D&D (2024) Shield, Blade Ward, and no material component

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Not sure what I think about the change to Blade Ward. Action economy wise, it conflicts quite a lot with the more reliable and powerful Shield, while if you don't have Shield or another defensive reaction, it's going to be a no brainer to use it every turn. It will be fantastic for Bladelocks, that's for sure.

 

[mellored]

Not sure what I think about the change to Blade Ward. Action economy wise, it conflicts quite a lot with the more reliable and powerful Shield, while if you don't have Shield or another defensive reaction, it's going to be a no brainer to use it every turn. It will be fantastic for Bladelocks, that's for sure.

The fact that it conflicts keeps it from being overpowered.

Not just with shield, but also opportunity attacks, absorb elements, hellish rebuke, guidance (possibly) and more.

So do you actually want to use it and lose your opportunity attack? And not have absorb elements in case the enemy blasts you?

Makes for interesting choices IMO.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

The choice between Shield etc. and other reactions is interesting, since they do different things. The choice between Blade Ward and Shield? Not so much, they both do the same thing, you're just guessing if it's worth it to spend a spell slot for potentially better results.

 

[Stalker0]

So do you actually want to use it and lose your opportunity attack?

Honest question, how often do people see monsters triggering OAs in their games? Sure I have the once in a while scenario where the monsters want to run past the fighter and he gets a swing off, but I just don't see OAs happen all that often, certainly not often enough to save a reaction on the off chance i might get one.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Honest question, how often do people see monsters triggering OAs in their games? Sure I have the once in a while scenario where the monsters want to run past the fighter and he gets a swing off, but I just don't see OAs happen all that often, certainly not often enough to save a reaction on the off chance i might get one.

It's not very often unless the NPC is terrified because the PCs seem bloodthirsty, and the NPCs want to flee with a move and Dash, scattering so that maybe one of them will get away and live. If they Disengage rather than flee, they're not really going to get away with just their speed.

Often if the PCs seem decent folk that are protecting themselves, and just want to rebuff attacks, but are whooping the NPC's butts, the NPCs will disengage, trying to talk their way out of it while backing off. "Our bad, we didn't realize you were the type that could swat dragons. Peace out."

Most of the time, if a Theater of the Mind battlefield is more open and someone isn't fully engaged yet, we assume they skirt around to their objective, even if it is to flank an enemy.

Grid games require the plotting of one's movement path, and sometimes the terrain and combatants restrict possible grid movement options. NPCs/monsters with lots of HP, or stupid overconfident ones, may risk the OA. Smarter, weak foes often won't.

 

[billd91]

OAs don't happen a ton in my game, in no small part, because my NPCs who need to get out of a troublesome spot usually just use the disengage action to not give up the opportunity. I'm usually not trying to squeeze so much out of their actions that I'm not willing to disengage.

 

[Horwath]

Honest question, how often do people see monsters triggering OAs in their games? Sure I have the once in a while scenario where the monsters want to run past the fighter and he gets a swing off, but I just don't see OAs happen all that often, certainly not often enough to save a reaction on the off chance i might get one.

It does not happen because they removed most of triggers to "streamline" the game,

We need most of them back:

1. Move through threaten area, not just out of it. Give some lockdown power to melee characters.
2. Ranged weapon attack without Sharpshooter feat.
3. Casting a spell that is not melee touch, self or cone.
4. Standing up.
5. drawing items from backpack or anywhere else that is not "combat ready", that is, in sword sheath, potion belt, scroll organizer.

then again, I would remove AoO from reaction cost and made them 4E style just opportunity attacks, once per turn.

 

[Neonchameleon]

It does not happen because they removed most of triggers to "streamline" the game,

We need most of them back:

1. Move through threaten area, not just out of it. Give some lockdown power to melee characters.
2. Ranged weapon attack without Sharpshooter feat.
3. Casting a spell that is not melee touch, self or cone.
4. Standing up.
5. drawing items from backpack or anywhere else that is not "combat ready", that is, in sword sheath, potion belt, scroll organizer.

then again, I would remove AoO from reaction cost and made them 4E style just opportunity attacks, once per turn.

1: Agreed if and only if we bring back flanking to give benefits for moving.
2: Disadvantage is enough. It's the control effect to get people to change acions that matters
3: Disadvantage would be enough if the disadvantage actually gave foes advantage on their saving throws.
4: Mmmm... Standing up should be challenging but there are multiple ways of doing this
5: Needs careful thought or a better encumbrance system. If using an anti-hammerspace variant then yes.

 

[mellored]

Honest question, how often do people see monsters triggering OAs in their games? Sure I have the once in a while scenario where the monsters want to run past the fighter and he gets a swing off, but I just don't see OAs happen all that often, certainly not often enough to save a reaction on the off chance i might get one.

Depends on the DM.

But it's more the threat of an opportunity attack. If you don't have one, I expect a number of DMs to run to the squishy.

That said. You probably are the squishy. It's pretty rare for someone to be hiding behind a wizard, or for them to have a threatening opportunity attack.

 

[Kurotowa]

The choice between Shield etc. and other reactions is interesting, since they do different things. The choice between Blade Ward and Shield? Not so much, they both do the same thing, you're just guessing if it's worth it to spend a spell slot for potentially better results.

I can name three very important differences. One is that Blade Ward has to be used before the attack is rolled, while Shield is used after. Two is that Blade Ward only applies to a single attack while Shield applies to every attack until your next turn. Three is that Blade Ward only works on melee attacks and Shield works on any attack roll.

So Blade Ward is good for protecting against, say, an Opportunity Attack. Or if one minion from a minion swarm gets around the front line and is trying to pound your squishy face in. But if a nasty monster with multiple attacks is trying to maul you, you want to use Shield. If you're being sniped by a spellcaster or an archer, you have to use Shield. If you're hoping the attack rolls low and you don't have to use your Reaction, you can only do that with Shield.

The better use case for Blade Ward might be for when you don't have the choice to use Shield. Warlocks, for example, don't get Shield at all. A Bladelock might appreciate having Blade Ward, if they don't mind passing up the chance at Opportunity Attacks.