Booming Blade Rider Damage

[CMCC]

What percentage of the time does the BB rider come into play? The secondary damage.

Obviously there is no "right" answer unless we had access to every D&D 5e game ever played and could calculate based on that. But let's use logic and a decent understanding of the game to try and make an educated guess.

Treantmonk recently dropped his estimation from 50% to 25%, as an example.



_______________

We now have:
16.7% as a calculated estimation
10%
25%

[solidork]

Does "the enemy doesn't move because they don't want to take the rider damage" count as coming into play?

If not, unless you're doing something like Warcaster, Crusher, or disengaging away from them I'd say they take the actual damage a lot less than 25% of the time.

[strangebloke]

Really depends on monster tactics, which that huge recent thread got into.

Basically, I treat it as though the monster knows what will happen if they move, so they usually don't, unless they're really dumb, enraged, can't feel pain, or are just too tough for it to stop them. Non-thinking undead, owlbears, berserkers, etc. will take the damage, most intelligent beasts and humanoids won't unless they have a really good reason. There's also the case where the monster simply never gets its turn because it dies before it could have moved, or where the monster would be willing to take the damage but is happy munching on the guy who cast booming blade.

There's also the dissonant whisper strategy, which forces a proc. If you've never seen this combo in action, its truly something to behold. At 7th level or so you can do something like: EK casts booming blade and hits (1d8+6+1d8) --> EK gets BA attack from war magic (1d8+6) --> bard casts dissonant whispers (3d6) --> procs secondary BB damage (2d8)--> EK procs OA with warcaster, gets both instances of BB damage (1d8+6+3d8). Comes out to 9d8+3d6+18=69 damage. It's very... nice :smallcool: for only using a 1st level spell.

Overall? Ignoring the trick with fear effects I would say 10%. It's pretty rare in my campaigns. I imagine something like a swashbuckler with BB who's dodging in and casting it before running away would get way more procs on average, more like 30%

[heavyfuel]

Does "the enemy doesn't move because they don't want to take the rider damage" count as coming into play?

This is key. The same goes for "they use a suboptimal (ranged) attack instead of their more powerful melee attack".

If it does count, I estimate about 80% of the time (assuming you build around not just using BB and standing next to the enemy)

If only the actual damage counts, I agree with TM that it's closer to 25% of the time.


There's also the dissonant whisper strategy, which forces a proc.

Overall? Ignoring the trick with fear effects

BB requires the target to "willingly move". I don't think fear effects and DW counts as "willingly". They are being forced to do so because of an effect.

[ender241]

Does "the enemy doesn't move because they don't want to take the rider damage" count as coming into play?

If not, unless you're doing something like Warcaster, Crusher, or disengaging away from them I'd say they take the actual damage a lot less than 25% of the time.

To piggyback off that idea, I think the real number we should care about is: the percentage of time that the target either: takes rider damage OR doesn't move when they really want to. Because if the target has to change their strategy to something less optimal as a result, BB still did its job.

Determining either number is basically an impossible task though, given that it will vary wildly by situation/monster/DM.

[da newt]

I believe RAW forced movement is only if some outside force moves the creature (a shove, repelling blast, thunder-wave, etc)- if the creature uses it's motion to move (fear, DW, etc) it triggers the damage rider.

[strangebloke]

BB requires the target to "willingly move". I don't think fear effects and DW counts as "willingly". They are being forced to do so because of an effect.

Sage advice agrees with you, but practically speaking this is sort of incoherent. Does BB read your mind to know that your wits have been compromised by a magical fear effect? The booming energy makes more sense as triggering if you move yourself (eg move your own arms and legs) but not if someone grapples you. Bad ruling IMO, though consistent with JC's longstanding hatred of combos.

Personally, I rule that grapples and shoves and repelling blast work too, its sort of silly they don't (though by my rules a grappler would get hit by the secondary effect too)

[Nefariis]

BB requires the target to "willingly move". I don't think fear effects and DW counts as "willingly". They are being forced to do so because of an effect.

That's how I always read it as well.

Also, the Mobile feat is another great way to set yourself up for extra damage - but even with the extra damage aside, taking a bad guy out of combat for a whole round because he "doesn't want to move", is definitely worth something. You can just keep running out, tag him, run back, and he is essentially immobilized freeing up the rest of your party. Even if you never process the movement damage once, this could still be a legitimate strategy.

[solidork]

Just out of curiosity, I opened up the Roll20 logs for my EK/Warlock and in what was recorded I hit with BB 36 (out of 40) times and triggered the rider damage 6 times. I mostly only used BB if I was in a situation where I thought the rider was going to come into play, preferring GFB otherwise since I was a Celestial Warlock. I'm not sure how long the logs go back, but it's def not all 4 years I played him.

[Keravath]

In my experience, very rarely, unless there is some reason the monster has to move to engage opponents. If they can just stand there and attack then they will quite often just choose not to move. Other than that, I've only seen it come into play when the creature decides it is worth taking the damage to attack a different target or the character using booming blade has some tactic that encourages the creature to move.

e.g.

A character with the telekinetic feat can use it to push the creature away after hitting it with booming blade - the creature then has to take the booming blade damage if they move back into range.

A character with the mobile feat can move in, attack and move away again. If the opponent wants to follow or has to move to attack another target then they take the damage. (A swashbuckler rogue could do the same).

Hitting a creature with booming blade when they are next to an environment hazard like create bonfire or flaming sphere - they take damage whether they move or not so they may choose to move.

However, most of the times it would get applied depends on the attacker moving away and the creature affected by the booming blade following.

[solidork]

Sage advice agrees with you, but practically speaking this is sort of incoherent. Does BB read your mind to know that your wits have been compromised by a magical fear effect? The booming energy makes more sense as triggering if you move yourself (eg move your own arms and legs) but not if someone grapples you. Bad ruling IMO, though consistent with JC's longstanding hatred of combos.

Personally, I rule that grapples and shoves and repelling blast work too, its sort of silly they don't (though by my rules a grappler would get hit by the secondary effect too)

BB is one of the hardest spells for me to reconcile/visualize what is actually happening and it's always annoyed me because of that. Makes enough sense as an abstract piece of game rules, zero sense as something that is a part of the world for the reasons you've pointed out.

[CMCC]

Sage advice agrees with you, but practically speaking this is sort of incoherent. Does BB read your mind to know that your wits have been compromised by a magical fear effect? The booming energy makes more sense as triggering if you move yourself (eg move your own arms and legs) but not if someone grapples you. Bad ruling IMO, though consistent with JC's longstanding hatred of combos.

Personally, I rule that grapples and shoves and repelling blast work too, its sort of silly they don't (though by my rules a grappler would get hit by the secondary effect too)

In that case the entire “willing” movement piece makes zero sense and forced movement should trigger the rider.

I do agree that’s it a bad ruling, but RAW it’s the case.

On the point of monster tactics. If a monster is encased in energy and knows it will take damage, yet has no one to attack, would it actually just sit still waiting to get picked off. It would take the minor damage to try and engage almost all the time.

[CMCC]

BB is one of the hardest spells for me to reconcile/visualize what is actually happening and it's always annoyed me because of that. Makes enough sense as an abstract piece of game rules, zero sense as something that is a part of the world for the reasons you've pointed out.

And this haha. “Encased in visible energy.. if they move they take damage” makes so much more sense.

[strangebloke]

And this haha. “Encased in visible energy.. if they move they take damage” makes so much more sense.

The other approach I used was to rename it "arcane judgement" and have it apply psychic chains to the target that would snap if the target willingly moved, dealing psychic damage. Makes a lot more sense.

[heavyfuel]

Sage advice agrees with you, but practically speaking this is sort of incoherent. Does BB read your mind to know that your wits have been compromised by a magical fear effect?

Of course it reads your mind, after all, "it's magic"™ :smalltongue:

While I agree that it makes little sense from a "realism" perspective, I think I'd rule 0 a lower damage dice if the players started using this tactic on the regular, like dropping it to d6 or d4 just to sort of balance it out.


BB is one of the hardest spells for me to reconcile/visualize what is actually happening and it's always annoyed me because of that. Makes enough sense as an abstract piece of game rules, zero sense as something that is a part of the world for the reasons you've pointed out.

Seconded (fourthed?). It's a pretty weird spell with lots of weird cases where it logically should apply, but game mechanics disallow. I like strangebloke's idea of a chain the deals damage if broken by any reason (including teleports, forced movement, and whatnot). It definitely deserves a low damage dice though.

Maybe d4 and a small movement speed penalty after breaking it?

[strangebloke]

Of course it reads your mind, after all, "it's magic"™ :smalltongue:

While I agree that it makes little sense from a "realism" perspective, I think I'd rule 0 a lower damage dice if the players started using this tactic on the regular, like dropping it to d6 just to sort of balance it out.

Oh I disagree. Two person combos like that should be strong. Teamwork should be rewarded, and this one has a few caveats to set up anyway. You have to get into melee, use booming blade, then have dissonant whispers ready before the enemy goes... and even then its just damage, and not actually that much considering this uses up two actions and a reaction.

[heavyfuel]

Oh I disagree. Two person combos like that should be strong.

But one person can pull off the combo by themself. Crusher, Telekinectic, EK/Bladesingers with Shove just off the top of my head. There are probably more ways

(unless you only allow for Dissonant Whispers and Repelling Blast, which would be even weirder than the strict-RAW)

[Unoriginal]

What percentage of the time does the BB rider come into play? The secondary damage.

Obviously there is no "right" answer unless we had access to every D&D 5e game ever played and could calculate based on that. But let's use logic and a decent understanding of the game to try and make an educated guess.

It's a question of context

A NPC will trigger the damage if:

1) they cannot identify the visible energy around them that feels like the attack that just damaged them as dangerous.

2) they do not care about taking damage due to X reason (ex: they're berserking).

3) they have incentives that, given their personalities and tactical considerations, make them willing to get hurt in order to follow said incentives.




Treantmonk recently dropped his estimation from 50% to 25%, as an example.

For fairness's sake, I'll ask: what is his reasoning for either of those %?


If a monster is encased in energy and knows it will take damage, yet has no one to attack, would it actually just sit still waiting to get picked off.

Depends hugely of the context:

- Can the PCs threat the NPC at the range they are in a way that seems more dangerous than getting damaged by the booming barrier?

- Are the PCs trying to kill the NPC during the round they're encased in the energy and unable to attack the PCs, or are they busy handling someone/something else?

- Is the NPC the kind to accept waiting while in a combat situation?

ETC.


It would take the minor damage to try and engage almost all the time.

I disagree with this assessment. For starter, for a lot of creatures it is not "minor damage", especially if they got hurt by the melee attack part of the spell (or the rest of the PCs' actions) first.

[strangebloke]

But one person can pull off the combo by themself. Crusher, Telekinectic, EK/Bladesingers with Shove just off the top of my head. There are probably more ways

(unless you only allow for Dissonant Whispers and Repelling Blast, which would be even weirder than the strict-RAW)

I've done it every way to do it, one of my consistent players takes it every campaign. But imo Dissonant Whispers makes better sense than strict-RAW since you can at least say that it's a magical tripwire that looks at the enemy's, uh... self-powered movement. Seems more reasonable than peaking into their brain, at least to me.

[CMCC]

It's a question of context

A NPC will trigger the damage if:

1) they cannot identify the visible energy around them that feels like the attack that just damaged them as dangerous.

2) they do not care about taking damage due to X reason (ex: they're berserking).

3) they have incentives that, given their personalities and tactical considerations, make them willing to get hurt in order to follow said incentives.



Assume averages. What happens more often in games with decently adequate players?


For fairness's sake, I'll ask: what is his reasoning for either of those %?
His personal experience + estimation.

[CMCC]

Just out of curiosity, I opened up the Roll20 logs for my EK/Warlock and in what was recorded I hit with BB 36 (out of 40) times and triggered the rider damage 6 times. I mostly only used BB if I was in a situation where I thought the rider was going to come into play, preferring GFB otherwise since I was a Celestial Warlock. I'm not sure how long the logs go back, but it's def not all 4 years I played him.

Wow, that's shockingly low, but this is awesome info. What makes it particularly shocking to me is that you only used it in certain situations rather than spamming it every attack.

[solidork]

Wow, that's shockingly low, but this is awesome info. What makes it particularly shocking to me is that you only used it in certain situations rather than spamming it every attack.

Well, my build included enough Celestial Warlock that I get +Cha to fire damage so I used GFB pretty often even on a single target. I was also not a dedicated melee build, there were over 520 Eldritch Blast attacks in the log.

I looked at the logs for my War Cleric, but the way I set up the macro it automatically rolled the rider damage along with the attack so I can't tell how often it triggered.

[LudicSavant]

What percentage of the time does the BB rider come into play? The secondary damage.

Obviously there is no "right" answer unless we had access to every D&D 5e game ever played and could calculate based on that. But let's use logic and a decent understanding of the game to try and make an educated guess.

Treantmonk recently dropped his estimation from 50% to 25%, as an example.



_______________

We now have:
16.7% as a calculated estimation
10%
25%

Happens about as often as PCs make decisions that make it happen (for example: being a Dodging Arcana Cleric with Spirit Guardian running and a sculpted hazard dropped on your head by allies).

[Unoriginal]

Assume averages. What happens more often in games with decently adequate players?

Once again, it isn't a question of players, it's a question of context.

Most NPCs will do what they perceive as the most beneficial option for their current circumstances, so it's entirely possible that a group of coordinated PCs dealing in majority with survival-desiring humanoids will manage to trigger the rider damage every time by making it so it's more dangerous for the humanoids to stay still than it is to run throug the booming energy barrier. That wouldn't be the case if those same PCs mostly have to deal with mind-controlled thralls whose survival doesn't matter to their puppet master, or bloodthirsty summoned demons who literal just pop back in their home plane should they lose in a slugfest.

Plus, as it's been pointed out, sometime people use Booming Blade because they want to make the target not move rather than wanting additional damage, so that's another factor to take into account.



His personal experience + estimation.

Given Treantmonk's previous work, I don't think that his estimations are relevant.


What makes it particularly shocking to me is that you only used it in certain situations rather than spamming it every attack.

As a Celestial Warlock, Green Flame Blade packs significantly more of a punch, so using Booming Blade only in certain situations is something to be expected.



Overall I would say that in term of DPR calculation, Booming Blade's rider damage is more an anecdotic amount, as:

-There is a good chance the PC using it wants to make the target stay in place more than deal extra damage

-The target needs some kind of incentive to trigger the damage unless they are unable of identifying how crossing the barrier brimming with destructive energy is detrimental to them or of caring about this danger (which is relatively rare in 5e).

In an actual play situation it can happen much more than one would expect, but in term of average expectations, one more likely than not isn't using that cantrip for the rider damage's contribution to DPR.

[CMCC]

Happens about as often as PCs make decisions that make it happen (for example: being a Dodging Arcana Cleric with Spirit Guardian running and a sculpted hazard dropped on your head by allies).

Think of it this way: like chess, we have a database of pretty much every move ever made in 5e. So we know exactly how many times booming blade has been cast and triggered. What is that percentage of that rider happening? Obviously its a huge guess. but if you had to guess using personal experience, logic, common sense, internet ramblings as evidence?

[CMCC]

Once again, it isn't a question of players, it's a question of context.

Most NPCs will do what they perceive as the most beneficial option for their current circumstances, so it's entirely possible that a group of coordinated PCs dealing in majority with survival-desiring humanoids will manage to trigger the rider damage every time by making it so it's more dangerous for the humanoids to stay still than it is to run throug the booming energy barrier. That wouldn't be the case if those same PCs mostly have to deal with mind-controlled thralls whose survival doesn't matter to their puppet master, or bloodthirsty summoned demons who literal just pop back in their home plane should they lose in a slugfest.


You seem to be thinking in terms of results in specific situations. I'm not interested in that. I'm interested in the average rate of the rider triggering. This is an actual number that exists in the world, that we'll never know, because we aren't omnipotent beings. But I'm asking others to use their best estimates given their experiences.




Plus, as it's been pointed out, sometime people use Booming Blade because they want to make the target not move rather than wanting additional damage, so that's another factor to take into account.



This should be taken into account when evaluating the control factor of the spell. That's outside the scope of my question.




Given Treantmonk's previous work, I don't think that his estimations are relevant.


*thumbs up*



As a Celestial Warlock, Green Flame Blade packs significantly more of a punch, so using Booming Blade only in certain situations is something to be expected.

I'm guessing you misunderstood my point. You seem to think I was surprised that booming blade was used in specific situations. I said I was surprised at how low the success rate was given the selective use, which should "artificially" inflate those conversion/success rates.





In an actual play situation it can happen much more than one would expect, but in term of average expectations, one more likely than not isn't using that cantrip for the rider damage's contribution to DPR.
Then we're undervaluing the spell - especially in terms of DPR.




I looked at the logs for my War Cleric, but the way I set up the macro it automatically rolled the rider damage along with the attack so I can't tell how often it triggered.
Same

[LudicSavant]

Think of it this way: like chess, we have a database of pretty much every move ever made in 5e. So we know exactly how many times booming blade has been cast and triggered. What is that percentage of that rider happening? Obviously its a huge guess. but if you had to guess using personal experience, logic, common sense, internet ramblings as evidence?

It *really* depends.

Like, for example, some BB users virtually *only* use it on an OA, in which case it obviously happens a huge percentage of the time for them.

Some other BB users spam it, and they obviously will have a far lower percentage.

What I will say is that I wouldn’t expect it to trigger unless you/the party are creating some reason for the enemy to *want* to move. I don’t treat it as a blind chance that is hoped to occur. I treat it as a thing that is actively caused to occur.

[CMCC]

It *really* depends.

Like, for example, some BB users virtually *only* use it on an OA, in which case it obviously happens a huge percentage of the time for them.
Good point of clarity. We're not counting any OA uses. Main action only.




Some other BB users spam it, and they obviously will have a far lower percentage.
I assume the vast majority of D&D players use it this way.

[Unoriginal]

You seem to be thinking in terms of results in specific situations. I'm not interested in that. I'm interested in the average rate of the rider triggering. This is an actual number that exists in the world, that we'll never know, because we aren't omnipotent beings. But I'm asking others to use their best estimates given their experiences.

Thinking about the results in specific situations are how one makes an estimation, though.



This should be taken into account when evaluating the control factor of the spell. That's outside the scope of my question.

It isn't, though, that's what I'm trying to say.

I think we can agree that the "control" factor of the spell and the "additional damage" factor of the spell are mutually exclusive.

Therefore, if you use Booming Blade, there is a lot of cases where you don't want the additional damage to trigger.

So, in other word, the fact that you can use Booming Blade as a control spell (or, specifically that it end up being either a control spell or an additional damage spell, but not both during the same round) diminishes the frequency of how often the rider damage is triggered (especially since players will try to incentivize the target to take the option they want to happen).

To try to make my point clearer: imagine a that there was a at-will, no action cost, no save, no way to resist way for a PC to make the target of BB triggers the rider damage. Just a "this turn, this NPC will trigger the BB's secondary damage". Even in such an hypothetical situation, the secondary damage wouldn't come into play 100% of the time, because there would be cases where the player would use BB for its control factor.

As such, it is a capital point to note in any estimation for how often the BB secondary damage is triggered to that BB's control function the percentage of how often the BB secondary damage is triggered.



I'm guessing you misunderstood my point. You seem to think I was surprised that booming blade was used in specific situations. I said I was surprised at how low the success rate was given the selective use, which should "artificially" inflate those conversion/success rates.

I did misunderstand your point, but I don't think that the data indicates a low success rate. Solidork's Warlock had a better cantrip for melee damage, therefore I assume they mostly used Booming Blade for its control function, in which case the damage not triggering would be a sign of success.




Then we're undervaluing the spell - especially in terms of DPR.


I don't understand what you mean here, sorry.




What I will say is that I wouldn’t expect it to trigger unless you/the party are creating some reason for the enemy to *want* to move. I don’t treat it as a blind chance that is hoped to occur. I treat it as a thing that is actively caused to occur.


I think you're correct. And it's actually not that easy to make the enemy want to move after you've spent your action casting a spell in melee.

[CMCC]

We're getting off the rails here.


Thinking about the results in specific situations are how one makes an estimation, though.
Let's assume the answer to my question is 10%. We're omnipotent beings, and it's 10%. Thinking about specific situations doesn't get me closer to that number. If it does, I'm happy to hear how I'm missing that point.



It isn't, though, that's what I'm trying to say.

I think we can agree that the "control" factor of the spell and the "additional damage" factor of the spell are mutually exclusive.

Therefore, if you use Booming Blade, there is a lot of cases where you don't want the additional damage to trigger.
I'm not asking if we want or don't want it to trigger. I'm asking how often it does. Again, the reason for it triggering or not is beyond the scope of my question. We can discuss that later.




So, in other word, the fact that you can use Booming Blade as a control spell (or, specifically that it end up being either a control spell or an additional damage spell, but not both during the same round) diminishes the frequency of how often the rider damage is triggered (especially since players will try to incentivize the target to take the option they want to happen).

To try to make my point clearer: imagine a that there was a at-will, no action cost, no save, no way to resist way for a PC to make the target of BB triggers the rider damage. Just a "this turn, this NPC will trigger the BB's secondary damage". Even in such an hypothetical situation, the secondary damage wouldn't come into play 100% of the time, because there would be cases where the player would use BB for its control factor.

You continue to explain WHY we could arrive at certain numbers rather than bringing us closer to arriving at those numbers. I think that's clear at this point.





I did misunderstand your point, but I don't think that the data indicates a low success rate. Solidork's Warlock had a better cantrip for melee damage, therefore I assume they mostly used Booming Blade for its control function, in which case the damage not triggering would be a sign of success.
I thought he said it was used in situations where he thought it would trigger. I could be wrong at this point. Honestly, it doesn't matter at all.




I don't understand what you mean here, sorry.
Using 0% as our number undervalues the actual number whether that's 0.1% or 99.9%. Perhaps I misunderstood your point.

[Foolwise]

This thread is a little disheartening for me as my Psi Warrior character has BB from an Art dip but hasn't used it yet due to using a shield. By L8 (@ L4 now), the plan was to use BB with War Caster OAs, or use Telekinetic Thrust to push the target 10ft with BB. I am also grabbing DW with Fey Touched and could solo combo BB+DW with an Action Surge.

There's also a solo combo of BB+Sanctuary that doesn't require an AS, but would that even work? Maybe if the party decides to retreat.

IDK, thread kinda has me wishing I chose a different cantrip instead.

[x3n0n]

Let's assume the answer to my question is 10%. We're omnipotent beings, and it's 10%. Thinking about specific situations doesn't get me closer to that number. If it does, I'm happy to hear how I'm missing that point.

It sounds to me like people are saying 2 main things in response:

Asking us doesn't help much on narrowing in on that number because it's extremely dependent on characters and tables/enemies. For example, the answer is likely very different between an Eldritch Knight 7, who is likely using BB purely for DPR, and a "skirmisher" that has some form of action-economy-advantaged Disengage-like ability (Mobile feat, Cunning Action, Goblin's Nimble Escape). Likewise, every table will vary as to how often the target of BB has something "good" to do without moving and how a given DM rules an enemy's awareness of the effect. For that matter, this is probably affected a lot by the personality and tactical savvy of the DM and the general attitude of the table toward combat in general.
Even if you had that hypothetical "10%" number, what good does it do if every use of it has to be qualified with "this will vary so much at your table that my estimate doesn't really matter"? (That is, because of point number 1.)


I guess you could ask for "in <specific context>, how often do you see BB 'proc'ing?", and then you (using your guesses of prevalence for various <specific context>s) could estimate "the area under the curve", but, again, what is the real value?

If it's to have "good" DPR numbers for a given build, maybe cite it as a range, or equivalently as DPR without riders plus "DPR contributed by BB riders, assuming 100% trigger rate: scale to your own expectations".

[Unoriginal]

You continue to explain WHY we could arrive at certain numbers rather than bringing us closer to arriving at those numbers. I think that's clear at this point.

I thought you made this thread because you wanted to discuss the various factors one has to take into account in order to make the estimation of what percentage of the time does the BB rider come into play, before making said estimation. It seems I was incorrect and you wants us to make an estimation without us presenting a reasoning or debating it (note: I hope I'm not sounding like a jerk here, it really isn't my intention).

I sincerely apologize for misreading the situation, CMCC, and I won't bother this thread anymore.


This thread is a little disheartening for me as my Psi Warrior character has BB from an Art dip but hasn't used it yet due to using a shield. By L8 (@ L4 now), the plan was to use BB with War Caster OAs, or use Telekinetic Thrust to push the target 10ft with BB. I am also grabbing DW with Fey Touched and could solo combo BB+DW with an Action Surge.

There's also a solo combo of BB+Sanctuary that doesn't require an AS, but would that even work? Maybe if the party decides to retreat.

IDK, thread kinda has me wishing I chose a different cantrip instead.

I don't get why you find it's disheartening. Using BB on someone then pushing them 10ft away is a great control tactic, and one that deals damage to the enemy if they decide to not play along.

[ender241]

This thread is a little disheartening for me as my Psi Warrior character has BB from an Art dip but hasn't used it yet due to using a shield. By L8 (@ L4 now), the plan was to use BB with War Caster OAs, or use Telekinetic Thrust to push the target 10ft with BB. I am also grabbing DW with Fey Touched and could solo combo BB+DW with an Action Surge.

There's also a solo combo of BB+Sanctuary that doesn't require an AS, but would that even work? Maybe if the party decides to retreat.

IDK, thread kinda has me wishing I chose a different cantrip instead.

That 100% should not be your takeaway from this thread. I honestly have no idea what OP's goal is, but even if we knew the number he's looking for (we don't and never will) it wouldn't be an indicator of the cantrip's effectiveness.

First thing I want to point out is that BB's rider will always trigger when used as an OA with Warcaster.

Second, if you use BB on a target that wants to move and they don't move as a result, then BB did its job. BB is about forcing the enemy to make a difficult decision. The only time you don't want to use it is when you think the enemy is perfectly content staying where they are. But even then, you (or your allies) can be creative in creating situations where they will want to move. Pairing with Telekinetic Thrust or DW or Sanctuary all seem like good options to me.

[da newt]

For my PC who used it as a default attack, the extra damage rider was triggered 1 in 5 times or less (best guestimate).

As for why this was so low, sometimes the target was killed before they could move, sometimes there was a target within melee so there was no reason to move, sometimes they decided to use a ranged attack, sometimes some other action moved them or made them unable to move, and very rarely they would choose to dodge rather than move. It was often more beneficial for me to stay in melee with them and tank than move away too.

While I had expected more DPR from the rider, I did reap the benefits of the extra damage on a hit and creating a motive for them to stay put - it was still very handy.

[Foolwise]

I don't get why you find it's disheartening. Using BB on someone then pushing them 10ft away is a great control tactic, and one that deals damage to the enemy if they decide to not play along.

One, I didn't realize OAs were not being factored into the numbers. So seeing such low guesstimates for the rider damage was troubling.

Also it was said JC stated DW doesn't trigger BB's rider, but after rereading the OA section in the PHB, I feel this is a poor ruling. Consider this line from the text:

You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction. For example, you don't provoke an opportunity attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe's reach or if gravity causes you to fall past an enemy.
I feel like the bolded part is a good test for what counts as "willing movement." DW forces the target to use both their reaction and movement speed on a failed save.

But yeah, after I read the responses that had posted while I was typing my post, I realized I had the wrong takeaway from the discussion.


Also pretty wild that "takeaway" and "guesstimate" appeared in the replies as I was typing this post, since I rarely use either word.

[CMCC]

I thought you made this thread because you wanted to discuss the various factors one has to take into account in order to make the estimation of what percentage of the time does the BB rider come into play, before making said estimation. It seems I was incorrect and you wants us to make an estimation without us presenting a reasoning or debating it (note: I hope I'm not sounding like a jerk here, it really isn't my intention).

I sincerely apologize for misreading the situation, CMCC, and I won't bother this thread anymore.



I don't get why you find it's disheartening. Using BB on someone then pushing them 10ft away is a great control tactic, and one that deals damage to the enemy if they decide to not play along.

No - I just want other people’s opinions on this hypothetical answer - knowing full well it’s complete conjecture and not useful at all for specific or situational use.

If I’m going to have a useful DPR calculation - that must be applied to all builds equally and calculating booming blade damage the same way is important.

I’m also just curious tbh. Given the recent video release from TM. But mostly the former.

[ender241]

No - I just want other people’s opinions on this hypothetical answer - knowing full well it’s complete conjecture and not useful at all for specific or situational use.

If I’m going to have a useful DPR calculation - that must be applied to all builds equally and calculating booming blade damage the same way is important.

I’m also just curious tbh. Given the recent video release from TM. But mostly the former.

The BB rider should not be factored into DPR at all imo.

[CMCC]

The BB rider should not be factored into DPR at all imo.

That’s def a reasonable take but it does undervalue the spell in terms of DPR

[strangebloke]

IMO, count it as proccing 100% of the time.

basically what's going here is. BB gives the enemy a choice. Take damage or stand still. The enemy will choose whichever it thinks is less bad (allowing for the fact that the enemy may think wrongly here). So in a sense you're usually getting the opposite of what you would want. If you're getting DPR, you probably wanted them to stand still. If you wanted them to take damage, they probably stood still. The question of whether to use BB or not is how bad you can make both those options.

So IMO, count it as occurring 100% of the time. That's the DPR-related question here. The secondary proc needs to deal enough damage to make the control effect have actual teeth compared to just dealing more damage. Because if the enemy stood still (AKA the damage was the 'worse' outcome for them) you could have applied an Even Worse option by just dealing more damage. Whereas if they move (standing still was worse) you're still just dealing damage, and less than you otherwise could have.

The only other layer here is how good your build is at making both options stink for the enemy. Consider three cases:

A swashbuckler using BB to kite makes 'standing still' look bad if they don't have good ranged attacks, because nobody will be in melee range. But the swashbuckler doesn't really make 'taking damage' look that worse than any other BB build, because its just the same 1/2/3d8 as anyone who uses BB. So among all BB users, the swashbuckler will get the damage proc more often.
A S&B EK with warcaster and warmagic runs up and slaps a BB on an enemy. Standing still looks really bad, because they have disadvantage on ranged attacks and only a very tough EK in melee range. But 'taking damage' looks really bad as well, because the EK will get another BB OA with warcaster for massive damage. (Which they may not know tbf) So both options are frankly awful for the enemy, and this is why EKs with warmagic, warcaster, and BB are really good.
Finally consider a high elf GWM battlemaster. Their AC is good but not amazing, so stand still isn't that bad an option for the enemy - they can just beat up on the Battlemaster. But 'take damage' still looks bad because the GWM battlemaster will beat them up and they'll take the secondary damage. So most of the time this will be a control effect rather than a DPR effect. But because casting BB lowered their DPR by so much to begin with, the control effect isn't really worth it. BB would be bad on such a build.