It really feels like we're overthinking this.
Surely if you want more spell slots you play a Bladesinger and if you don't want more do EK.
Bladesinger 1:3 Fighter-Wizard while Eldritch Knight is 1:3 Wizard-Fighter
Looking forward to this.
I saw the first film again recently. I remember thinking how well some of the elements would translate to Dark Sun in cities ruled by Sorcerer Kings. Both the methods of control and the measures taken when control starts to slip!
So my next D&D campaign is going to add in an element of degrees of success.
Where on non-combat rolls a over achieving by 5 gets some kind of boost and by 10 gets something substantial.
Failing by 5 or more gets some form of disadvantage meanwhile failing by 10 gets results in a more tangible...
I always thought 5e characters were pretty realized and capable at level 1.
Sure they get a subclass and some important extras at level 3 but that’s only 900 XP of the 6500 XP they would need to reach 5.
It always felt to me that the subclass was like the prestige class or kit of old.
I’m actually going back through old 2E dungeon magazine adventures and Forgotten Realms modules for inspiration for my next Dalelands campaign. There are some gems in there.
I’m all about the actions… slaying/overcoming monsters and obstacles and achieving objectives.
I think the objectives are a big one missed off the list. A level appropriate XP award for achieving a level appropriate objective.
I did say ‘a bit’ redundant. By which I mean completely redundant until level 5 and then it’s only doing 1d6 extra damage with all the penalties using a spell comes with.
Bladesingers get Int bonus uses per day not proficiency now. So they are likely to be using 3-4 times a day. If you’re not...
I mean the biggest change is the new blade singer gets Int to attack and damage straight away.
So true strike is actually a bit redundant for the most part.