Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Bladesinger - a criticism of its design
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7241400" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>So, we've slid from 'fighter and wizard are otherwise equal' to 'traditions are equal and archetypes are equal'. Not a problem, just want to make sure we're on the same set of goalposts.</p><p></p><p>That agreed, your argument still doesn't logically follow, largely because of the reasons for the overshadowing. Wizards overshadow fighters because wizards contribute strongly to all pillars of the game while fighters only contribute strongly to the combat pillar of the game. When considering what the Bladesinger offers compared to other traditions, it doesn't increase ability in the social or exploration pillars, and, arguably, decreases effectiveness in those pillars if it's core concept is applied (ie, fighting in melee) by siphoning resources to bolster the melee strength (spells to enhance survivability and effectiveness in melee). For this it gains some moderate effectiveness in melee, an area other wizards are very weak in, but does so at increased risk. Since wizards can be just as effective in combat without engaging in melee, the Bladesinger really only offers a novelty exchange to allow a wizard to be in melee, but doesn't increase effectiveness at all.</p><p></p><p>Compare this to the EK. The EK gains 1/3 progression wizard casting, which at first blush would seem to enhance the fighter's ability in other pillars and make it a stronger subclass. But it doesn't do this at all. The spell selection is tightly limited to abjuration and invocation, both of which are combat pillar spells. The few the EK gets outside of those two schools aren't significant in expanding their effectiveness outside of the combat pillar. And, for those spells, they don't significantly enhance combat pillar effectiveness over the other archetypes.</p><p></p><p>The EK getting wizard spells doesn't mean the EK is able to assume the abilities the abilities of the wizard class -- like the other fighter archetypes, the abilities provided by the EK archetype supplement it's contribution to the combat pillar in a roughly equal way. The Bladesinger tradition abilities, conversely, offer a choice - be a mediocre fighter with good defense or be a wizard - and that choice isn't multiplicative, it's either or. This is why the Bladesinger isn't an overpowered tradition - it can't do both at the same time, and the trade off, while versatile, means it's not as effective at either.</p><p></p><p>So, the wizard can overshadow the fighter because it contributes strongly to all pillars while the fighter does combat only. The Bladesinger just offers the option to contribute to the combat pillar as a wizard or a mediocre fighter, but not both and not in a multiplicative or even additive way. The EK archetype doesn't let a fighter become a wizard, but instead narrowly focuses, like the other archetypes, on enhancements to combat pillar contribution. The Bladesinger overshadows fighters (including the EK) because it's still a wizard, not because it can sometimes be a mediocre fighter. It doesn't overshadow the other traditions because it doesn't offer any increase in power, just a bit of role versatility. The EK doesn't overshadow other archetypes because it doesn't gain abilities in other pillars and the abilities it gets in the combat pillar are on par in effectiveness as the other archetypes. The reading that since the EK casts spells as a wizard that it becomes better than other archetypes misses the fact that it's not casting that makes wizards overshadow fighters, it's what and how many things the wizard can cast.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7241400, member: 16814"] So, we've slid from 'fighter and wizard are otherwise equal' to 'traditions are equal and archetypes are equal'. Not a problem, just want to make sure we're on the same set of goalposts. That agreed, your argument still doesn't logically follow, largely because of the reasons for the overshadowing. Wizards overshadow fighters because wizards contribute strongly to all pillars of the game while fighters only contribute strongly to the combat pillar of the game. When considering what the Bladesinger offers compared to other traditions, it doesn't increase ability in the social or exploration pillars, and, arguably, decreases effectiveness in those pillars if it's core concept is applied (ie, fighting in melee) by siphoning resources to bolster the melee strength (spells to enhance survivability and effectiveness in melee). For this it gains some moderate effectiveness in melee, an area other wizards are very weak in, but does so at increased risk. Since wizards can be just as effective in combat without engaging in melee, the Bladesinger really only offers a novelty exchange to allow a wizard to be in melee, but doesn't increase effectiveness at all. Compare this to the EK. The EK gains 1/3 progression wizard casting, which at first blush would seem to enhance the fighter's ability in other pillars and make it a stronger subclass. But it doesn't do this at all. The spell selection is tightly limited to abjuration and invocation, both of which are combat pillar spells. The few the EK gets outside of those two schools aren't significant in expanding their effectiveness outside of the combat pillar. And, for those spells, they don't significantly enhance combat pillar effectiveness over the other archetypes. The EK getting wizard spells doesn't mean the EK is able to assume the abilities the abilities of the wizard class -- like the other fighter archetypes, the abilities provided by the EK archetype supplement it's contribution to the combat pillar in a roughly equal way. The Bladesinger tradition abilities, conversely, offer a choice - be a mediocre fighter with good defense or be a wizard - and that choice isn't multiplicative, it's either or. This is why the Bladesinger isn't an overpowered tradition - it can't do both at the same time, and the trade off, while versatile, means it's not as effective at either. So, the wizard can overshadow the fighter because it contributes strongly to all pillars while the fighter does combat only. The Bladesinger just offers the option to contribute to the combat pillar as a wizard or a mediocre fighter, but not both and not in a multiplicative or even additive way. The EK archetype doesn't let a fighter become a wizard, but instead narrowly focuses, like the other archetypes, on enhancements to combat pillar contribution. The Bladesinger overshadows fighters (including the EK) because it's still a wizard, not because it can sometimes be a mediocre fighter. It doesn't overshadow the other traditions because it doesn't offer any increase in power, just a bit of role versatility. The EK doesn't overshadow other archetypes because it doesn't gain abilities in other pillars and the abilities it gets in the combat pillar are on par in effectiveness as the other archetypes. The reading that since the EK casts spells as a wizard that it becomes better than other archetypes misses the fact that it's not casting that makes wizards overshadow fighters, it's what and how many things the wizard can cast. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Bladesinger - a criticism of its design
Top