D&D 5E Should i bother with magic initiate feat?

[Mercule]

Magic initiate isgreat for help building concept, but is a fairly weak feat overall. One houserule I did was let the spell go in your spells known list.

I second this. For my Eberron game, this is how we're handling Dragonmarks (small, house-specific list of spells from which to pick, rather than by class). If you want to focus on your Dragonmark, then you can choose a caster class, multi-class to caster, or something like Eldritch Knight rather than trying to refit whatever the 3E PrC was.

It is totally balanced and not broken, mechanically. In fact, it probably fixes weaknesses in the core feat. Do note that it has been officially clarified that the core feat does not work this way, so it'd be a house rule.

 

[flametitan]

It is totally balanced and not broken, mechanically. In fact, it probably fixes weaknesses in the core feat. Do note that it has been officially clarified that the core feat does not work this way, so it'd be a house rule.

I thought the clarification in Sage Advice was it did, as long as you took the magic initiate feat that corresponded to your class. e.g. a Sorcerer could take magic initiate: Sorcerer, and use the added spell as a spell they can cast both with the feat and their spell slot.

 

[famousringo]

Yeah, figured i would take fireball with at least one of them at 6th level

If you're getting Hex, I'd be tempted to pick up Scorching Ray. An upranked Scorching Ray with Hex will not only outdamage Disintegrate but it also bypasses magic resistance. Expensive, but one heck of a damage spike.

Not that Fireball isn't a great choice, too. Just a question of whether you want to solve the big bad guy problem or the enemy horde problem. Which is more important probably depends on what your group looks like.

Worth keeping in mind that Hex is concentration, though. There are a lot of cooler things that a lore bard could be concentrating on, like Suggestion or Polymorph.

 

[Mercule]

I thought the clarification in Sage Advice was it did, as long as you took the magic initiate feat that corresponded to your class. e.g. a Sorcerer could take magic initiate: Sorcerer, and use the added spell as a spell they can cast both with the feat and their spell slot.

You might be correct. When the only use anyone in my game cares about is not RAW, I didn't really pay attention to the middle zone.

 

[Ahglock]

If I play a spellcaster I can never have too many cantrips. Don't really care about the attack ones. I'll take one maybe but the utility ones are just a lot of fun.

 

[TheWriterFantastic™]

I thought the clarification in Sage Advice was it did, as long as you took the magic initiate feat that corresponded to your class. e.g. a Sorcerer could take magic initiate: Sorcerer, and use the added spell as a spell they can cast both with the feat and their spell slot.

According to Sage Advice, it sort of does... Sorcerers treat the spell from Magic Initiate as known, but it's not treated as prepared for Wizards -- Wizards get to add it to their spellbook to prepare as normal -- so according to Sage Advice, Sorcerers get a bonus spell known to cast from, but Wizards have to prepare it as part of their normal allotment of prepared spells -- not sure of their logic, but I'd house-rule it as a known spell for wizards along the same line as multiclass prepared/known casters -- it'll keep things simpler, without gimping the feat for anyone.

 

[Li Shenron]

At 4th level i was thinking of taking green flame blade, eldritch blast and i guess hex with M.initiate feat. My question is should i bother with damage cantrips?. At low levels i am sure will be useful, but as i increase in levels will they become pretty useless, as i will be using high level spells most of the time, And wasting the feat in the process. I am a lore bard

As a Lore Bard I wouldn't bother, since you can already learn cantrips and spells without spending a feat. The Magic Initiate feat is mostly meant for non-spellcasters to get minor spellcasting capabilities.

In addition, I wouldn't generally pick more that a single damage cantrips. Sure there can be those times when you face a monster which is specifically immune to your cantrip's damage type, and you'll wish you had picked a second one, but damage cantrips work essentially like weapons, if your cantrip doesn't work then use a weapon, or cast your real spells or find out something else to do... Personally I hate the "golf bag" strategy of wanting to always have the right tool for the job, I'd find much more amusing if occasionally you don't have the tool and have to come up with an idea different from just "I do damage".

And to be honest, you don't even always need a damage cantrip at all. You would be fine with all non-damaging cantrips. But of course you can pick multiple damaging cantrips if you want, just don't complain later that you don't have enough flexibility if you burn all your spell knowledge on stuff that is only marginally differentiated

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Every subclass except 2 has a feature that either a) scales their weapon damage, or b) enhances their (automatically scaling) cantrip damage.

It is intended that you will have access to that scaling damage. Spending your turn making a 1d8+3 attack at level 17 just doesn't really do much.

The two subclasses that lack that feature (for some reason) are the poor land druid, and the lore bard. The lore bard, however, has the ability to approximate either route. They can take eldritch blast or firebolt for the best ranged cantrip damage (even without the +ability mod some casters get, those spells are powerful enough to meet the goal), or they can take greenflame blade (or booming blade) for a scaling melee attack. (Or they could take both.)

The one point I'm making is that if you don't take greenflame/booming blade your character will not be at an expected level of performance for melee once you get into the mid-levels. So if you want to actually use a weapon, you should take greenflame/booming blade. If you plan to be using ranged attack cantrips, and your weapon is just for show and opportunity attacks, then you won't need it.

(The sad part for the poor land druid is that they have to take a feat to get it, which requires a more optional rule, and in some games (like mine) requires some story content, while the bard can take it as a built-in class feature. Ie, a "regular" druid can't even have it. We need a new druid cantrip that does basically the same sort of thing.)

 

[dmnqwk]

I don't recommend fireball either, since there are better damage spells on offer.

The most broken spell is Conjure Animals, because you are able to summon 8 Giant Owls, doing 2d6+1 damage per attack (and with flyby they can all swoop the same target instead). While a nice fireball for 8d6 can seem tasty, for it to beat a concentration spell that can do 16d6+16 per round you'd need to be risking failure on your concentration checks; or there to be many, many threats to take out in a single go.

Failing Conjure Animals, there are also another couple of Concentration-based AoE spells such as Crusader's Mantle or Spirit Guardians.

 

[Zardnaar]

If you are after a blaster type bard I would avoid melee. Take spell sniper picking up eldritch blast and magic secrets at lvl 6 to steal hex and fireball with destructive wave and whatever at level 10. I'm not a fan of concentration spells in melee when one doesn't have proficiency in con saves and/or the warcaster feat.