D&D 5E Totally underwhelmed by 5e bladesinger, am I missing something?

[flametitan]

Yes. Missile weapons and focus fire. Also stealth is good.

My players' first encounter with drow was when they ventured into the caverns below the surface and ran into eight or nine drow (one Elite Warrior and eight regular drow IIRC) in the dark. The drow had 120' darkvision so advantage on all their attacks (which cancelled out disadvantage for being at long range on their crossbows) and the Necromancer's dozen or so skeletons had disadvantage to shoot back. The drow wound up knocking out both the Necromancer 9 and the Shadow Monk 6/Druid 3(ish) with their sleep poison and hand crossbows; they took enough casualties that they didn't stick around long enough to finish off the downed PCs in the face of skeleton archer counterfire, so the Necromancer lived (made enough death saves) while the monk died (failed three death saves).

Other things that necromancers hate include bad terrain (have to jump this 15' canyon or take 4d6 falling damage? 4d6 is nothing to a PC, but 4d6 to each skeleton really hurts), infiltrating populated areas (trying to sneak 4 PCs into the Mind Flayer citadel is far easier than sneaking in 30 skeletons or 30 mercenaries), and monsters who are good at hit-and-run attacks (a white dragon who smashes 12 of your skeletons and then flies off to short rest and regain HP). Having skeletons means you're basically giving up the logistics of a PC Special Ops team in exchange for the logistics of a platoon or small company. If you as a DM design your adventures in such a way that a Special Ops team is the logical way to approach problems, necromancers and other minion-oriented PCs will self-limit. And you'll have a better game, because you'll finally have an answer to the question "Why is the King giving this quest to me instead of to his army?" This approach isn't really compatible with the "lots of easy encounters" Combat As Sport adventuring day meme, but it's perfectly compatible with the Combat As War paradigm.

I'm also thinking AOE also works if you're 8-9th level. Remember your ability to command skeleton is limited to 60 feet of you. With average hit points, even the extra Wiz level to hit points means they'll be one shotted by a Dragon breath regardless of success or failure (Though if somebody has the leadership feat, this is mitigated to being one shot by a failed save.) So this range limit does put an upper bound of probably around a dozen skeletons.

Additionally, I also noted the ability to reassert control has to be done before your control ends, not when it ends. This means that ever so slowly, the time you have before you can reassert control creeps back to before you can complete a long rest, which means you run the risk of them eventually turning against you in your sleep. This one is a bit easier to mitigate, however, and more of a pain to manage, so it's not the best balancing factor.

I do like your analogy to special ops teams, though. It does describe a better way to set up D&D missions, when abilities are balanced around the dungeon environment more than for the outside world. I do feel like the importance of 6-8 encounters to balance is overstated, though. 2 short rests per long rest seems to be the more important factor than how many specific fights you get into.

But this is all off topic to the Bladesinger.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'm also thinking AOE also works if you're 8-9th level. Remember your ability to command skeleton is limited to 60 feet of you. With average hit points, even the extra Wiz level to hit points means they'll be one shotted by a Dragon breath regardless of success or failure (Though if somebody has the leadership feat, this is mitigated to being one shot by a failed save.) So this range limit does put an upper bound of probably around a dozen skeletons.

Additionally, I also noted the ability to reassert control has to be done before your control ends, not when it ends. This means that ever so slowly, the time you have before you can reassert control creeps back to before you can complete a long rest, which means you run the risk of them eventually turning against you in your sleep. This one is a bit easier to mitigate, however, and more of a pain to manage, so it's not the best balancing factor.

The "control creep" thing isn't really an issue unless you're really trying to max out your number of skeletons, which most players won't even do in practice. An 8th level wizard maxes out at 30, but he can control 26 of them indefinitely with ease, although it could be kind of annoying to figure out which ones need recycling when, and which skeletons are scheduled for a double-casting today to reset their control creep.

AoE isn't a serious issue either, because skeletons are equipped with missile weapons. While remaining in mutual support range, you can spread them out enough that normal Fireball AoE isn't likely to kill more than a fraction of your skeletons (say, six squads of four with one larger squad of six) and even a dragon's breath is unlikely to hit them all; on top of this, Necromancers get enough extra HP (especially if you also have access to Inspiring Leader shenanigans for your skeletons, via a shared language) that eventually a Fireball isn't likely to kill even the ones it does hit. 50-HP skeletons are achieveable, and BTW you can also give them scale mail armor and dual shortswords for dual-wielding--but the point is, killing all the skeletons is exactly what the Necromancer wants you to do, which is why missile weapons and focus fire are something Necromancers hate--because you can go straight for the wizard.

Note further that you have to be within 60' to issue a command, but they continue to obey commands after you give them. "Follow Sir Caneghem around and try to kill whatever he tries to kill, and nothing else" is a legitimate command that should be within the scope of a (malevolent, tool-using) Int 6 creature's understanding to obey. (Think of them are ultra-murderous attack dogs.) So there is no requirement that your entire army remain within 60' of the Necromancer at all times to stay effective at mutual support.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

To be honest, I'm not sure there is 'a' or 'the' bladesinger feel. I'm pretty sure that the Bladesinger concept is one of those things that is mostly made up by its' own fanbase because every actual incarnation has been problematic.

Bladesinger started as a kit from the Complete Book of Elves in 2e. What most people remember about it is

• It was iconic as an example of CBoE giving elves more powers for no particular reason except that elves are awesome
• It balanced rule benefits with roleplay penalties, which people apparently hate.
• While not exactly overpowered (because it is a fighter-mage kit, and f-ms are not all that awesome in 2e), it was strictly better than other f-ms in every way

In 3e, Bladesingers were a gish PrC that I never remember the OP boards every including in gish builds

I'm not familiar enough with 4e, but my understanding is that Bladesingers were sold as controllers, but ended up as strikers.

So it sounds like in each incarnation, people have "loved the idea of" the bladesinger, but either hated the outcome or just expected something different from what they got. I guess it doesn't surprise me that everyone's expectations haven't been met.

Back to my fraction analogy--I think there absolutely should be an arcane 50:50 class, but I have no reason to think that it has to be called bladesinger. Duskblade, hexblade, spellsword if it hasn't been used.

I tend to think of bladesingers as lightly armored and artificers as "I enchanted this armor and now I am going to wear it", but I agree that gish classes tend to attract a lot of hope and a lot of frustration. Spellsword might be the best name, since I think the duskblade and hexblade were absorbed into the bladelock. Still, if the spellsword class had an origin like "you started in an arcane discipline but discovered joy in martial combat", you could base the subclasses off of wizard, bard, warlock, and maybe sorcerer--the hexblade subclass could be a better melee type than the bladelock (but worse spell caster 50:50 vs. 25:75)

 

[flametitan]

but the point is, killing all the skeletons is exactly what the Necromancer wants you to do, which is why missile weapons and focus fire are something Necromancers hate--because you can go straight for the wizard.

I want to focus on this, as you pointed out some fairly good points, but this is one where I think it depends on the mindset of the enemy. Certainly, ignoring the skeletons and killing the wizard is easy, especially if they try to max out skeletons, running the risk of not having that valuable counterspell, but is it really the best move for the enemy to make? Killing the necromancer doesn't kill the skeletons; they're still there, shooting at you even after death. The necromancer's death means that the skeletons won't come back tomorrow, but are they of larger priority to kill than the things that are doing the 120 DPR you've estimated them doing? Certainly from the PC point of view it's bigger that they're ignoring the skeletons, but I don't know my tactics well enough to know if it's the most logical from the monster's point of view. (or if the skeletons will fight each other after the necromancer dies, if so then yes. Kill the necromancer.)

 

[Pathkeeper24601]

I don't think I'd say it's an easy thing to "keep" one from running around with a skeleton army, because "preventing" things isn't my style as a DM. I just run the world, I don't have a stake in the outcome. In my observation, players are more likely to self-limit themselves to a small handful of skeletons, without DM coercion, unless they're headed into something which actually needs extreme firepower (warzone or Tomb of Horrors).

That doesn't change the fact that Necromancers have far more raw power than Bladesingers, even when they choose not to exercise it. Ergo I have no quarrels with the Bladesinger class as a DM.

Although, really anyone with a pocketfull of gold has access to the same amount of power as Necromancers do. My first real 5E experience saw my 8th level party first ambushing a party of a dozen hobgoblins fleeing from something (I don't know why we ambushed them, we just did), then seven wraiths came along (mounted on Perytons) and turned all the hobgoblin corpses into spectres, which then attacked us all en masse--and it turned out that this DM liked for necrotic damage from wraiths/spectres to inflict permanent HP loss. My PC lost an old (NPC) friend that day to permanent HP loss, and the obvious lesson was: "we should have allied with those hobgoblins to help us instead of attacking them." The fight with the wraiths would have been a cake walk instead of a brutally punishing affair.

If you support your minions with Inspiring Leader they will even be durable too (and therefore more loyal because low casualty rates + success + loot = loyal troops).

This was AL, so skeleton's don't carry over week to week and desecrating graveyards for materials would be considered both Evil and non-Lawful (outside of scope allowed AL alignments). The player in question was good at self-limiting and found 3-4 just fine in most cases. Enough to make use of the class feature, but not enough that it takes away focus the rest of the party. Usually if they faced humanoids he could flay two bodies for skeletons during a short rest if he didn't take the rest himself. Otherwise he got zombies. This usually fell in line with what the rest of the party could stomach without setting off the serious clerics or paladins.

As far as Bladesinger goes (since this is the subject) it looks like a fun class. It sits on one end of the spectrum of gish with Eldritch Knight on the other. It seems to fit more on the "fun" than "power" side of being a caster and will probably appeal more there. Kind of odd that the best cantrips for become less useful at 6th. Starts off a bit more survivable at lower levels than a lot of the other Wizard classes. A friend of mine complains that it would be good if it allowed GWF or PAM with it since to him that is the only type of melee.

 

[Zardnaar]

Be a better wizard instead of a crappy melee character.

 

[neogod22]

You’re not the slightest bit more versatile, since you traded versatility in other forms for bladesong. Portent adds to wizard versatility. Summoning huge mobs of powerful undead is versatility. Using AoE without endangering allies is versatility. The argument is that buffing your AC is a less useful choice as a wizard subclass than the alternatives, to which you have offered no rebuttal.



Then he probably uses a direct damage spell instead. Not exactly rocket science, the point is that his AoE options are more consistently available than yours (should you use them) and that this increases his value to the party through wide killing potential. Furthermore, potent cantrip and empowered evocation are good for single or multi target spells, so he’s simply trading your defense in favor of killing power, and offense is commonly held to be the better option since ‘dead’ is the ultimate crowd control.



He probably pops a shield or similar reactive spell, same as you. His AC won’t be as phenomenal, but by high level this doesn’t really matter since enemies frequently have potent spellcasting/breath weapons of their own and AC is less valuable. Lastly, your AC isn’t going to matter in a couple levels anyway, since enemies are going to be reliably rocking +11-17 to hit, so even your vaunted 27 AC won’t save you. This is one of the reasons that barbarians are sometimes cited as more of a tank than fighters; at high level effective HP becomes far more important than AC.



It increases survivability only when AC is the subject of the attack, so it doesn’t really ‘ensure’ anything. That’s not necessarily bad, but it’s more niche in application than the evoker’s damage bonus which works on every opponent he faces. It’s certainly not ‘OP’ in any sense of the term, and can be overcome in a variety of ways.
As an aside, 1d8+5 damage is incredibly low for 8^th level, even with 2 attacks.

Ok here's a few things, every wizard ability is are niche abilities. All are situational. Portent is a 1x a day roll 2 dice, you have to choose to use the dice before a roll takes place, so it's a gamble. Evoker's ability to exclude their friends out of spells only applies to invocation/evocation spells, still situational. You can say bladesong is situational, but when a creature gets into melee range, I'm popping shield a lot less than a wizard with say a 13 AC. As a matter of fact, my 18 AC is hard enough to hit without bladesong, so if the fight don't look overly difficult, I'm probably not worried about popping bladesong.

You don't fight creatures with +11-17 to hit until tiers 3 and 4. Bosses in tier 2 are usually around +7-10.

Here's the thing you forget, while all wizard unique abilities are situational, the Bladesinger ALWAYS have good AC whether I'm in bladesong or not. At this point I ALWAYS have 2 melee attacks, and my 1d8+5 per attack does more damage than all cantrips until I get to 11 where I'll switch primarily to GFB and BB, but when I get to level 14 and I can add my INT bonus to my melee damage, again I fail to see how it's not more versatile. Bladesingers are full wizards thst can be a legit melee character when he wants to be.

The wizard being the most powerful class in every edition but 4th only had 1 weakness, which is low HP and low AC, making them the glass Cannon. Bladesingers eliminated the low AC and have measures that deal with their low HP making them the perfect class, and they sacrifice what? Nothing.

Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk

 

[Chaosmancer]

Eldritch Knight 7 gets to make a bonus melee weapon attack when you cast a cantrip. Booming Blade cantrip and Greenflame Blade cantrip both include both a melee weapon attack, some extra damage (1d8 at 5th-10th level), and a rider (2d8 in the case of Booming Blade, triggered on movement; splash damage for Greenflame Blade but I forget exactly how much, might be d8+Int mod).


It's really really difficult to make generalizations about bardic spells, because they have access to ALL THE SPELLS via Magical Secrets.

Valor Bards are late bloomers, but they are still really interesting. And Athletics Expertise + two attacks + Enhanced Ability is a great way to become really, really good at physical control.

Oh yeah, I think Valor is pretty great, but they don't get MAgical Secrets until 10th, and I noticed a lot of distress with a fellow player when he wanted to be doing more in combat and found that his most damaging ability was Vicious Mockery. Personally, what they can do is far better than direct damage, but people do love their direct damage.

Greenflame blade. An Eldritch Knight at 7th level gets to make a weapon attack as a bonus action when they cast a cantrip so, assuming there are two targets standing next to each other an 8th level EK with duelist, a longsword, and 20 strength can deal:

Target 1: 1d8 +7 (weapon) + 1d8 (cantrip damage)
Target 2: 1d8 + int. mod (cantrip damage)
Target X: 1d8 + 7 (weapon)

Edit: This is actually one of the reasons why I would have wanted the Bladesinger to have their own war magic ability instead of extra attack. To me, a bladesinger should be mixing more magic with combat so firing off a cantrip should allow them to make an attack as a bonus action. In my opinion, anyway.

Okay, so we're looking action for 2d8+7 (possible splash for 1d8+int) followed by 1d8+7 bonus action. If they are using Greenflame blade. That makes a lot more sense

Personally, I would go Lightning Lure and "Get Over Here!" some fool whom I couldn't quite reach if I was an EK.

That's a really interesting ability I was not aware of. Still doesn't make a 1d8+5 twice a turn bad for no daily resources.

 

[Zardnaar]

Ok here's a few things, every wizard ability is are niche abilities. All are situational. Portent is a 1x a day roll 2 dice, you have to choose to use the dice before a roll takes place, so it's a gamble. Evoker's ability to exclude their friends out of spells only applies to invocation/evocation spells, still situational. You can say bladesong is situational, but when a creature gets into melee range, I'm popping shield a lot less than a wizard with say a 13 AC. As a matter of fact, my 18 AC is hard enough to hit without bladesong, so if the fight don't look overly difficult, I'm probably not worried about popping bladesong.

You don't fight creatures with +11-17 to hit until tiers 3 and 4. Bosses in tier 2 are usually around +7-10.

Here's the thing you forget, while all wizard unique abilities are situational, the Bladesinger ALWAYS have good AC whether I'm in bladesong or not. At this point I ALWAYS have 2 melee attacks, and my 1d8+5 per attack does more damage than all cantrips until I get to 11 where I'll switch primarily to GFB and BB, but when I get to level 14 and I can add my INT bonus to my melee damage, again I fail to see how it's not more versatile. Bladesingers are full wizards thst can be a legit melee character when he wants to be.

The wizard being the most powerful class in every edition but 4th only had 1 weakness, which is low HP and low AC, making them the glass Cannon. Bladesingers eliminated the low AC and have measures that deal with their low HP making them the perfect class, and they sacrifice what? Nothing.

Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk

The sacrifice subclass options. Opportunity cost. That can be a free save proficiency for example and some other abilities.

 

[PMárk]

I like fighter/mages.

I liked elves in od&d all the way through swordmages in 4e and eldrich knights in 5e.

I've liked the previous iterations of the bladesinger.

But the current incarnation of the bladesinger just seems off to me.

It seems to be a wizard that gives up the best parts of being a wizard (range, cover from allies etc.) to be a barely competent melee combatant - and that for only about 2 minutes a day.

As a matter of fact, it seems the best way to play a bladesinger (certainly from a survivability standpoint) is to ignore the "wade into the fray" fluff hang back and enjoy the high AC and (at higher level) damage absorption (for the VERY limited times you get them) - and just be the full wizard you are.

So what am I missing?

I won't say bladesinger is bad, because it's not, but my 2 cents:

There isn't any real fighter/mage hybrid class in 5e so far. Bladesinger is a wizard with some melee capabilities, but it doesn't deliver what the fluff says. I'm still waiting for a real "swordmage" class, like the Magus in Pathfinder, which was designed from the start as a fighter/mage, with features tailored to that and balanced around that. Bladesinger is a wizard with some melee, EK is a fighter with some magic. Neither is a true hybrid. Yes, multiclassing is a thing, but I still want a class with unique abilities and flavor, especially since the settings' various fluffs always integrated those kind of characters and it is one of my favorite concepts.