My proposed rogue/wizard

smbakeresq · Apr 12, 2019

CHR use is the point of Swashbuckler, its not mathematically optimized but it is RP wise.

If you use BB you cant use a bonus action to attack again, you have to use cunning action to disengage. The use of a bonus action to attack again is to get 2 chances to land a sneak attack. You have to decide which one you want to go for.

You don't give up a wizard level by making CHR higher, just your INT score. If you can squeeze in Alert its fine, IMO Alert is more of a luxury for MC build like this as you will only get 4 feats or bumps anyway if going to rogue 3.

I wouldn't prioritize weapon use either. It just seems that's what he wants to do. I wouldn't even play a bladesinger to even use weapons that much unless I was a 5th member of the party, you are far more effective just being a wizard and using your ever expanding, controlling spell list and just enjoying the defensive benefits. Every bladesinger I have seen played weapon-aggressive against any competent DM ends up face down in the dirt, just like most bards who try to front line all the time, hence the wall of bards meme. Yes your AC gets higher but as you go up in level enemy attacks scale faster then your AC and HP does and area attacks still get you.

As far as concentration resilient or warcaster is probably still needed at some point.

Bladesingers to me are greatly game dependent. If you use the easy mode of 2 encounter then SR, then you always have everything available. I play in and DM 4-6 encounter as an average between SR, so you need to actually manage resources and play as group; the group needs to rotate who is using their SR recharge abilities this encounter and so on. This has the side benefit of players taking turns who is the "hero" for this encounter.

Esker · Apr 12, 2019

smbakeresq said:
If you use BB you cant use a bonus action to attack again, you have to use cunning action to disengage. The use of a bonus action to attack again is to get 2 chances to land a sneak attack. You have to decide which one you want to go for.

For sure. If you want to dual wield then the third rogue level becomes more valuable.

You don't give up a wizard level by making CHR higher, just your INT score. If you can squeeze in Alert its fine, IMO Alert is more of a luxury for MC build like this as you will only get 4 feats or bumps anyway if going to rogue 3.

Not by making CHR higher, but by taking the rogue level to get swashbuckler features. And the initiative part of swashbuckler isn't worth that much unless you have the charisma to back it up, which means sacrificing INT, which means giving up bladesinger stuff. Overall seems like a bad trade to me.

I wouldn't prioritize weapon use either. It just seems that's what he wants to do.

I didn't think it was clear that was what he wanted to do. His instinct was to boost INT first, which suggests that he wasn't planning to be very weapon-focused. If he is though, then my suggestion was to put more levels into rogue. And if he's not, stop at rogue 2. Rogue 3 strikes me as an awkward in between space.

I wouldn't even play a bladesinger to even use weapons that much unless I was a 5th member of the party, you are far more effective just being a wizard and using your ever expanding, controlling spell list and just enjoying the defensive benefits. Every bladesinger I have seen played weapon-aggressive against any competent DM ends up face down in the dirt, just like most bards who try to front line all the time, hence the wall of bards meme. Yes your AC gets higher but as you go up in level enemy attacks scale faster then your AC and HP does and area attacks still get you.

I don't disagree, hence the recommendation to lean more into rogue if you want to be more weapon-oriented. Because then you get features like uncanny dodge and evasion that help you survive when a high AC doesn't cut it.

If you use the easy mode of 2 encounter then SR, then you always have everything available. I play in and DM 4-6 encounter as an average between SR, so you need to actually manage resources and play as group; the group needs to rotate who is using their SR recharge abilities this encounter and so on. This has the side benefit of players taking turns who is the "hero" for this encounter.

I wouldn't call 2 encouters per short rest "easy mode". I'd call 4-6 encounters per short rest "intense". Isn't the default recommendation is 6-8 encounters per long rest, with two short rests in between? That means roughly 2 encounters per short rest, occasionally 3. That suggests to me that the intent is that the bladesinger gets about one bladesong per combat, so if they don't get incapacitated and have to double dip, then they pretty much have it on except for during the first round prior to their turn (and some encounters will be easy and not require it). Even then, most groups I've seen don't actually do 6-8 combat encounters in a day. Your group might be the outlier here, whatever the merits of the approach might be.

smbakeresq · Apr 13, 2019

Every build here is premised on 2 encounters per SR. They fail unless played well over that. The BS is is an example of that, it’s a class that was created entirely around the 2 SR mechanic. That’s clear

krunchyfrogg · Apr 13, 2019

Thanks for all the feedback guys.

Going primarily wizard, perhaps I’d be better served just getting 2 rogue levels.

UngeheuerLich · Apr 13, 2019

smbakeresq said:
Every build here is premised on 2 encounters per SR. They fail unless played well over that. The BS is is an example of that, it’s a class that was created entirely around the 2 SR mechanic. That’s clear

Its still 2-3 encounters on average. IF the premise was: every day 2 encounters per short rest, the feature would just be at will... because there is no difference.

I'd also not call 2 - 3 encounters easy mode. It is actually more than most people here state. Many tell about 2 encounters per day being a problem and then short rest classes or classes who don't really need short rests fall behind.
It is also not essential that every day actualy has more than 1 or 2 encounters (per short rest)... it is just important that the can. It is important that you have to play every fight as if it was just the beginning of a long adventuring day.
I can easily see that in dungeons it might be fairly hard to rest between encounters so I'd say 5 or 6 before short rest does not sound unreasonable here.

UngeheuerLich · Apr 13, 2019

krunchyfrogg said:
Thanks for all the feedback guys.

Going primarily wizard, perhaps I’d be better served just getting 2 rogue levels.

Why do you want to be rogue at all? Is cunning action so important to you that you need 2 levels of rogue at all?

It is a great feature to let you enter and leave close combat easily. I'd probably say that it won't make you really better. You could solve that with magic. 1d6 sneak attack is nice but does not help you a lot.
Maybe wizard 1 is indeed the stronger choice. Wis save proficiency is rather important. Dex proficiency only prevents damage. Nice but often not as big as resisting hold person and such.

smbakeresq · Apr 13, 2019

I thought he was doing it for RP purposes no?

An interesting take might be trickery Cleric then Wizard....

The SR recharge classes are fine with more encounters as long as you realize that you will not be able to nova in every encounter, some you just contribute to.

Wizards get a deep spell pool as you go up so can handle almost anything. BS get a fall back option in they can be ok melee for the cleanup phase of encounters, extending their spell slots. They are like Valor Bards in that way.