Booming Blade being reprinted and nerfed in Tasha's [New Preview Release]

[clash]

Honestly, I think this is a good thing. Scag cantrips have always been straight up better than competing options(weapon attack or cantrip), hopefully this brings them in line.

[Gtdead]

Why people think it doesn't work with sneak attack any more? Any specific reason?

From the picture we can see words like "brandish weapon" and "hit".
Sneak attack just requires an attack with a finesse weapon.

Warcaster and twin are probably out unless there is specific wording for these cases (which is unlikely), but not SA.

And also no, rogue doesn't need it, but it's nice on melee rogues as a risk/reward play. After all going warcaster for BB isn't such a hot pick on rogue. Enemies would rather hit him than flee. All that went away is the MI + Warcaster + Sentinel interaction which again was inefficient. Just MI+Sentinel is enough.

Also there is a thread with leaks on reddit and it seems that rogue got a new cunning action that gives advantage on the next attack which is a substantial buff in rogue's reliability.

[bendking]

Nope.
Nope.
*Facepalm*

Such well-detailed arguments. Truly, I have been blessed to be educated by your immense knowledge.
Anyway, if you had ever played in a high-op table you would have easily seen how the Rogue is utterly outclassed by some of the other classes.
Not everyone has to play high-op, but I don't think it's helpful to bring your low-op experience into a debate regarding class balance.

Why people think it doesn't work with sneak attack any more? Any specific reason?

From the picture we can see words like "brandish weapon" and "hit".
Sneak attack just requires an attack with a finesse weapon.

Warcaster and twin are probably out unless there is specific wording for these cases (which is unlikely), but not SA.

And also no, rogue doesn't need it, but it's nice on melee rogues as a risk/reward play. After all going warcaster for BB isn't such a hot pick on rogue. Enemies would rather hit him than flee. All that went away is the MI + Warcaster + Sentinel interaction which again was inefficient. Just MI+Sentinel is enough.

Also there is a thread with leaks on reddit and it seems that rogue got a new cunning action that gives advantage on the next attack which is a substantial buff in rogue's reliability.

The main draw for BB on Rogue is not Warcaster, it's having an attack with extra damage and a rider that synergizes with the Rogue's bonus action Disengage. It's straight-up better than his regular attack.
Rogue is completely outclasses by other classes in the game, so yes, I would say he needs it. Without Booming Blade working with Sneak Attack (which I am still not certain of) the Rogue is just much weaker.

[cutlery]

Anyway, if you had ever played in a high-op table you would have easily seen how the Rogue is utterly outclassed by some of the other classes.

I have. It isn't.

Are Rogues Wizards? No. Can they excel at social and investigation pillars while making a strong contribution to the combat pillar? Yes.

If you do the math, you're better off attacking with an offhand weapon for the accuracy boost and greater likelihood of landing a sneak attack. The only time a BB is always the best choice for a rogue is if they took war caster and get an OP attack; which is a niche case.

Even if you have BB available, you're often better off making a regular attack so you have the option of a bonus action offhand attack - assuming maximizing SA damage is the goal.

[stoutstien]

Such well-detailed arguments. Truly, I have been blessed to be educated by your immense knowledge.
Anyway, if you had ever played in a high-op table you would have easily seen how the Rogue is utterly outclassed by some of the other classes.
Not everyone has to play high-op, but I don't think it's helpful to bring your low-op experience into a debate regarding class balance.



The main draw for BB on Rogue is not Warcaster, it's having an attack with extra damage and a rider that synergizes with the Rogue's bonus action Disengage. It's straight-up better than his regular attack.
Rogue is completely outclasses by other classes in the game, so yes, I would say he needs it. Without Booming Blade working with Sneak Attack (which I am still not certain of) the Rogue is just much weaker.

So your entire basis of comparison is how much damage a class can do? I would argue your experience is not a highly optimized table but rather just one that focuses on one-dimensional combat that is basically a race to zero.
there's actually nothing optimized about doing damage because it's the least effective way of solving problems. There's always more meat points to deal with.

Anyways back on the main topic, this change doesn't actually affect arcane trickster that much. Getting sneak attack on reactions is still the bulk of their extra damage.

[KorvinStarmast]

Such well-detailed arguments. Truly, I have been blessed to be educated by your immense knowledge.

Your unsupported, general, and overly broad statements warranted about that much effort in response. Since I don't need to point out to you that the game was not designed for power gamers, not in this edition anyway, I think we are about done. (Ah, I see that cutlery and stoutstien have offered a similar response, so I'll retire from this line of discourse).

[Tanarii]

Booming Blade could definitely stand to be toned down. It's a very powerful cantrip for any melee attacker except GWM users. And maybe PAM.

If anything, it made not taking Booming Blade on Rogue a sub-optimal choice, but I didn't mind it that much since Rogue is a low-tier class.

Rogues are a top tier class. You're very mistaken in your judgement if you believe otherwise.

[bendking]

I have. It isn't.

Are Rogues Wizards? No. Can they excel at social and investigation pillars while making a strong contribution to the combat pillar? Yes.

If you do the math, you're better off attacking with an offhand weapon for the accuracy boost and greater likelihood of landing a sneak attack. The only time a BB is always the best choice for a rogue is if they took war caster and get an OP attack; which is a niche case.

Even if you have BB available, you're often better off making a regular attack so you have the option of a bonus action offhand attack - assuming maximizing SA damage is the goal.

Anyways back on the main topic, this change doesn't actually affect arcane trickster that much. Getting sneak attack on reactions is still the bulk of their extra damage.

I did do the math. And it's a considerable difference. Let's break it down.
Level 20 AT, Shadow Blade casted at 3rd level, against an AC of 19, with Elven Accuracy, assuming you used your Owl to do a Flyby Help, giving your first attack triple-advantage.
Main-hand uses Shadow Blade, off-hand uses Shortsword.

Here are the numbers (produced by LucidSavant's DPR calculator):
Booming Blade - 73 DPR
Booming Blade + Rider Triggers - 91 DPR
Regular Attack + Bonus Attack - 61 DPR
Regular Attack + Bonus Attack (+3 Shortsword) - 65 DPR

Keep in mind, using just Booming Blade also keeps your bonus action free to use Cunning Action which is a staple of the Rogue. This makes it possible to use the Bonus Action to disengage, thus practically ensuring the rider triggers. Personally, I prefer taking Mobile and keeping my bonus action free for other things such as Dash, making you even harder to pin down. Also, staying in place (the result of not being able to Disengage as a bonus action) also makes you much more vulnerable, which isn't great for squishy characters such as Rogues (unless MCed to get better AC).
And of course, if you want to cast Shadow Blade for maximum DPR, your Bonus Action is taken on the first round of combat, dipping your DPR to 53.

Your unsupported, general, and overly broad statements warranted about that much effort in response. Since I don't need to point out to you that the game was not designed for power gamers, not in this edition anyway, I think we are about done. (Ah, I see that cutlery and stoutstien have offered a similar response, so I'll retire from this line of discourse).

As I said, it's fine not to play high-op. I am discussing high-op here, which is clearly a discussion we two shouldn't be having.

Booming Blade could definitely stand to be toned down. It's a very powerful cantrip for any melee attacker except GWM users. And maybe PAM.

Well, it's definitely not a "very powerful cantrip" for any class that has Extra Attack, not just GWM users. It's mainly useful for classes without Extra Attack.

In any case, I'll stop the discussion (on my part) here since I don't want this to escalate further. Hopefully, some of what I said made sense to some of you, and if it didn't, that's also fine.

[stoutstien]

I stop reading any build that relies on a familiar to provide advantage. If you can pull that off more than once or twice a day then the encounters your table arw facing challenges aren't high enough to even consider optimal play.

[cutlery]

I did do the math. And it's a considerable difference. Let's break it down.
Level 20 AT, Shadow Blade casted at 3rd level,

Why would you use concentration for Shadow Blade instead of Haste (for readied action sneak attacks) or greater invisibility?

[KorvinStarmast]

which is clearly a discussion we two shouldn't be having.

Thank you for your gracious reply. Here, have a beer, on me. 🍻👍

Why would you use concentration for Shadow Blade instead of Haste (for readied action sneak attacks) or greater invisibility?

IIRC, even in dim light you get advantage on the attack with Shadow blade, not just in darkness. There are a boat load of ways that dim light happens. (I need to review shadow blade again to clear up in my own mind why one would do that. Also, SB is level 2 spell, haste is level 3)

[bendking]

I stop reading any build that relies on a familiar to provide advantage. If you can pull that off more than once or twice a day then the encounters your table isn't facing challenges high enough to even consider optimal play.

I provided it to both builds so I don't see what's the problem. It's not that hard to get advantage at level 20 anyway.
Besides, you have Shadow Blade which makes it even easier to get advantage.

Why would you use concentration for Shadow Blade instead of Haste (for readied action sneak attacks) or greater invisibility?

Because Haste is quite dangerous to cast if you're on the front-lines. I would rather someone else cast it on me.
Anyway, that is beside the point, because both of the builds gain from it. I could just as well remove Shadow Blade from both builds and the difference wouldn't change much.

Thank you for your gracious reply. Here, have a beer, on me. 🍻👍

Not sure whether you're being sarcastic. Poe's Law and all.
Either way, I was being genuine since I don't think we should be discussing character balance considering our different view of the game.

[Dork_Forge]

I did do the math. And it's a considerable difference. Let's break it down.
Level 20 AT, Shadow Blade casted at 3rd level, against an AC of 19, with Elven Accuracy, assuming you used your Owl to do a Flyby Help, giving your first attack triple-advantage.
Main-hand uses Shadow Blade, off-hand uses Shortsword.

Here are the numbers (produced by LucidSavant's DPR calculator):
Booming Blade - 73 DPR
Booming Blade + Rider Triggers - 91 DPR
Regular Attack + Bonus Attack - 61 DPR
Regular Attack + Bonus Attack (+3 Shortsword) - 65 DPR

Keep in mind, using just Booming Blade also keeps your bonus action free to use Cunning Action which is a staple of the Rogue. This makes it possible to use the Bonus Action to disengage, thus practically ensuring the rider triggers. Personally, I prefer taking Mobile and keeping my bonus action free for other things such as Dash, making you even harder to pin down. Also, staying in place (the result of not being able to Disengage as a bonus action) also makes you much more vulnerable, which isn't great for squishy characters such as Rogues (unless MCed to get better AC).
And of course, if you want to cast Shadow Blade for maximum DPR, your Bonus Action is taken on the first round of combat, dipping your DPR to 53.

So is everything that isn't an AT suboptimal to you?

Not only is a level 20 comparison mostly useless to actual play, it also heavily favours the cantrip (which gets it's highest amount of dice), which does nothing but reinforce your point.

I'm also very confused why you think a Rogue is squishy at all? A d8 for hps with Uncanny Dodge, Evasion, Cunning Action etc. If it's their AC then I think your view may be a bit skewed, you don't need 20+AC to not be squishy.

[Gtdead]

The main draw for BB on Rogue is not Warcaster, it's having an attack with extra damage and a rider that synergizes with the Rogue's bonus action Disengage. It's straight-up better than his regular attack.
Rogue is completely outclasses by other classes in the game, so yes, I would say he needs it. Without Booming Blade working with Sneak Attack (which I am still not certain of) the Rogue is just much weaker.

What builds are you talking about? The only way to force the rider is to do it on a melee that hasn't yet engaged which is a whole can of worms as far as optimization goes and it's still a gimmick. You have to deal with how you will reach the target without dash, how you will apply both SA and BB etc.

And without the rider, DW is strictly better up to lvl 11 (and probably stays) so you can just go mobile+DW and you pretty much maxed out in damage as far as single classed rogue goes. You may get more dice damage with BB, but DW gives a chance to apply SA if you miss your first attack, which completely changes the math. Try calculating against a common 15 AC with the increased chance to apply SA and you will see the results yourself. Plus you can do some minor crit fishing if your DM doesn't object at rolling both dices at the same time ^^

[KorvinStarmast]

Not sure whether you're being sarcastic.

Nope, was being for real. I figured that with the somewhat snarky tone in my first reply I ought to acknowledge your taking the initiative to improve the tone. Have another beer. 🍻😎

[cutlery]

I could just as well remove Shadow Blade from both builds and the difference wouldn't change much.

G.Invis means attacking with advantage for both main and off hand.

You'll have better average damage due to greater likelihood of landing the sneaks. The option of an offhand attack trumps the piddly 13.5 damage from a SCAGtrip; unless ACs drop below 16ish - which shouldn't even be mooks at 20.

A SCAGtrip is nice when you know you want to use your BA to disengage; but it is only a modest increase in other scenarios because of how important it is to get a second chance to land SA.

Rogues aren't weak, and SCAGtrips are merely icing for them - not the whole cake.

[RogueJK]

I'm hoping it's now a melee spell attack instead of weapon attack.

That would be a massive oof for Tricksters and EKs.

And 2/X Sorcadins, consider you can't smite on a melee spell attack.

[Hael]

I don’t quite see why you wouldn’t be able to SA BB anymore. Or for that matter quicken BB. Twinning, Warcaster OAs and *maybe* reach attacks (depending on wording) are likely out though.

The primary nerf seems to be to warcaster Gish Tanks, and especially EKs as they tend to have their reaction available as well as a few edge cases (sorcadin and melee sorcerer nova).

[Man_Over_Game]

It was mostly a buff for classes that needed the buff. Rogue is already one of the worst classes in the game, taking Booming Blade away from him like that is straight-up brutal.
It's not like it was OP on full-casters, which are the strongest classes in the game, so it didn't power creep the game in any way. It mostly propped-up the less powerful classes.

If anything, it made not taking Booming Blade on Rogue a sub-optimal choice, but I didn't mind it that much since Rogue is a low-tier class.
Of course, I would have preferred seeing the Rogue buffed instead of this band-aid solution, but removing the band-aid and not giving a replacement is a bad call.

I mean, the Rogue isn't really impacted by this change at all. Rogues aren't dependent on anything other than whether or not an attack with an eligible weapon was made. If anything, it'd only be a nerf to builds that tried to abuse it as anything more than that, mostly tanky gishes. Considering how common they are, not really sure if anyone needs to really worry about them.

There are parts about the mechanics of Paladins, EKs and Bladesingers that I think are stupid, but they are probably still stronger than most other stuff.

[Gtdead]

I think Clerics got hit the hardest from this. Most cleric builds were depending on it just to be relevant since warcaster and it worked well because warcaster is pretty much a feat tax. Now that it can't be used with warcaster there is no point in spending effort and resources to optimize around it. Sorcerer multiclasses can still use it as a nova option.

[stoutstien]

I mean, the Rogue isn't really impacted by this change at all. Rogues aren't dependent on anything other than whether or not an attack with an eligible weapon was made. If anything, it'd only be a nerf to builds that tried to abuse it as anything more than that, namely Paladin+Sorcerer builds, or most tanky gishes.

Aye. There is a new attack cantrips in the book as well with lighting strike. Who knows what that will bring.

[stoutstien]

I think Clerics got hit the hardest from this. Most cleric builds were depending on it just to be relevant since warcaster and it worked well because warcaster is pretty much a feat tax. Now that it can't be used with warcaster there is no point in spending effort and resources to optimize around it. Sorcerer multiclasses can still use it as a nova option.

They standard dodge/ SW/SG combo is still one of the best options for clerics who want to blender. War caster isn't a tax for clerics nearly as much as classes who can't use shields as focus.

[RogueJK]

War caster isn't a tax for clerics nearly as much as classes who can't use shields as focus.

Warcaster wasn't needed to cast BB while holding a weapon and shield anyway. Its components are just Verbal and Material, and the Material component is a weapon (which you're already holding anyway).

So anyone with access to Booming Blade - either through a class, race, or feat - can "sword and board" with that spell already.

[stoutstien]

Warcaster wasn't needed to cast BB while holding a weapon and shield anyway. Anyone can do that. Its components are just Verbal and Material, and the Material component is a weapon (which you're already holding anyway).

I think they were referring to the BB on AOO.

[Gtdead]

They standard dodge/ SW/SG combo is still one of the best options for clerics who want to blender. War caster isn't a tax for clerics nearly as much as classes who can't use shields as focus.

Yea but you don't have endless spell slots. It was nice to be able to start a fight with bless and running to the enemies threatening a BB AoO, or just dashing to a chokepoint. I've heard something about spending CD charges to regain spells though which seems promising.

[J-H]

Good. I'll allow it now, and GFB if that one is also changed to make sense.
Also, "booming energy" is just stupid sounding.

[KorvinStarmast]

warcaster is pretty much a feat tax.

For a cleric, I am for once inclined to agree with the idea of a feat tax. As you go up levels getting hit is more likely due to how many + the opponents have, and the increase in spell casters/dragon breath etc that the party faces. As I look back, all of my clerics grabbed warcaster as soon as they could at the expense of boosing wiz to 20 (at that point in their careers). Heck, even my warlock (Celestial; an all-suppport build as we have no cleric), took it at level 8 rather than boost cha to 20. She res Con at 1 for vHuman. Yeah, I really hate missing those concentration saves.

Aye. There is a new attack cantrips in the book as well with lighting strike. Who knows what that will bring.

Tempest Clerics. It's like how leaving bacon chunks on the ground brings puppies ...

[Willie the Duck]

I'm sad that they didn't give it a less ridiculous name. "Booming", really?

Especially when singing swords and thundering hammers have such a storied tradition.

if they really are going to errata stuff I can image some other stuff that could use tuning (both up and down) before Booming Blade...

its pretty perfect as it is.

It was mostly a buff for classes that needed the buff. Rogue is already one of the worst classes in the game, taking Booming Blade away from him like that is straight-up brutal.
It's not like it was OP on full-casters, which are the strongest classes in the game, so it didn't power creep the game in any way. It mostly propped-up the less powerful classes.

I've always been of many minds on the SCAGtrips (BB in particular, since it works better for grabbing even if you don't have an optimal casting stat).

On one hand, if single-attack classes needed some kind of patch, this is not how you should* go about doing it. It is awkward, clunky, relies on one of the otherwise least liked splats in the game, and leads to strange and possibly unintended interaction effects, and creates the new headache of 'weapon attack as part of spellcasting action and not an attack action' to confuse people new to the game on top of all the other poor-wording-pitfalls like unarmed weapon attacks and such. Before hexblade came out as a poorly thought through patch for pact of blade, this was one of my go-to examples of 'I don't care whether it is overpowered or not, I still don't like how they did it.'
*IMO, obviously.

On the other hand, the classes and concepts (classes doing specific things, such as cleric who wants to actually swing their weapon at levels 5+) that usually pick this up are not the runaway power concepts in the game. That's the threshold I am using*: not dominating. Eldritch Knights (who, from what I can tell, have mostly moved to XGTE as their +1), Arcane Tricksters, Clerics who want to swing their mace instead of just sit back and dodge while their Spirit/ual spells act as their combat contribution... heck, mountain dwarf wizards who have these nice weapon proficiencies, decent AC and Str bonus and actually want to use them... none of them are such that a boost like this specifically unbalances things.
*Hopefully avoiding the 'are rogues bad' dumpster fire.

Now, a sorcadin or hex-sorlock or similar can quicken it (and because your other action would be an attack, doesn't run into the normal limits of quickened spells), and that's annoying. I really don't care how often one would use it, it's a perk to the whole cha-based contorted knot that it doesn't need. That pushes it a little more back to 'they really should find another way to boost single-attackers, if that was their goal' in my books.

And that last sentence is pretty much where I sit. It's not horrid. It isn't simulacrum-level broken or 1H quarterstaff+PAM+shield level silly or the like, but if there was another way of achieving the same basic ends, I'd much prefer another option.

[stoutstien]

Honestly I wish they would just fix lighting lure. Damage riders never worked IMO as a good " stay where I want you" effect.

[CMCC]

I think Clerics got hit the hardest from this. Most cleric builds were depending on it just to be relevant since warcaster and it worked well because warcaster is pretty much a feat tax. Now that it can't be used with warcaster there is no point in spending effort and resources to optimize around it. Sorcerer multiclasses can still use it as a nova option.

I’m starting my new booming blade cleric with war caster tonight. So this is great news :(