D&D 5E [GUIDE] NADRIGOL's Melee Bladesinger Guide

[Yunru]

See, hyperbole."Completely avoids damage assuming we make the roll." Yes, and AC completely avoids the damage assuming they fail the roll.

And then you talk about Blur being better. Hate to break it to you, but the better the concentration buff the stronger my point is.

As for "simply avoiding the damage", yeah sure, then we'll just do the same when the 20hp would make a difference and it won't matter either. It affects both equally (well no, it favours Con but...), so it's irrelevant.

 

[Yunru]

I hope that's enough math for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A single paragraph for and a single paragraph against, both against the same static values? Hardly. I at least gave two values so a comparison could be drawn.

 

[GarrettKP]

See, hyperbole."Completely avoids damage assuming we make the roll." Yes, and AC completely avoids the damage assuming they fail the roll.

And then you talk about Blur being better. Hate to break it to you, but the better the concentration buff the stronger my point is.

As for "simply avoiding the damage", yeah sure, then we'll just do the same when the 20hp would make a difference and it won't matter either. It affects both equally (well no, it favours Con but...), so it's irrelevant.

Mirror Image does avoid damage completely. That's not hyperbole. That's what the spell does.

Also my points about Haste are not in regards to the Tough vs Con argument. They are meant to illustrate that Haste isn't a spell you should use in every situation and that statistically Blur is better.

My points regarding Tough and Con are that any Singer isn't going to just take 30 damage. They will all attempt to prevent as much damage as possible. And looking at your example of 30 damage BOTH Singers would use reactions to reduce damage regardless of wether they took Tough or not. And in that context both Singers will make the Concentration saves with equal frequency but the Tough Singer will come out with more HP without using more resources.

That means you survive more of those attacks and still make the saves just as often. More survivability with the same Save Success %. That favors the tough feat, not Con ASI regardless of how much you wish it wasn't true.

So where does the extra Con help more than the Tough feat in that scenario?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Yunru]

Mirror Image does avoid damage completely. That's not hyperbole. That's what the spell does.

And that's exactly why it's hyperbole. Because you willing ignore the conditional.
Mirror Image means you avoid the damage completely if you make the role.
Having an AC means you avoid damage completely if they fail the roll.

In the same strain I can guarantee you a 3 Con Wizard will never take damage... If they don't take damage.

And obviously when I say the Bladesinger takes 30 damage, I mean they take 30 damage. Not "they have 30 damage coming at them." Maybe they already used their reaction, maybe they're out of spell slots, maybe they already reduced it as much as possible. It doesn't matter, somehow they end up taking 30 damage.

 

[Schattenriss]

[MENTION=6780961]Yunru[/MENTION], GarettKP: As far as I am concerned I see two separate argumentation lines. Both logically valid. Which one you prefer, depends on your own preferences. I thank you for sharing your point of views, so I can add them to my considerations.

 

[GarrettKP]

And that's exactly why it's hyperbole. Because you willing ignore the conditional.
Mirror Image means you avoid the damage completely if you make the role.
Having an AC means you avoid damage completely if they fail the roll.

In the same strain I can guarantee you a 3 Con Wizard will never take damage... If they don't take damage.

And obviously when I say the Bladesinger takes 30 damage, I mean they take 30 damage. Not "they have 30 damage coming at them." Maybe they already used their reaction, maybe they're out of spell slots, maybe they already reduced it as much as possible. It doesn't matter, somehow they end up taking 30 damage.

Which is where I take issue with it because it's out of context. How did they take the damage and not reduce it further? Are they that drained of resources that they can't reduce it more? They shouldn't be in close combat in that scenario to begin with and neither Con nor Tough are going to help them much at all.

If you're so drained of resources that you're taking 30 damage and can't reduce it you're in trouble regardless.

But even if you're insistent on ignoring context of an encounter and looking only at this specific scenario, we are still talking about only 5% of a difference. You have to roll a 6 or better (75%) and I have to roll a 7 or better (70%). You'll succeed 15 out of 20 times. I'll succeed 14 out of 20. And that's already only happening less than 9% of the time with your defensive spell active.

The difference is, to me, negligible. You certainly can think differently, but that doesn't stop me from keeping my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GarrettKP]

[MENTION=6780961]Yunru[/MENTION], GarettKP: As far as I am concerned I see two separate argumentation lines. Both logically valid. Which one you prefer, depends on your own preferences. I thank you for sharing your point of views, so I can add them to my considerations.

I think you're right. I think this is just preference at this point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Schattenriss]

@NADRIGOL: One comment about the guide. In the multiclass-section about the paladin second level dip it is written

"Note that spells requiring saves will be wisdom based, which makes..."

In PHB on page 84/85 it is mentioned that paladin spells are charisma based.

First, you might want to change that in the guide. Secondly, the Spell DC is better for those paladin spells (compared to if wisdom would be the applied spellcasting ability). Sure it is not as good as a fully maxed INT wizard. But considering that the Paladin 2 / bladesinger X has MAD requirement, the wisdom will most likely be 8, whereas INT and CHA are 14 or 13. Assuming INT is not increased on the Paladin/bladesinger (instead DEX is maxed or feats are taken), the wizard and Paladin spells have the same (or nearly the same) spell DC.

If I would build an high elven pallysinger, my stats would be 14,14,12,14,8,14 (after applying race modifications). So in my build the spell dc is for wizard and Paladin spells the same.

 

[NADRIGOL]

Well I'm glad the four pages of comments I missed overnight aren't all feedback I need to act on...

I think Tough, Resilient (Con), and +2 Con are all viable. I think both of you made great points. Here's my input on the situation... Screw all of them. Both of you made similar arguments as to how your opponents choice was only valuable in fringe scenarios. I think this is true. Singers already have great AC and defensive spell buffs. As a Singer, you should be playing carefully, casting the most appropriate defensive spells, and not inserting yourself into scenarios where 30 damage is going to drop you. You're still a Wizard with full spellcasting progression, and heading to the back-line behind cover and chucking out some spells should still be viable (assuming you somehow have no healing options to get you melee ready).

Considering how cool the opportunities are from feats like Dual Wielder, Warcaster, Mobile, and how across-the-character-sheet advantageous bumping Dex or Int will be, I wouldn't be putting much consideration into the HP/Con options unless my DM's playstyle had directly lead to me thinking I had no other choice.

I've reviewed the relevant entries in the guide, and decided not to change anything. I have added a quick review of stat bump ASI's to the feat section for reference, but they should surprise no one.

 

[NADRIGOL]

@NADRIGOL I just recently noticed that haste allowed to do haste attack with additional offhand. Then you are not able to use extra attack but it will still be worth it.

I think extra attack is still useful for the good old longbow which with d8+5 and primary dex may well outdamage your firebolt by length.

That is the beauty of Haste with this build... abuses the use of Haste, SCAG cantrips, and TWF all at the same time. The build would certainly be less viable without it. Still arguments to be made for it for sure. Having more weapon attacks really takes advantage of the Song of Victory bonus late game. But I don't think I'd be here arguing it as the optimal build.

Extra attack definitely helps when you have to pull back to range. You can see the Longbow vs Firebolt comparison in some of the tables at the end of the guide.