Twin and Quicken), as well as a couple of levels of a class that gets melee capabilities (say fighter 6 or warlock 6). You could (theoretically) Twin Booming Blade on two targets in melle (3d8 (1d8 weapon and 2d8 BB) to each, and 3d8 when they move) and then Quicken another for 3d8+3d8 more damage. This would give the class a (theoretical) damage of 15d8 at 11th level, at a cost of 3SP. The only question, is this even viable to try to do?

You can definitely do this, Draconic Sorcerer would give you better HP and remove the need for Mage Armor. You can cast/upcast Shadow Blade for more damage along with Dueling, maneuvers etc. If you're so inclined then you can certainly get in there and mix it up in melee with the martials.

[nickl_2000]

I’ve seen it done as a single class half orc.

He did have the advantage of using the UA stone sorcerer though.

[Anymage]

The big drawback I'm seeing here is that like effects don't stack. Someone can only have one BB punishment looming over their head at a time, so you'll need at least four conveniently placed enemies. Then you'll either have eaten attacks of opportunity to get in and back out, or you'll be surrounded by enemies who see no reason to move and trigger the punishment when you've presented yourself as a tempting target.

And if you have conveniently placed targets like that, fireball will deal much more damage, not contingent on the enemy moving, for a pretty trivial resource at eleventh level.

[Bobthewizard]

I made a goblin UA stone sorcerer that works pretty well in melee. 13 base AC like a dragon sorcerer but they get shield proficiency. So 18AC (13 base plus 16 DEX and a shield) and +1HP per level with quickened/twinned booming blade works well in bursts. He's better as a caster but can get in melee if needed. Best part of this is no multiclassing to slow down his spells.

[Ganryu]

Not only can you, it's freaking terrifying.

Quicken, Green Flame Blade, you now have two attacks a turn, same as many melee classes. But how much damage is ridiculous.

Grab mobile feat, it helps. Let's cast Shadow blade at 7th level. Insane, I know, but we don't plan on staying in melee range.

When we hit, we're dual casting GFB.

8d8+5 damage is not bad. But we hit twice. 16d8+10. That's... deeeefinitely decent. And its sustain damage. If we went two levels of paladin, somehow, that could be 26d8 for two smites ontop of that. If we crit, potentially 52d8.

So... not bad.

And we haven't stayed in melee range, so we're not getting hit back probably. But if we do, assume Mage armor on. We have Shield. That's 23 AC, IF they chased us.

But what if we want to tank? Well, Blur, Stone Sorcerer, and Shield give us ridiculous AC.

Oooor, Giant Soul Sorcerer, grab Armor of Agathys, use Quicken to cast Blade Ward. Someone hits you, they get hurt, and you have reduced damage.

[Crgaston]

Shouldn't a twinned cantrip qualify for the EK's War Magic feature, so they get to make an additional attack as a bonus action?

That's 3 SB attacks, 2 with additional BB damage + rider. All you need are 2 enemies within 10 feet of each other and the Mobile feat. As a Wood Elf you wold have 45' of movement, so that's plenty. And you're not really using Cha, so...

An EK7/Sorcerer13 would have the slots to do a 5d8 SB 2x/day, a 4d8 SB 3x/day, and a 3d8 SB 6x/day.

It's cheaper on SP cost by half, too.

[Sparky McDibben]

Can someone remind me, if you Quicken a spell that involves making an attack, is the whole thing a bonus action? So if you have Extra Attack, could you make two attacks on your action, then Quickened BB?

[Dork_Forge]

Shouldn't a twinned cantrip qualify for the EK's War Magic feature, so they get to make an additional attack as a bonus action?

That's 3 SB attacks, 2 with additional BB damage + rider. All you need are 2 enemies within 10 feet of each other and the Mobile feat. As a Wood Elf you wold have 45' of movement, so that's plenty. And you're not really using Cha, so...

An EK7/Sorcerer13 would have the slots to do a 5d8 SB 2x/day, a 4d8 SB 3x/day, and a 3d8 SB 6x/day.

It's cheaper on SP cost by half, too.

Cheaper on SP buy the BA attack would be at lower damage, though its still a really nice combo.


Can someone remind me, if you Quicken a spell that involves making an attack, is the whole thing a bonus action? So if you have Extra Attack, could you make two attacks on your action, then Quickened BB?

That's right!

[Crgaston]

Cheaper on SP buy the BA attack would be at lower damage, though its still a really nice combo.


Well, yes, of course the Twinned BA would be at lower damage.

Quicken gets you 1 BA attack with SB+cantrip damage and 2 Attack Action attacks with just SB for 2 SP.

Twinned gets you 1 BA attack with just SB and 2 Melee Spell Attacks (against different targets) with BB+SB damage for 1 SP.

Quicken is better if you only have 1 potential target, for sure. But for overall DPR, Twinned wins. It also increases your chance of critting on a BB+SB.

[Dork_Forge]

Well, yes, of course the Twinned BA would be at lower damage.

Quicken gets you 1 BA attack with SB+cantrip damage and 2 Attack Action attacks with just SB for 2 SP.

Twinned gets you 1 BA attack with just SB and 2 Melee Spell Attacks (against different targets) with BB+SB damage for 1 SP.

Quicken is better if you only have 1 potential target, for sure. But for overall DPR, Twinned wins. It also increases your chance of critting on a BB+SB.

What I mean is there's no reason why you can't do both in one round (providing you have the sorc points), if you have two enemies next to each other you can nail them each with a BB with your twinned action and then quicken a GFB to damage them both again. Seeing as the fighting style lends itself to one main spell and then Shield as needed, you can afford to burn unused slots to recover your points for more SCAGtrip shenanigans.

[Crgaston]

What I mean is there's no reason why you can't do both in one round (providing you have the sorc points), if you have two enemies next to each other you can nail them each with a BB with your twinned action and then quicken a GFB to damage them both again. Seeing as the fighting style lends itself to one main spell and then Shield as needed, you can afford to burn unused slots to recover your points for more SCAGtrip shenanigans.

Ooooh I gotcha! I tend to think in terms of versatility/sustainability, but lets see...

F2 (for Action Surge and shield proficiency)/Sorc 18 gets you:
7 1st and 2nd level slots for Shield/Absorb Elements
6 slots of 5th-8th level for 4d8/5d8 Shadow Blade
Up to 41 SP so you could pull this combo off a total of 13 times per day, with 2 more uses of Twinned or 1 of Quickened.
Plus Psychic Scream for your 1/day AOE?

That's... pretty dang sustainable! Nasty!

[Dork_Forge]

Ooooh I gotcha! I tend to think in terms of versatility/sustainability, but lets see...

F2 (for Action Surge and shield proficiency)/Sorc 18 gets you:
7 1st and 2nd level slots for Shield/Absorb Elements
6 slots of 5th-8th level for 4d8/5d8 Shadow Blade
Up to 41 SP so you could pull this combo off a total of 13 times per day, with 2 more uses of Twinned or 1 of Quickened.
Plus Psychic Scream for your 1/day AOE?

That's... pretty dang sustainable! Nasty!

Psychic Scream seems a solid AOE, I can't pass on the versatility of Wish though personally (melee fighting as primarily a Sorc isn't so scary with a Clone tucked away and your hoard of permanent summons).

Depending on stats you could potentially palm off Shield as a Magic Initiate spell, giving you the flexibility to burn an extra 1st level slot (or 2nd) for more SP!

[stoutstien]

If you were to take 5 levels of Sorcerer (grabbing Twin and Quicken), as well as a couple of levels of a class that gets melee capabilities (say fighter 6 or warlock 6). You could (theoretically) Twin Booming Blade on two targets in melle (3d8 (1d8 weapon and 2d8 BB) to each, and 3d8 when they move) and then Quicken another for 3d8+3d8 more damage. This would give the class a (theoretical) damage of 15d8 at 11th level, at a cost of 3SP. The only question, is this even viable to try to do?

Twinning BB is questionable.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?475147-Twin-Spell-booming-Blade

It's been heavily debated on how it works.

[Dork_Forge]

Twinning BB is questionable.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?475147-Twin-Spell-booming-Blade

It's been heavily debated on how it works.

What's still debatable at this point? As part of casting the spell you make an attack, just like when casting shocking grasp you make a melee spell attack, Twin allows you to affect two people within 5ft of you (so attack them) just like you were using any other spell with an attack roll. This doesn't really seem to be unclear or an edge case and more seems like people looking for a reason for it to not work.

[stoutstien]

What's still debatable at this point? As part of casting the spell you make an attack, just like when casting shocking grasp you make a melee spell attack, Twin allows you to affect two people within 5ft of you (so attack them) just like you were using any other spell with an attack roll. This doesn't really seem to be unclear or an edge case and more seems like people looking for a reason for it to not work.

Until there is an ettra it's hardly clear past people wanting reinsurance that there view is correct. Scag cantrips have been a source of confusion since print and due to who actually wrote the book we won't see any clarification.

One common issue is the combo of twinning/quicken Bb and GWM. Suddenly the question of how the spell weapon attack(s) works becomes a more important question.

I only made it known so that the OP that they might want to verify how the table will run it before they invest a lot into it.

[Dork_Forge]

Until there is an ettra it's hardly clear past people wanting reinsurance that there view is correct. Scag cantrips have been a source of confusion since print and due to who actually wrote the book we won't see any clarification.

One common issue is the combo of twinning/quicken Bb and GWM. Suddenly the question of how the spell weapon attack(s) works becomes a more important question.

I only made it known so that the OP that they might want to verify how the table will run it before they invest a lot into it.

It seems pretty clear cut (GWM just says when you make a melee weapon attack, BB requires that attack so I'd say yes it qualifies for GWM, and as it's two different attack rolls you can apply it to both), but if people have an issue with it then it's a shame but their table.

[stoutstien]

It seems pretty clear cut (GWM just says when you make a melee weapon attack, BB requires that attack so I'd say yes it qualifies for GWM, and as it's two different attack rolls you can apply it to both), but if people have an issue with it then it's a shame but their table.
Bad fun wrong is surprising from you. Without official ettra the wording is not clear enough to a point where I be seen it ruled a bunch of different ways. Scag cantrips where not public play tested at all and it shows.

[Dork_Forge]

Bad fun wrong is surprising from you. Without official ettra the wording is not clear enough to a point where I be seen it ruled a bunch of different ways. Scag cantrips where not public play tested at all and it shows.

The SCAG in general shows a lack of playtest, but I don't understand your bad fun wrong remark. It's a shame if a player isn't able to do something they want to do because of a rule interpretation, but it's the DM's table. Whilst I don't agree with the ruling (or fully understand the amount of... debate worthyness? Confusion didn't sound right), I don't think that those people are playing the game or enjoying themselves in an incorrect manner. I'm sure there's plenty about my DM style that would not be to the taste of many people and vice versa, it doesn't detract from the fun one has at those tables.

[stoutstien]

The SCAG in general shows a lack of playtest, but I don't understand your bad fun wrong remark. It's a shame if a player isn't able to do something they want to do because of a rule interpretation, but it's the DM's table. Whilst I don't agree with the ruling (or fully understand the amount of... debate worthyness? Confusion didn't sound right), I don't think that those people are playing the game or enjoying themselves in an incorrect manner. I'm sure there's plenty about my DM style that would not be to the taste of many people and vice versa, it doesn't detract from the fun one has at those tables.

Because BB is already better than lv 1 spells? Saying that some of combos are not allowed at some tables is an attack on fun is pretty harsh especially seeing how BB is already considered the best option for classes with no extra attack.

[Dork_Forge]

Because BB is already better than lv 1 spells? Saying that some of combos are not allowed at some tables is an attack on fun is pretty harsh especially seeing how BB is already considered the best option for classes with no extra attack.

I can't really see the argument for it being better than a level one spell before 5th when you get the bonus damage and the rider scales, but that's the whole point of cantrips. They remain relevant as you progress through tiers, level 1 spells remain static unless upcast, it's not a fair comparison to make.

At no point did I say it was an attack on fun, I thought my last post clarified that, the only thing I ever said on the matter was it was a shame if a player that wanted to use it missed out due to some lack of clarity (that to be fair seems the minority on the boars, or the supporters are just more vocal).

[No1ofIntrst]

.
I only made it known so that the OP that they might want to verify how the table will run it before they invest a lot into it.

If it helps, I (most likely) will/would be playing at Adventurers League, as its the easiest.

Thanks for all the suggestions! How early do you think a BB sorcerer could come online? The earliest I can think (for AL) would be level 6, getting Sorcerer 5 and Fighter 1. It would be nice if I could get Hexblade Warlock for CHA weapon, but that might add too many classes and keep it from being AL legal.

[Dork_Forge]

If it helps, I (most likely) will/would be playing at Adventurers League, as its the easiest.

Thanks for all the suggestions! How early do you think a BB sorcerer could come online? The earliest I can think (for AL) would be level 6, getting Sorcerer 5 and Fighter 1. It would be nice if I could get Hexblade Warlock for CHA weapon, but that might add too many classes and keep it from being AL legal.

If you start with a Fighter level it'd come online fully at 5th overall when you get that damage on the main hit. Then you're rocking shadow blade, dueling, booming blade and access to twin and quicken.

[ThatoneGuy84]

Dragon Sorc (HP, no mage armor)
Paly dip if want crazy extra DPS (fighter is ok also, but cmon. Smite with Sorc slot capability is just so much more appealing)
Warlock is also an option (you can do things like darkness/devil combo) and pretty much always have advantage/give disadvantage.

[Jerrykhor]

I saw a homebrew Sorcerer origin that caught my interest, Deathsinger. Its similar to the Bladesinger for Wizard, but restricted to Drow. Their main draw is the lack of extra attack, instead they focus on a single deadly and accurate strike empowered by GFB or BB.

[Klorox]

I don’t think adding 6 levels of another fighting class makes a melee sorcerer.

I think adding 6 levels of another class makes you a gish.

[da newt]

I'm pretty sure the Booming Blade + Shadow Blade combo is AL illegal due to the PHB +1 rule.