D&D 5e Powergamer's Tactics Room Review and Rating Series: The Bladesinger

[Bilbron]

How does the Bladesinger from Tasha's Cauldron of Everything stack up against the other wizard subdomains? Let's review!

Note that this is not an optimization video, but rather a brief look at the relative power of the subdomain relative to the others. There will be an optimization vid coming soon, however!

11:17

https://youtu.be/t9-4fAqXNdg

[Corran]

Note that this is not an optimization video, but rather a brief look at the relative power of the subdomain relative to the others. There will be an optimization vid coming soon, however!
It'd be interesting to see how the bladesinger relates to your tactical aspects of combat philosophy.

For example, bladesinging boosts (some) defenses, but when you are relying on not even being targeted, then it acts mainly as a back up to a superior defense (that is when that superior defense is actually working). On the plus side it can allow you tank in some cases if it's needed, and if that works well (eg more spread out damage between the pc's), then it could be useful because it could in theory allow some ally more time to affect the fight (or better OoC healing if you are relying on something like prayer of healing, but eh, that's just a minor point). Personally, I think this is the main selling point of the class, so if you agree with something like that, perhaps it would be nice to do some other video at some future point where you'll go deeper on how reliably and effectively a wizard could rely on such kind of defensive tactics that essentially would reduce something like bladesinging to either poor or simply situational (I am not suggesting that's the case, in fact I am very unsure about this, hence the curiosity to see someone examine it from this angle). In short, I'd be interested in knowing your view on this: Is the bladesinger mostly a (pardon the term) noob-friendly wizard for those who want to add survivability without overthinking on alternative ways available to any wizard (eg cover, concealment, whatever). Is it situational, in that it can act as a great backup or necessary boost when an unconventional defensive approach is not working, and if so how often or under what circumstances should I usually expect to rely enough on bladesinging for defense?

Bladesong also gives a mobility boost, so another point could be how that relates to your approach to offense (again, as per your tactical aspects series). For example, I am thinking that this mobility boost would be far more attractive if the bladesinger had access to powerful nova options, because such options pair well with mobility offensively. Or maybe that's an indication that a bladesinger character should consider having at least one such option available.

Or how song of defense relates to your defense video philosophy. Yes, it's pretty expensive to use, but there is probably some good situational value there. Meaning, that it doesn't sound too good to spend a 5th level slot just to reduce damage taken by 25 points, when I could be using this slot to cast something like a wall of force. But if I am already concentrating on a very effective wall of force, I may want to reduce damage taken just to improve my chances at keeping the spell contributing (ie prevent dropping unconscious or just reducing the DC of the concentration check). Usually something to be done when hit for lots of damage, though since it uses your reaction and thus it has competition with spells like shield, absorb elements and counterspell, it might be tricky to have it handy when I would really want to use it (so the action economy might be further holding this ability back).
Lay the foundation of how the bladesinger's abilities could be good or bad tactically. Sounds more interesting than what usually happens in optimization discussions. Which is people ignoring the overall approach and go in depth about obscure synergies that could very well end up being totally inconsequential from a tactical point of view. I guess I am interested in narrowing down the answer to a twofold question. First, (very roughly) how much I am risking by not going bladesinger in favor of being the typical more fragile wizard. And second, does the bladesinger get a situational tactical edge over the typical more fragile wizard. At least that's how I'd like to see you handle the optimization aspect (though there are probably more to it), and that's cause I really bought your way of approaching things in your tactical aspects of combat mini series. The nitty gritty is just an easy afterthought if I am already approaching things with a good sense of what I am looking for.

Apologies for derailing (a bit) instead of just focusing on the current video.

[Bilbron]

It'd be interesting to see how the bladesinger relates to your tactical aspects of combat philosophy.

For example, bladesinging boosts (some) defenses, but when you are relying on not even being targeted, then it acts mainly as a back up to a superior defense (that is when that superior defense is actually working). On the plus side it can allow you tank in some cases if it's needed, and if that works well (eg more spread out damage between the pc's), then it could be useful because it could in theory allow some ally more time to affect the fight (or better OoC healing if you are relying on something like prayer of healing, but eh, that's just a minor point). Personally, I think this is the main selling point of the class, so if you agree with something like that, perhaps it would be nice to do some other video at some future point where you'll go deeper on how reliably and effectively a wizard could rely on such kind of defensive tactics that essentially would reduce something like bladesinging to either poor or simply situational (I am not suggesting that's the case, in fact I am very unsure about this, hence the curiosity to see someone examine it from this angle). In short, I'd be interested in knowing your view on this: Is the bladesinger mostly a (pardon the term) noob-friendly wizard for those who want to add survivability without overthinking on alternative ways available to any wizard (eg cover, concealment, whatever). Is it situational, in that it can act as a great backup or necessary boost when an unconventional defensive approach is not working, and if so how often or under what circumstances should I usually expect to rely enough on bladesinging for defense?

Bladesong also gives a mobility boost, so another point could be how that relates to your approach to offense (again, as per your tactical aspects series). For example, I am thinking that this mobility boost would be far more attractive if the bladesinger had access to powerful nova options, because such options pair well with mobility offensively. Or maybe that's an indication that a bladesinger character should consider having at least one such option available.

Or how song of defense relates to your defense video philosophy. Yes, it's pretty expensive to use, but there is probably some good situational value there. Meaning, that it doesn't sound too good to spend a 5th level slot just to reduce damage taken by 25 points, when I could be using this slot to cast something like a wall of force. But if I am already concentrating on a very effective wall of force, I may want to reduce damage taken just to improve my chances at keeping the spell contributing (ie prevent dropping unconscious or just reducing the DC of the concentration check). Usually something to be done when hit for lots of damage, though since it uses your reaction and thus it has competition with spells like shield, absorb elements and counterspell, it might be tricky to have it handy when I would really want to use it (so the action economy might be further holding this ability back).
Lay the foundation of how the bladesinger's abilities could be good or bad tactically. Sounds more interesting than what usually happens in optimization discussions. Which is people ignoring the overall approach and go in depth about obscure synergies that could very well end up being totally inconsequential from a tactical point of view. I guess I am interested in narrowing down the answer to a twofold question. First, (very roughly) how much I am risking by not going bladesinger in favor of being the typical more fragile wizard. And second, does the bladesinger get a situational tactical edge over the typical more fragile wizard. At least that's how I'd like to see you handle the optimization aspect (though there are probably more to it), and that's cause I really bought your way of approaching things in your tactical aspects of combat mini series. The nitty gritty is just an easy afterthought if I am already approaching things with a good sense of what I am looking for.

Apologies for derailing (a bit) instead of just focusing on the current video.
I've been working on this all night, and I'm not going to optimize him to maximize the Terms of Engagement as my Hide wizard does, dancing in and out of range on a Phantom Steed and optimizing obscurement/cover to never get hit. That's a completely different style of play and if that's what you want, pick a different subdomain that has 4 full abilities to support that playstyle instead of 1 like the Bladesinger.

As I see it, the role of a Bladesinger IS a front-line guy, where he is to divert lots of attacks at disadvantage into his fantastic AC and SUPERIOR DURABILITY (because he's a freakin' WIZARD and has a familiar granting him quasi-regeneration by applying a Potion of Healing or ideally Life-powered Goodberries every round), while delivering massive offensive spell output along a range of opportunistic options on some rounds, and on others respectable combat damage superior to what a different wizard subdomain would create with cantrips (because you simply cannot pump out slotted spells every round and have any kind of staying power).

This will expose him to danger moreso than a Hide wizard, to be sure, but the point of optimizing is to mitigate that. It's not as invincible as the Hide Wizard, but being invincible is boring and not everyone can play the exact same style in a party.

[Gtdead]

I don't think that Bladesinger is a frontliner. Being able to do something doesn't mean that he is good at it. Let's consider a bit the strong points of Bladesinger:

One of the strongest T4 in the game. Wizards set the party for success but Damage ends the encounter and there are few things more terrifying than a Shapechanged Bladesinger with access to all his class features. He can make any shapechange form exponentially stronger than the base stat block through things like Bladesong and Song of Victory, along with Spammable shield and Misty Step.
This guy can literally solo everything in the MM without tricks, just straight head to head combat.

Best at will damage out of every wizard starting at lvl 6. The trick here is that a BS can fullfill any damage role, from ranged to melee. He is also one of the best skirmishers due to haste. Not many things can outrun him. He can be built to effectively emulate a rogue with damage to match or more if he doesn't want to disengage. Eventually rogue gets more at will damage, but for most of T2 BS is competitive. Advantage on acrobatics checks also helps with one of the weak wizard points, being grapple defense.

Almost impossible to lose concentration. I like to invest in Alert and Res: Con for my wizards (although lately I'm moving away from Res: CON for some of my builds). Now that we can create Vhuman bladesingers this is way more feasible. While having bladesong active, he eventually autosucceeds at the common 10 DC check, starting from +7 at lvl 4 and reaching +9 (soft cap) at lvl 8 and with access to absorb elements and song of defense, he can hold concentration under almost any circumstance.

He is an amazing user of wall of fire. His increased survivability allows him to bait melee enemies in positions where they will take the damage multiple times. This isn't an optimal play because it kind of breaks proper positioning, but it's a strong quality to have as a skirmisher. He also has access to spells like Mirror Image to further supplement this type of play. When other skirmishers kite, Bladesinger stands and fights.

His survivability is built in the subclass, so he doesn't need to dip cleric/hexblade or pick a race like Githyanki to function. While I've seen many people disagree with me on this, I believe that spell progression is paramount and I dislike having to dip before getting all the spells that are core to my build. Bladesinger compares favorably to almost any defense oriented wizard.

His kit is good against any encounter. He doesn't have to deal with immunities/resistances that control or blaster oriented wizards have to take into account.

Bladesinger cons:

He is spellslot inefficient for the traditional wizard role even without song of defense. He doesn't have any subclass tricks that offer a cheap way to do wizard things or have some ability to increase the efficiency of his spells except self buffing. He mitigates this by being more survivable, so he doesn't really need to boost his defenses through spells but there is a fairly big opportunity cost on bladesong used solely for defense, especially now that it's PB uses per long rest.

Low initiative. This can be said for most wizard subclasses, but both War and Chronurgy have an amazing advantage as controllers, because they can reliably act first and control spells work best when the enemy hasn't acted yet. Mitigated in Tasha's for allowing us to make vhuman Bladesingers with alert but..

Low initiative also affects the Bladesinger's survivability. He isn't worse than most single classed wizards, but multiclassed wizards with 19 AC are in a much better position to survive a few hits than Bladesinger who will most likely start the fight with 15 or 16. I may overstate this problem a bit because after all, he can easily get +8 to initiative which is better than most monsters, immunity to surprise and shield spell. Can be mitigated a bit also by investing in stealth. But it's still a problem because in early tiers, optimized wizards depend on initiative for their survivability and optimal positioning, and BS is just average at it.

Personally I'd rate him 3rd after Chronurgist and Diviner in normal games and 5th in games where Illusionists and Necromancers can shine (meaning the DM likes illusions or the necromancer has huge downtime and the DM doesn't react too much to his undead minions).

[Bilbron]

I don't think that Bladesinger is a frontliner. Being able to do something doesn't mean that he is good at it. Let's consider a bit the strong points of Bladesinger:

One of the strongest T4 in the game. Wizards set the party for success but Damage ends the encounter and there are few things more terrifying than a Shapechanged Bladesinger with access to all his class features. He can make any shapechange form exponentially stronger than the base stat block through things like Bladesong and Song of Victory, along with Spammable shield and Misty Step.
This guy can literally solo everything in the MM without tricks, just straight head to head combat.

Best at will damage out of every wizard starting at lvl 6. The trick here is that a BS can fullfill any damage role, from ranged to melee. He is also one of the best skirmishers due to haste. Not many things can outrun him. He can be built to effectively emulate a rogue with damage to match or more if he doesn't want to disengage. Eventually rogue gets more at will damage, but for most of T2 BS is competitive. Advantage on acrobatics checks also helps with one of the weak wizard points, being grapple defense.

Almost impossible to lose concentration. I like to invest in Alert and Res: Con for my wizards (although lately I'm moving away from Res: CON for some of my builds). Now that we can create Vhuman bladesingers this is way more feasible. While having bladesong active, he eventually autosucceeds at the common 10 DC check, starting from +7 at lvl 4 and reaching +9 (soft cap) at lvl 8 and with access to absorb elements and song of defense, he can hold concentration under almost any circumstance.

He is an amazing user of wall of fire. His increased survivability allows him to bait melee enemies in positions where they will take the damage multiple times. This isn't an optimal play because it kind of breaks proper positioning, but it's a strong quality to have as a skirmisher. He also has access to spells like Mirror Image to further supplement this type of play. When other skirmishers kite, Bladesinger stands and fights.

His survivability is built in the subclass, so he doesn't need to dip cleric/hexblade or pick a race like Githyanki to function. While I've seen many people disagree with me on this, I believe that spell progression is paramount and I dislike having to dip before getting all the spells that are core to my build. Bladesinger compares favorably to almost any defense oriented wizard.

His kit is good against any encounter. He doesn't have to deal with immunities/resistances that control or blaster oriented wizards have to take into account.

Bladesinger cons:

He is spellslot inefficient for the traditional wizard role even without song of defense. He doesn't have any subclass tricks that offer a cheap way to do wizard things or have some ability to increase the efficiency of his spells except self buffing. He mitigates this by being more survivable, so he doesn't really need to boost his defenses through spells but there is a fairly big opportunity cost on bladesong used solely for defense, especially now that it's PB uses per long rest.

Low initiative. This can be said for most wizard subclasses, but both War and Chronurgy have an amazing advantage as controllers, because they can reliably act first and control spells work best when the enemy hasn't acted yet. Mitigated in Tasha's for allowing us to make vhuman Bladesingers with alert but..

Low initiative also affects the Bladesinger's survivability. He isn't worse than most single classed wizards, but multiclassed wizards with 19 AC are in a much better position to survive a few hits than Bladesinger who will most likely start the fight with 15 or 16. I may overstate this problem a bit because after all, he can easily get +8 to initiative which is better than most monsters, immunity to surprise and shield spell. Can be mitigated a bit also by investing in stealth. But it's still a problem because in early tiers, optimized wizards depend on initiative for their survivability and optimal positioning, and BS is just average at it.

Personally I'd rate him 3rd after Chronurgist and Diviner in normal games and 5th in games where Illusionists and Necromancers can shine (meaning the DM likes illusions or the necromancer has huge downtime and the DM doesn't react too much to his undead minions).Great take, many thanks. I must say that I'm taking a different approach so it's very interesting to hear how others play the subdomain.

I love Alert but this subdomain is very ASI hungry, super hard to fit it in. Part of me does want to do the Alert/Obscure thing to get reliably attacked at disadvantage, but it strikes me as unthematic and I'm already doing that on my current character. Do you take Warcaster, and if so, when?

One thing that's amazing me is how few spell slots you get at higher levels. It makes choosing spell preps a real tactical quandary. I've never actually played a high level campaign (never cast a 7th level spell in 40 years) so analyzing those spells and balancing the prep list in the context of how few you get is a real bear.

[Witty Username]

I have seen a take on bladesinger (a little dated but still relevant) that weapon combat is what bladesinger does less as the wizards goes up in tier. At tier 1 and tier 2, the bladesinger does pretty well with weapons and importantly doesn't have many spells to sling as constantly so bladesong and weapons is the primary with spells as "big guns" (swing/end this combat). At tier 3 and higher spells are more available and more powerful, and bladesong is still useful for boosting concentration with weapon combat being for emergency purposes, or rather when a wizard would normally be throwing cantrips.

In this view, bladesinger isn't that ASI hungry, 16 dex will get you to tier 3 just fine, and int is still your primary. So if you have something like dex 16 con 14 int 16 and plan to bring int to 20 weapons will be about as effective as they are normally until T3 where spells will be taking over anyway, and 16 dex will still allow for surprisingly effective weapon attacks.

In short, the weapon as a early level option very effective and late still useful in emergencies.

This is all assuming that the bladesinger is going to wizard 20.

[Snivlem]

On topic:

Good video. I enjoyed it. Much more interesting than the previous one. I am looking forward to the follow of.

Off topic:


... as my Hide wizard does, dancing in and out of range on a Phantom Steed...

Excuse me for digressing, but i've sort of been scratching my head on how you find so much value in mounts (suggesting phantom steed for magical secret etc) , and i am just gonna take this opportunity to ask you. This quote makes me think that you might be getting the rules wrong. Are you aware that even if you and your mount share initiative, you do in fact operate on separate turns, so you can't split up the mounts move in the same way you can split up your own move when on foot? Here's a rules reference if you need it:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sageadvice.eu/2018/03/14/rider-on-controlled-mount-wants-to-attack-mid-move-do-rider-and-mount-share-one-turn/amp/

[Gtdead]

Great take, many thanks. I must say that I'm taking a different approach so it's very interesting to hear how others play the subdomain.

I love Alert but this subdomain is very ASI hungry, super hard to fit it in. Part of me does want to do the Alert/Obscure thing to get reliably attacked at disadvantage, but it strikes me as unthematic and I'm already doing that on my current character. Do you take Warcaster, and if so, when?

One thing that's amazing me is how few spell slots you get at higher levels. It makes choosing spell preps a real tactical quandary. I've never actually played a high level campaign (never cast a 7th level spell in 40 years) so analyzing those spells and balancing the prep list in the context of how few you get is a real bear.

I generally avoid Warcaster on Wizards. Bladesinger in particular doesn't use a shield so he has a free hand. The AoO BB is nice and all but I'd rather take mobile and disengage than stay in melee.
BS is ASI hungry only if you decide to increase your DEX, which I think is a bad idea overall. Other than that he needs pretty much the same feats as any other wizard, namely INT ASIs, Alert and some combination of res:con, lucky or mobile (if you want to make use of BB). For T4 play grabbing metamagic adept for extend is a good idea but this can literally be done at lvl 19.

As for high level play, I haven't played with these spells in a normal game in 5e, it's mostly white room analysis/one shots that don't go very far, which is sad because most games start with the intention of reaching these levels, but life gets in the way. I have played T4 in 3.5 multiple times and there are a lot of videogames that you can test a few of the high level ideas (although you can't do the crazy things that are possible in pnp). I hope that eventually I will test all of my theorycrafting in an actual game ^^

[MaxWilson]

Excuse me for digressing, but i've sort of been scratching my head on how you find so much value in mounts (suggesting phantom steed for magical secret etc) , and i am just gonna take this opportunity to ask you. This quote makes me think that you might be getting the rules wrong. Are you aware that even if you and your mount share initiative, you do in fact operate on separate turns, so you can't split up the mounts move in the same way you can split up your own move when on foot? Here's a rules reference if you need it:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sageadvice.eu/2018/03/14/rider-on-controlled-mount-wants-to-attack-mid-move-do-rider-and-mount-share-one-turn/amp/

Note: Crawford's take is unsupported by the PHB. Notice how he doesn't quote PHB support for anything in his tweets. Note further that there are excellent reasons why Crawford's tweets are not considered official rules sources even by AL or Sage Advice.

On the other hand, PHB rules for controlled mounts strongly imply that the mount acts on the rider's turn. Rules ref:

Controlling a Mount
While you're mounted, you have two options. You can either control the mount or allow it to act independently. Intelligent creatures, such as dragons, act independently.
You can control a mount only if it has been trained to accept a rider. Domesticated horses, donkeys, and similar creatures are assumed to have such training. The initiative of a controlled mount changes to match yours when you mount it. It moves as you direct it, and it has only three action options: Dash, Disengage, and Dodge. A controlled mount can move and act even on the turn that you mount it.

Emphasis mine. "Even" implies "also in other cases," which in this context implies that "initiative... changes to match yours" indeed implies that your turn and its turn take place concurrently.

Obviously a DM is free to follow Crawford's opinion if they want to, but I just wanted to highlight the actual rules instead of Twitter.

[Dork_Forge]

Note: Crawford's take is unsupported by the PHB. Notice how he doesn't quote PHB support for anything in his tweets. Note further that there are excellent reasons why Crawford's tweets are not considered official rules sources even by AL or Sage Advice.

On the other hand, PHB rules for controlled mounts strongly imply that the mount acts on the rider's turn. Rules ref:

Controlling a Mount
While you're mounted, you have two options. You can either control the mount or allow it to act independently. Intelligent creatures, such as dragons, act independently.
You can control a mount only if it has been trained to accept a rider. Domesticated horses, donkeys, and similar creatures are assumed to have such training. The initiative of a controlled mount changes to match yours when you mount it. It moves as you direct it, and it has only three action options: Dash, Disengage, and Dodge. A controlled mount can move and act even on the turn that you mount it.

Emphasis mine. "Even" implies "also in other cases," which in this context implies that "initiative... changes to match yours" indeed implies that your turn and its turn take place concurrently.

Obviously a DM is free to follow Crawford's opinion if they want to, but I just wanted to highlight the actual rules instead of Twitter.

But that doesn't supercede the tie break rule for initiative where higher Dex goes first does it? Changing initiative doesn't mean that the turns happen at the same time (as in they are the same turn basically) and nothing in the mounted rules superceses the general initiative rules, imo the mounted rules should have just given you the speed of whatever you're mounted on.

[Ir0ns0ul]

Hey Bilbron, nice video.

I have played a Bladesinger recently, but unfortunately the campaign suddenly ended by level 5. I was playing as bold melee frontliner, but actually positing myself tactically between our Paladin and Barbarian. It was before Tasha’s and I never managed to get extra attack anyways, so I focused in a mix of control and melee support spells like classics Sleep, Tasha’s Hideous Laugher, Shield, Absorb Elements, PFE&G, Blur, Misty Step, Hold Person, Web and etc. My bread and butter, however, was always Shadow Blade + Booming Blade.

Key learnings:

- As a Bladesinger, you’ll have a really good AC. Because of that, Mirror Image sounds like a waste even being considered a defensive table stake for any Wizard. Blur (and PFE&G) was much more effective.

- Haste is awesome and I have actually chosen this spell by level 5, but upcasted Shadow Blade showed to be more powerful thanks to the advantage in Dim light, who was something common in my campaign.

- Since I was commonly in the fray, my Concentration was constantly tested. I took Res CON by level 4 (rolled stats and I had DEX 18, INT 16, CON 15). I know usually boost INT is the way to go, but DEX was my priority.

Keep it up the good work.

[MaxWilson]

But that doesn't supercede the tie break rule for initiative where higher Dex goes first does it? Changing initiative doesn't mean that the turns happen at the same time (as in they are the same turn basically) and nothing in the mounted rules superceses the general initiative rules, imo the mounted rules should have just given you the speed of whatever you're mounted on.

I think the mounted combat rules are more specific than the general rules on tie-breaking (IIRC the rule is "player characters go first when there's a tie"). They explicitly state that you and your mount act on the same turn sometimes, and strongly imply that you act on the same turn always.

I agree that the mounted combat rules are messed up in ways that have nothing to do with initiative per se. Mounted combat action economy is too good, makes it too easy to kite. Your suggestion of just making it give you the speed of whatever you're mounted on is nice and elegant, would fix some of the problem although independent mounts would still be an exploitable corner case.

[thinks] Yeah, your rule for controlled mounts would have been better than the PHB rule.

[Asisreo1]

But that doesn't supercede the tie break rule for initiative where higher Dex goes first does it? Changing initiative doesn't mean that the turns happen at the same time (as in they are the same turn basically) and nothing in the mounted rules superceses the general initiative rules, imo the mounted rules should have just given you the speed of whatever you're mounted on.
There is no such rule in the PHB nor DMG. If a tie occurs, the players choose amongst themselves or the DM decides. If there's no more favorable outcome, then the DM can have both participants roll a d20 and the highest one goes first (no dex is added to this roll).

[Dork_Forge]

I think the mounted combat rules are more specific than the general rules on tie-breaking (IIRC the rule is "player characters go first when there's a tie"). They explicitly state that you and your mount act on the same turn sometimes, and strongly imply that you act on the same turn always.

I agree that the mounted combat rules are messed up in ways that have nothing to do with initiative per se. Mounted combat action economy is too good, makes it too easy to kite. Your suggestion of just making it give you the speed of whatever you're mounted on is nice and elegant, would fix some of the problem although independent mounts would still be an exploitable corner case.

[thinks] Yeah, your rule for controlled mounts would have been better than the PHB rule.

As Asisreo pointed out I was remembering a particularly ingrained table rule (though one that does wonders for speeding up combat between indecisive players).

Mounted combat is one of the areas of the game that definitely could have done with more depth and clarity, especially as it's a niche and trope unto itself.

I'm glad you like the rule, I've tried it a couple times and it typically makes it less of a headache for all involved.



There is no such rule in the PHB nor DMG. If a tie occurs, the players choose amongst themselves or the DM decides. If there's no more favorable outcome, then the DM can have both participants roll a d20 and the highest one goes first (no dex is added to this roll).

Well that is one deeply ingrained table rule, thanks for the clarification!

[Bilbron]

I have seen a take on bladesinger (a little dated but still relevant) that weapon combat is what bladesinger does less as the wizards goes up in tier. At tier 1 and tier 2, the bladesinger does pretty well with weapons and importantly doesn't have many spells to sling as constantly so bladesong and weapons is the primary with spells as "big guns" (swing/end this combat). At tier 3 and higher spells are more available and more powerful, and bladesong is still useful for boosting concentration with weapon combat being for emergency purposes, or rather when a wizard would normally be throwing cantrips.

In this view, bladesinger isn't that ASI hungry, 16 dex will get you to tier 3 just fine, and int is still your primary. So if you have something like dex 16 con 14 int 16 and plan to bring int to 20 weapons will be about as effective as they are normally until T3 where spells will be taking over anyway, and 16 dex will still allow for surprisingly effective weapon attacks.

In short, the weapon as a early level option very effective and late still useful in emergencies.

This is all assuming that the bladesinger is going to wizard 20.

Yes, this is the perspective I'm bringing into this subdomain. May I ask why it's "dated"? This implies that it was discovered to be suboptimal relative to a better approach.


Excuse me for digressing, but i've sort of been scratching my head on how you find so much value in mounts (suggesting phantom steed for magical secret etc) , and i am just gonna take this opportunity to ask you. This quote makes me think that you might be getting the rules wrong. Are you aware that even if you and your mount share initiative, you do in fact operate on separate turns, so you can't split up the mounts move in the same way you can split up your own move when on foot? Here's a rules reference if you need it:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sageadvice.eu/2018/03/14/rider-on-controlled-mount-wants-to-attack-mid-move-do-rider-and-mount-share-one-turn/amp/
Wow, I was indeed getting that wrong, many thanks for the correction. Very good to know. I see there's some contention to that perspective so I'm glad to hear it's somewhat ambiguous. I'll bring it up with my DM to see how he wants to handle it.

I'll add that I liked Fey Touched before, but now I REALLY like Fey Touched after trying to build around the insanely few slots one gets at high levels (seriously, it's EYE-POPPINGLY few!). The one or two prep slots that it opens up are super valuable as you level.

[Witty Username]

Yes, this is the perspective I'm bringing into this subdomain. May I ask why it's "dated"? This implies that it was discovered to be suboptimal relative to a better approach.

Oh right context. The analysis I saw was for bladesinger in SCAG, before Tasha's came out. The analysis is still mostly applicable but changes may effect some of the detail work.

I dug up the original document (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1O6vBhvie18hFDmnom5lMv3zTj1nYUkvC8UxH0ngZWXQ/edit) , it looks like the owner made some changes since Tasha's came out so my qualifier may have been addressed.

[Hael]

The new bladesinger is in a very different place than the previous incarnation. The original incarnation was one of the better tier 1 wizards in the game (up there with the Diviner or Chronurgist and maybe a few others). Having that ac boost was a huge deal for survivability. However, the proficiency bonus nerf has really put it in a pretty awkward place. In practice you are mostly keeping those bladesongs for emergencies rather than every combat sort of deal. All of a sudden, it falls down several lvls for tier1 play. Keep in mind after Tasha, many optimized wizards will be mountain dwarves, wearing medium armor, which you won't be wearing, so assuming a standard short rest distribution of fights you might be in a position where you have a few fights with several ac less than other wizards and then a fight where you have something like a +1ac over your competitors (again it depends on stat rolls). Not good!

This of course changes a lot in tier 2, and I would say the new bladesinger is a solid tier 2 wizard. Maybe not S tier like the Chronurgist, but still very strong and moreover you can Gish very well here. I would say that continues to hold true well into tier 3, but probably at some point in late tier 3, you will stop wanting to go into melee range b/c it ceases to make sense. Having played the old bladesinger into tier 3, the incentive to melee becomes very low when you can sit back and cast forcecage instead. When a single grapple against your strength, breaks your concentration and you end up on your butt in a world of hurt.

So at that point you are a very standard feeling wizard in the backline with something like +3 ac relative to your peers, a little more movement speed and the ability to do a good bit of occasional damage if something gets up in your face. So that's good, but obviously very different than the world altering endgame abilities of the Illusionists and things like that.

[Bilbron]

The new bladesinger is in a very different place than the previous incarnation. The original incarnation was one of the better tier 1 wizards in the game (up there with the Diviner or Chronurgist and maybe a few others). Having that ac boost was a huge deal for survivability. However, the proficiency bonus nerf has really put it in a pretty awkward place. In practice you are mostly keeping those bladesongs for emergencies rather than every combat sort of deal. All of a sudden, it falls down several lvls for tier1 play. Keep in mind after Tasha, many optimized wizards will be mountain dwarves, wearing medium armor, which you won't be wearing, so assuming a standard short rest distribution of fights you might be in a position where you have a few fights with several ac less than other wizards and then a fight where you have something like a +1ac over your competitors (again it depends on stat rolls). Not good!

This of course changes a lot in tier 2, and I would say the new bladesinger is a solid tier 2 wizard. Maybe not S tier like the Chronurgist, but still very strong and moreover you can Gish very well here. I would say that continues to hold true well into tier 3, but probably at some point in late tier 3, you will stop wanting to go into melee range b/c it ceases to make sense. Having played the old bladesinger into tier 3, the incentive to melee becomes very low when you can sit back and cast forcecage instead. When a single grapple against your strength, breaks your concentration and you end up on your butt in a world of hurt.

So at that point you are a very standard feeling wizard in the backline with something like +3 ac relative to your peers, a little more movement speed and the ability to do a good bit of occasional damage if something gets up in your face. So that's good, but obviously very different than the world altering endgame abilities of the Illusionists and things like that.
Yeah, the more I think about it, the more it seems like Bladesong has to be situational so you probably have to have a ranged weapon and play from the back sometimes. Entering the fray I guess would have to be a kind of dramatic thing. Or dip for Armor and only switch to Bladesong at like level 6 or something. Blah.

It's tough to optimize. Lots of info out there to sift through, lots of mechanics to think about. May take a bit longer than I thought.

[MaxWilson]

Yeah, the more I think about it, the more it seems like Bladesong has to be situational so you probably have to have a ranged weapon and play from the back sometimes. Entering the fray I guess would have to be a kind of dramatic thing.

I believe the Tasha's Bladesinger would work very well post-level 8 with cantrips (especially Agonizing Repelling Eldritch Blast), Gunner feat, and a net. Throw the net, gain advantage on your Eldritch Blasts, blast the enemy 10' to 40' away. No Bladesong needed most of the time.

2 levels is a heavy price to pay of course, plus there's MADness to consider.

I'm currently planning on keeping the SCAG Bladesinger as is.

[Zaile]

Good video.

On the class, I really like the new version. Bladesinger's Extra Attack is now a better version of Eldritch Knight's War Magic a level earlier!

I was going to make a Psylocke build for a game soon, but the Soulknife is just kinda -- meh. Instead I plan to go BS and use Shadow Blade. Will probably go Champion 3 or Assassin for better crits or Psi Warrior for more themetic feel. Elven Accuracy for triple advantage in dim light or lower. Twilight cleric is also a tempting MC for that sweet 300' darkvison.

Maybe not in power, but in versatility and maneuverability it is definitely a powerful subclass.

Also pairs really well with the spell feats in the book as it can get spells for both caster and melee, like Hunter's Mark.

[bendking]

To me, the biggest strength of the Bladesinger is covering one of the Wizard's biggest drawbacks - lack of reliable single target damage.
Usually, this role is best filled by martial, but the Bladesinger allows you to compete for top tier DPR in a full-caster chassis, and the freakin' wizard chassis no less.

For the sake of comparison, at level 6, vs AC 15, a Bladesinger with 16 DEX gets up to a DPR of 24/39 with a 3rd level Shadow Blade, while a Samurai Archer has a DPR of 18/34 with no casting to speak of. At level 11, 16 DEX, and a 5th level Shadow Blade, this becomes 35/55 vs 35/56.
The fact that this Wizard subclass lets you compete with optimized martial builds DPR-wise, have potentially higher AC, access to the Shield spell, and still get full-casting is ludicrous.

When facing enemies with Magic Resistance and even Legendary Resistance, I would rather have no Wizard subclass other than the Bladesinger.

[Gignere]

To me, the biggest strength of the Bladesinger is covering one of the Wizard's biggest drawbacks - lack of reliable single target damage.
Usually, this role is best filled by martial, but the Bladesinger allows you to compete for top tier DPR in a full-caster chassis, and the freakin' wizard chassis no less.

For the sake of comparison, at level 6, vs AC 15, a Bladesinger with 16 DEX gets up to a DPR of 24/39 with a 3rd level Shadow Blade, while a Samurai Archer has a DPR of 18/34 with no casting to speak of. At level 11, 16 DEX, and a 5th level Shadow Blade, this becomes 35/55 vs 35/56.
The fact that this Wizard subclass lets you compete with optimized martial builds DPR-wise, have potentially higher AC, access to the Shield spell, and still get full-casting is ludicrous.

When facing enemies with Magic Resistance and even Legendary Resistance, I would rather have no Wizard subclass other than the Bladesinger.

It’s really nova DPR though not sustainable because you don’t have that many max level spell slots.

[stoutstien]

It’s really nova DPR though not sustainable because you don’t have that many max level spell slots.

Not even good nova damage due to taking 2 turns to to come online and relying on lighting conditions.

[Gignere]

Not even good nova damage due to taking 2 turns to to come online and relying on lighting conditions.

It comes online in first round assuming you don’t Bladesong because Shadowblade is bonus action cast. However it is nova because you can do it what two times maybe three times assuming you cast nothing but Shadowblade with your highest slots.

[stoutstien]

It comes online in first round assuming you don’t Bladesong because Shadowblade is bonus action cast. However it is nova because you can do it what two times maybe three times assuming you cast nothing but Shadowblade with your highest slots.

So the wizard is casting SB and getting close enough to use it, relying on the hope they can eliminate the threat before they can retaliate?

[Gignere]

So the wizard is casting SB and getting close enough to use it, relying on the hope they can eliminate the threat before they can retaliate?

Assuming you need to kill it now, it can be the right strategy.

[stoutstien]

Assuming you need to kill it now, it can be the right strategy.

Sure? That's like saying occasionally taking the Dodge action is the right strategy. it's hard to imagine a competent wizard being in a situation where upcasting Shadow blade is their best option if attempting to eliminate a threat as quickly as possible is the goal.

[bendking]

It’s really nova DPR though not sustainable because you don’t have that many max level spell slots.
You don't have to use a 5th level slot though, you still have plenty of 2nd, 3rd and 4th level slots. I just showed that if you want to you can reach top tier DPR on a freakin' full-caster, which is nuts.
Besides, if you're fighting an enemy with Legendary Resistance it's the time to nova anyway.

[Gignere]

You don't have to use a 5th level slot though, you still have plenty of 2nd, 3rd and 4th level slots. I just showed that if you want to you can reach top tier DPR on a freakin' full-caster, which is nuts.
Besides, if you're fighting an enemy with Legendary Resistance it's the time to nova anyway.

But the DPR will be less if you use the lower spell slots and wizards can reach top level DPR with the correct spells and minionmancy. With enough skeletons, tiny servants and animate objects your DPR will be very competitive too.

[bendking]

But the DPR will be less if you use the lower spell slots and wizards can reach top level DPR with the correct spells and minionmancy. With enough skeletons, tiny servants and animate objects your DPR will be very competitive too.

Animate Dead, Tiny Servant, and Animate Objects are mutually exclusive unless you only intend on giving orders to one of them and leave the rest just standing there (or in Animate Dead/Object's case, "defend itself against Hostile creatures" which is open to interpretation).
This means we only need to compare the DPR of one of them to the same level Shadow Blade on a Bladesinger, which one do you prefer?

Just for the sake of discussion:
Animate Objects DPR (Tiny Objects): 47/61
Bladesinger 5th-level Shadow Blade DPR: 35/55

However, the big caveat about Animate Objects is that it is highly susceptible to AoE. A single Fireball can easily wipe out half of the tiny objects and thus half its DPR.

[Gtdead]

Animate Dead, Tiny Servant and Animate Objects are mutually exclusive unless you only intend on giving orders to one of them.
This means we only need to compare the DPR of one of them to the same level Shadow Blade on a Bladesinger, which one do you prefer?

Technically you can cheat the action economy here due to the concept of "General Command". For example you can order the skeletons to always attack the target of your other spells, or the most recently attacked enemy, or any hostile they see in X feet prioritizing from their left to their right. That way you have the bonus action free to use animate objects and tiny servants and again you can issue general commands.

[Witty Username]

Animate Dead, Tiny Servant, and Animate Objects are mutually exclusive unless you only intend on giving orders to one of them and leave the rest just standing there (or in Animate Dead/Object's case, "defend itself against Hostile creatures" which is open to interpretation).
This means we only need to compare the DPR of one of them to the same level Shadow Blade on a Bladesinger, which one do you prefer?

Just for the sake of discussion:
Animate Objects DPR (Tiny Objects): 47/61
Bladesinger 5th-level Shadow Blade DPR: 35/55

However, the big caveat about Animate Objects is that it is highly susceptible to AoE. A single Fireball can easily wipe out half of the tiny objects and thus half its DPR.

Does animate objects DPR include the damage from attack actions that the blade singer is taking? Given that it is a bonus action to command so you can still take actions to attack.

[bendking]

Technically you can cheat the action economy here due to the concept of "General Command". For example you can order the skeletons to always attack the target of your other spells, or the most recently attacked enemy, or any hostile they see in X feet prioritizing from their left to their right. That way you have the bonus action free to use animate objects and tiny servants and again you can issue general commands.

Even if your DM would allow that, that's something the Bladesinger with Shadowblade can also do, so it doesn't really change the discussion here. Thanks for the info, though.


Does animate objects DPR include the damage from attack actions that the blade singer is taking? Given that it is a bonus action to command so you can still take actions to attack.

It actually does not, thank you for reminding me!
However, in my mind, this comparison is basically between a Bladesinger and any other Wizard trying to do single-target damage, not the Bladesinger with Shadowblade versus a Bladesinger with Animate Objects, though that would also be interesting.
Thus, it would be correct to add Firebolt DPR to the Animate Objects comparison, because in both examples the only resource being used is a 5th level spell. Firebolt DPR at level 11 is 13/18 (vs AC 15, as all DPR numbers so far).
If you're curious though, Bladesinger DPR with a Rapier is 16/25.

[Gignere]

Even if your DM would allow that, that's something the Bladesinger with Shadowblade can also do, so it doesn't really change the discussion here. Thanks for the info, though.



It actually does not, thank you for reminding me!
However, in my mind, this comparison is basically between a Bladesinger and any other Wizard trying to do single-target damage, not the Bladesinger with Shadowblade versus a Bladesinger with Animate Objects, though that would also be interesting.
Thus, it would be correct to add Firebolt DPR to the Animate Objects comparison, because in both examples the only resource being used is a 5th level spell. Firebolt DPR at level 11 is 13/18 (vs AC 15, as all DPR numbers so far).
If you're curious though, Bladesinger DPR with a Rapier is 16/25.

Bladesinger with animate objects should do better than that because they can sub one of the attacks for a cantrip. The downside is that they are more at risk of losing concentration as the other wizards will likely be nowhere near where the action is.

However, my point was to demonstrate that having good nova DPR is not unique to Bladesinger, all wizards have good nova DPR with the correct spell selection.

[bendking]

Bladesinger with animate objects should do better than that because they can sub one of the attacks for a cantrip. The downside is that they are more at risk of losing concentration as the other wizards will likely be nowhere near where the action is.

However, my point was to demonstrate that having good nova DPR is not unique to Bladesinger, all wizards have good nova DPR with the correct spell selection.

The damage I've calculated was with subbing one of the attacks with Booming Blade, but without Animate Objects DPR.

To recap:
Bladesinger 5th-level Shadow Blade DPR: 35/55
Bladesinger Animate Objects DPR: 16/25 + 47/61 = 63/86
Any Wizard Animate Objects DPR: 13/18 + 47/61 = 60/79

I concede that all wizards have good nova DPR with Animate Objects (which is a somewhat broken spell with tiny objects, but that is beside the point), but I still think Bladesinger's does it better with upcasted Shadow Blade since Animate Objects is extremely susceptible to AoE damage.
However, I admit it is not as clear cut as I had originally thought, because I did not consider how high the DPR of Animate Objects is (since I usually don't allow minionmancy spells at my table).

[Gtdead]

Even if your DM would allow that, that's something the Bladesinger with Shadowblade can also do, so it doesn't really change the discussion here. Thanks for the info, though.


It's part of the spell description so most DMs are inclined to allow it if they are ok with some limited minionmancy. I generally dislike having to roll many times but if you noticed, my examples were about focus firing, which is easily resolved with electronic dice. Of course stacking animate dead, animate objects and tiny servants can become tedious. I kind of want to move away from animate objects entirely with the new Tasha's summon spells but it's such a strong spell..

[Asisreo1]

It's part of the spell description so most DMs are inclined to allow it if they are ok with some limited minionmancy. I generally dislike having to roll many times but if you noticed, my examples were about focus firing, which is easily resolved with electronic dice. Of course stacking animate dead, animate objects and tiny servants can become tedious. I kind of want to move away from animate objects entirely with the new Tasha's summon spells but it's such a strong spell..
If summon spells are too cumbersome because of all the rolls, you can ask your DM to speed them up by using the Handling Mobs rule in the DMG on page 250.

You certainly lose some nuance in the attacks, but its much quicker and easier without having to choose not to use a spell you like just for the sake of speed.

[bendking]

It's part of the spell description so most DMs are inclined to allow it if they are ok with some limited minionmancy. I generally dislike having to roll many times but if you noticed, my examples were about focus firing, which is easily resolved with electronic dice. Of course stacking animate dead, animate objects and tiny servants can become tedious.

I understand. I personally am not a fan of minionmancy in 5e and find it to be overtuned in a lot of cases, so I prefer to keep it out of my games.


I kind of want to move away from animate objects entirely with the new Tasha's summon spells but it's such a strong spell..

It's ridiculously strong, especially with stuff like Crusader's Mantle for extra cheese. The PHB summoning spells are all quite powerful, but Animate Objects stands as one of the most ludicrous. But of course, if your DM knows you're going to use it and wants to counter you, all he needs is a single spell-caster with Fireball/Cone of Cold to rain on your parade, which is a weakness that Summon Greater Demon or Tasha's summoning spells don't have.

[Asisreo1]

It's ridiculously strong, especially with stuff like Crusader's Mantle for extra cheese. The PHB summoning spells are all quite powerful, but Animate Objects stands as one of the most ludicrous. But of course, if your DM knows you're going to use it and wants to counter you, all he needs is a single spell-caster with Fireball/Cone of Cold to rain on your parade, which is a weakness that Summon Greater Demon or Tasha's summoning spells don't have.
If you're a DM and you happen to have trouble with Animate Objects, there's a few things you should be aware of to help combat.

Unlike other minionmancy spells, the objects don't get to go immediately once they're summoned. They aren't separated in initiative, either. They all go at the exact same time with one initiative roll. Its entirely possible for a creature to end the caster's concentration before the objects can even act.

Don't forget, when your caster gets Animate Objects, they're big boys now. They can handle much greater than Guard Captains. In fact, Archmages are only a Hard encounter against 9th level characters.

You're not going to push them if you don't actually provide them a challenge. They can even start to handle Adult Dragons as a barely deadly encounter. They're not My Little Players anymore, don't coddle them at these levels.

They also have the glaring weakness of having -4 wisdom saves and +0 con saves, which are very frequent saves. Getting hit with an effect that frightens nearby enemies on Wisdom can seriously mess with your creatures.

Finally, IIRC, Animate Objects don't do magical BPS. They themselves are magical but their attacks aren't fueled by magic. If they're facing a creature with BPS resistance or immunity, they'll have a hard time.

[Gignere]

Finally, IIRC, Animate Objects don't do magical BPS. They themselves are magical but their attacks aren't fueled by magic. If they're facing a creature with BPS resistance or immunity, they'll have a hard time.

Yeah that’s how I use to play it but I’m not sure anymore with recent clarification of what is considered magic damage. Essentially any damage done by spells are considered magical. If that’s the case animate objects would certainly qualify.

[Asisreo1]

Yeah that’s how I use to play it but I’m not sure anymore with recent clarification of what is considered magic damage. Essentially any damage done by spells are considered magical. If that’s the case animate objects would certainly qualify.
I don't want to deviate too far from the bladesinger discussion but I'll give my reasoning as to why I think Animate Object's attacks are not magical.

It can be up to DM adjudication but I think if you process it slowly, it becomes evident that Animate Objects attacks are nonmagical, and we'll use the Sage Advice Compendium's series of questions.

Is it a Magic Item? No. Clearly they're creatures.

Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that's mentioned in its description? Animate Objects is a spell, but the attacks they make are not spells and do not confer a spell's effect.

Is it a spell attack? No. It clarifies that it is a weapon attack.

Is it fueled by the use of a spell slot? By "it," it refers to the attack. The attack itself doesn't require a spell slot to activate. Its true that the attack couldn't happen without the spell slot, but thats only by proxy. Take, for example, a Druid polymorphed into a Giant Spider. If it restrains a target with the Web attack, would it be dispellable? I'm sure it can't be.

Does its description say its magical? No.

So I believe its a nonmagical attack brought about by magical entities. The 4th question has some swing to it but I hope it makes sense.

[Bilbron]

I don't want to deviate too far from the bladesinger discussion but I'll give my reasoning as to why I think Animate Object's attacks are not magical.

It can be up to DM adjudication but I think if you process it slowly, it becomes evident that Animate Objects attacks are nonmagical, and we'll use the Sage Advice Compendium's series of questions.

Is it a Magic Item? No. Clearly they're creatures.

Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that's mentioned in its description? Animate Objects is a spell, but the attacks they make are not spells and do not confer a spell's effect.

Is it a spell attack? No. It clarifies that it is a weapon attack.

Is it fueled by the use of a spell slot? By "it," it refers to the attack. The attack itself doesn't require a spell slot to activate. Its true that the attack couldn't happen without the spell slot, but thats only by proxy. Take, for example, a Druid polymorphed into a Giant Spider. If it restrains a target with the Web attack, would it be dispellable? I'm sure it can't be.

Does its description say its magical? No.

So I believe its a nonmagical attack brought about by magical entities. The 4th question has some swing to it but I hope it makes sense.They are definitely not magical attacks, or it would say so in their stat block, like with Pit Fiends and such.

I do make my Tiny Servants and AO from silver coins, so they at least do full damage to Lycanthropes and Devils.

[Gignere]

They are definitely not magical attacks, or it would say so in their stat block, like with Pit Fiends and such.

I do make my Tiny Servants and AO from silver coins, so they at least do full damage to Lycanthropes and Devils.

I like to carry different types of bolts and animate those, like adamantine bolts and silver bolts. Just to get around some resistance. One thing I wanted to try but never got the chance is what if you dipped the objects in poison?

[MaxWilson]

It's ridiculously strong, especially with stuff like Crusader's Mantle for extra cheese. The PHB summoning spells are all quite powerful, but Animate Objects stands as one of the most ludicrous. But of course, if your DM knows you're going to use it and wants to counter you, all he needs is a single spell-caster with Fireball/Cone of Cold to rain on your parade, which is a weakness that Summon Greater Demon or Tasha's summoning spells don't have.

Aside from the fact that Fireball won't necessarily kill an animated Tiny object, let's also highlight that Animate Objects can be used to animate Medium, Large or Huge objects as well, giving out a profile similar to one of the Tasha'a spells. You can even mix them: animate one 80 HP Huge object and two 25 HP Tiny ones. Cone of Cold can probably kill the Tiny ones but not the Huge one.