Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7252092" data-attributes="member: 16814">As a further point, your scenario requires that the party know a fight is coming, or spend the first 2 rounds of the fight setting up the combos (the cleric is casting warding bond and sanctuary to effect the scheme).  While warding bond does have a 1 hour duration, that's not long enough to ensure your preplanning always works to anticipate a fight, so there's a distinct risk that the spell is wasted without effect if precast in anticipation.That's a lot of work just to put the bladesinger into a position where they can tank.  The fighter could benefit from both Warding bond and blur as well, cast by other party members, and improves his survivabiltiy as well.  Further, the DPS of your group is low -- the cleric doesn't contribute, the bladesinger is doing low melee damage, so it's really only the two archers contributing significantly to DPS.  Your fight takes longer to finish.  The champion led group has much more effective DPS, with the cleric not needing to warding bond and hide, instead tossing guiding bolts for the rogue to handle off-tank giants, the champion dishing a significant amount of damage back to the giants, and the wizard actually able to engage in trivializing foes with spells either though DPS or lockdowns.Finally, running a few mock combats in FG doesn't mean that's any more than an anecdote.  THOSE fights went well for everyone, with carefully planned and seemless tactical decision making on the side of the party, who integrated all of their abilities to maximize the bladesinger while the giants appeared to engage separate targets and run after kites that had plenty of open fields without obstructions to slow them down.So, yeah, open field, party with optimized tactics to show of the bladesinger, a few run-throughs without anything wild happening, and lots and lots of resources burned and you get a good result.  Congrats!  This wasn't in dispute (in fact, you explicitly chose some resource expenditure to directly counteract the glaring weakness of critical vulnerability -- and you'd have to).  What's in dispute isn't that the bladesinger can't burn lots of resources to not get hit, but that they can still be an effective wizard while doing so.  You've pretty clearly shown that the resource burn to make the bladesinger viable as a tank is so high that the bladesinger cannot risk casting spells for other purposes without endangering their tanking.  So, my point stands:  the bladesinger can be a poor fighter (good AC, bad hp, moderate to low damage output) at the cost of being a wizard.  It's a good tradition, strong in some regards, not so much in others, but not super-awesome, only choose this, can be both a fighter and a wizard.  You can pick, but you can't really do both jobs.</blockquote>

Verification