D&D 5E The Most Annoying Wizard Ever- A Bladesinger Build

Jordan Kahl

First Post
I'll readily admit that I'm inexperienced at the table, but I'm eager to learn. I accept that it is MAD, but why is that necessarily bad?

* You won't get a +3 shield * You won't get +3 armor * You won't be very good at anything other than not getting hit for a few rounds per day

The +3 shield is irrelevant to the build, as you can't wield one and dual wield or use bladesong and +3 armor would be a bonus, but it wasn't necessary to get to (27 at level 9). With 27 AC, you still have extra attack, two weapon fighting, divine smite, and colossus slayer for 3 attacks at DEX(4)+Prof(4) to hit and damage die+DEX(4) for damage, plus up to 4d8 smite and 1d8 slayer (if you hit even 2 of the 3 with a +8 to hit), all at level 9. You have 7d10+2d6 hit dice, so you don't suffer too much on the HP front for an AC that is +7.

I will readily accept it, if there is some flaw I'm not understanding, but I'm just not quite seeing it. Please help me understand.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Ovarwa

Explorer
Hi,

That's fair, and I apologize if I sounded snarky.

The most annoying build, in the sense of being annoyingly good (as opposed to being annoying because I'm playing the character :)/2) is annoying because of what he does.

A well-optimized character, in general, is great because of what he can do! Sure, it's important to remember Vader's advice, "it is unwise to lower your defenses." But AC is only one defense, and more than anything else, you need an awesome way to unleash your anger.

Another way to look at it: The only reason you care about not getting hit is so that you can spend more time being awesome. You're describing a level 11 character. At this point, Revivify is a thing and so is Raise Dead. You can afford to take a few hits. You can't afford to be dull.

So, what do you want your character *do*? How do we maximize that?

Well, he isn't going to get a +3 shield or +3 armor at level 9. And he isn't going to roll all 18s. (If you know you're in a campaign where such abundance is, um, abundant, things change, and I'd recommend a Robe&Staff of the Archmagi, because why not?)

Your resources will be more limited: Expecting specific magic items is often a mistake. You have a limited number of character points to spend, and you want to max out important characteristics, so MAD is bad.

A straight Dex-based Ranger probably wants to start with 16 Dex. You mentioned dual-wielding, which puts you in the thick of combat, so a good Con is important. Do you plan to concentrate on any spells? Con remains important. Oh, and you might want a decent Wisdom. Under normal circumstances, you can leave every other stat at 8 if you want. You can even consider a low Wisdom, though you probably don't want to. You are level 9, so you could have put your two ASIs into Dex 20. But you also could have taken Sharpshooter and Dex 18. Both choices improve your AC and makes you more dangerous.

Your Ranger/Wizard/Paladin? He also needs Int 13, which are 5 points that don't go into something useful. In fact, the only stat you get to have below 13 is Con (rangers require 13 Wis, iirc.) So that's 25 points right there, assuming Con 8. Meanwhile, you have 11 levels and only one ASI, which you wasted on Medium Armor Mastery. So your Dex is probably less than 16 and you don't have any good combat feats. You spellcasting is nothing to write home about either. Sure, you have good AC, but why would anyone waste their action hitting you, rather than make you roll a saving throw, or better yet, ignore you and deal with a more dangerous character?

Candidates for that more dangerous character? Well, the most annoying wizard ever, from the title of this thread, who might annoy the GM by utterly ruining an encounter through a well-chosen spell. Or an archer with Archery Style and Sharpshooter. Or a tank character who might be easier to hit but is also spewing massive damage. Or maybe that paladin, dealing solid damage while protecting the other characters with his Aura. Or various kinds of Warlock. (At level 11, I find Paladin/Tomelock with 6-8 levels of Paladin and 20 Cha to be pleasantly annoying. Great AC? Yep. Melee? Yep. Ranged? Yep. Crazy good saving throws? Yep. Good hp? If you include temp hp, probably. Buffing the party? Yep. Utility? Yep. Doing most of this at the same time? Yep. But there are many other scary options, like the assassin with Improved Invisibility: Where he's going, he doesn't even *need* AC; a Warlock or Bladesinger multiclass can do this nicely. Or just a plain, boring, garden variety, reality altering 11th level wizard. Heck, even Moon Druids are good at level 11.)

Meanwhile, an 11th level Ranger+stuff who only knows 2nd level spells, who has spell slots of a 7th level caster (which you plan to use for smite), whose Dex isn't very good, whose Con is pathetic... Just not seeing it.

Oh, and being a Variant Human? Well that makes everyone better. A F1/Abjurer2 or Warlock/Martial can start with Heavy Armor Mastery; HAM makes a steady stream of temp hp even better. A real martial character can start with Sharpshooter or GWM or PAM or something else that's *dangerous*. Alert counts as dangerous if you're an Assassin. So all the builds I described (and the many more builds I *didn't* describe) ... what might they do with an extra feat?

Anyway,

Ken
 

Sean Dobbins

First Post
Can confirm - we have a Bladesinger/Arcane Trickster in the group and it's quite OP.

Weaknesses are certain saving throws and ranged combat ability.

My Dwarven War Cleric still is a better tank though. Having too high AC is pointless as mobs just ignore you after they realise you're too hard to hit. Being a huge bag of hitpoints is better.

The AC isn't pointless if you just make sure that they can't move past you, which is what polearm master+sentinel is for.
 


Remove ads

Top