D&D 5E Bladesinger tank!? Madness, or crazy like a fox?

[Ainulindalion]

I suppose, read one way, nothing actually prevents a Bladesinger from dual wielding. I don't think it's worth it, even if you read it that way.

But also, I'd argue that if you dual wield, you are using two hands to attack with a weapon, unless you never actually use your off hand attack while in Bladesong. Sure, it's not both hands at the same time, or the same weapon, but it's still your left and right hand attacking with a weapon.

Maybe that's a stretch from a RAW standpoint.

But dual wielding (and ranger in general, for that matter) are focused on damage output, not tanking. Hoard breaker would be great for a tank with sentinel if it could trigger off your turn, though. It can't, sadly, I just looked.

As written, Hoard Breaker ought to trigger off the attack in Green-flame or Booming Blade, though, if you use them on your turn.

I'm sure a Ranger/Bladesinger would be a fun combo to build, but I think EK fits better for purposes of the discussion on tanking.

 

[Parmandur]

WOTC clarified on Twitter that RAI, one hand has to be free.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Sure, why not? IME, anybody with heavy armor and the Shield spell can tank effectively at need, and wizards are better at it than most thanks to Blur/Web/Mirror Image/etc.. Some people will try to tell you that you don't have enough HP to do the job, but frankly there's not that much HP difference between the classes in 5E anyway, and there's nothing to stop you from taking the Tough feat in order to completely equalize your d6 with a fighter's d10.

Where you're going to struggle is not with HP attrition, it is the fact that a Bladesinger's saving throws stinks. No Con save proficiency, no Dex save proficiency means that the first time you run into ghoul, ghast, gorgon, carrion crawler, banshee, or anything else that incapacitates you via Con/Dex saves, you have a pretty fair chance of getting taken out of the combat and/or munched, depending on how tough the combat is. Because you're a wizard you will have ways to work around this (e.g. stay at range and plink with Fire Bolts instead of entering melee) but don't get cocky just because you have a good AC. You're strong against about 50% of the nasty stuff but there's another 50% that you're weak against.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I guess the abjurer Wizard is the better tank. It has a lot going for him. A massive HP shield that can be easily refreshed by casting shield. Take one level of fighter and wear plate and shield. Don´t bother to even use a weapon at first or use a staff one handed, which serves as your focus and allows you to cast many spells. and don´t bother boosting Int too much. Instead boost constitution as much as you can.
Instead of fighter you also may be a dwarf wearing good medium armor and you may upgrade later by just taking a feat or so. Maybe be a shield dwarf and a lvl 1 fighter, which makes your hp rise very high. Take warcaster if you tend to still fail constitution checks, even with proficiency in it and con 18 and an ablative shield.

Not that a bladesinger is bad or so, but it is more a mobile wizard with a bit melee potential rather than a tank.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Sure, why not? IME, anybody with heavy armor and the Shield spell can tank effectively at need, and wizards are better at it than most thanks to Blur/Web/Mirror Image/etc.. Some people will try to tell you that you don't have enough HP to do the job, but frankly there's not that much HP difference between the classes in 5E anyway, and there's nothing to stop you from taking the Tough feat in order to completely equalize your d6 with a fighter's d10.

Where you're going to struggle is not with HP attrition, it is the fact that a Bladesinger's saving throws stinks. No Con save proficiency, no Dex save proficiency means that the first time you run into ghoul, ghast, gorgon, carrion crawler, banshee, or anything else that incapacitates you via Con/Dex saves, you have a pretty fair chance of getting taken out of the combat and/or munched, depending on how tough the combat is. Because you're a wizard you will have ways to work around this (e.g. stay at range and plink with Fire Bolts instead of entering melee) but don't get cocky just because you have a good AC. You're strong against about 50% of the nasty stuff but there's another 50% that you're weak against.

Bladesong and heavy armor are mutually exclusive, as is taking a shield in the off hand. Magic shields are rather common and thus you need great int and dex to make it up in AC to just an eldritch knight, who also has defensive fighting style. As you say, you are a full time wizard on top, so your creativity should help you getting around most problems, but in no way do you have a better AC than a simple eldritch knight at level 3. If you take the tough feat, it sets you back in ability boosts, which are 16/16 int/dex at level 1 with the standard array and a high elf. This means, you will need level 19 to reach 20/20, if you don´t roll for stats.
It also means your constitution starts at 13, which is not very much at all, and it will never rise.

Your AC at level 2 will be 13 (mage armor) +3 (Dex) +3 (shield) which is just 19. An AC easily obtained by the level 1 shield fighter.
really, bladesong only comes in handy if you are desperate to melee. Which can be really fun and such. Luckily at level 1 you are barred from going into melee as you only qualify for bladesinger at level 2. At level 1 it would just be suicide.

 

[Blue]

I suppose, read one way, nothing actually prevents a Bladesinger from dual wielding. I don't think it's worth it, even if you read it that way.

But also, I'd argue that if you dual wield, you are using two hands to attack with a weapon, unless you never actually use your off hand attack while in Bladesong. Sure, it's not both hands at the same time, or the same weapon, but it's still your left and right hand attacking with a weapon.

Maybe that's a stretch from a RAW standpoint.

Using two hands to attack with a weapon is entirely different than attacking with two weapons, one in each hand. This isn't a stretch, it's clearly written in the rules. Your way you can use Great Weapon Fighting while dual wielding.

But dual wielding (and ranger in general, for that matter) are focused on damage output, not tanking.

Hmm, with a very few examples (mostly in the new SCAG), 5e doesn't have any "tanking" mechanics that force a character to attack you. You need to make it worthwhile for the foes to do so. One way to do that is to be a threat and do damage. So yes, doing damage is part of tanking in 5e.

I'm sure a Ranger/Bladesinger would be a fun combo to build, but I think EK fits better for purposes of the discussion on tanking.

That's reasonable.

 

[Blue]

WOTC clarified on Twitter that RAI, one hand has to be free.

So Duelist fighting style can work with a shield, which was highly questioned when the game first came out, but bladesong that only prohibits using a weapon in two hand can't. This is really shoddy writing.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

So Duelist fighting style can work with a shield, which was highly questioned when the game first came out, but bladesong that only prohibits using a weapon in two hand can't. This is really shoddy writing.

maybe they didn't understand the question...

 

[Ainulindalion]

Using two hands to attack with a weapon is entirely different than attacking with two weapons, one in each hand. This isn't a stretch, it's clearly written in the rules. Your way you can use Great Weapon Fighting while dual wielding.

Bladesong: "if you use two hands to make an attack with a weapon"
GWF: "a melee weapon that you are wielding with two hands"
TWF: "attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in your other hand"

They're not actually the same phrasing. But I already said it was a stretch.

Hmm, with a very few examples (mostly in the new SCAG), 5e doesn't have any "tanking" mechanics that force a character to attack you. You need to make it worthwhile for the foes to do so. One way to do that is to be a threat and do damage. So yes, doing damage is part of tanking in 5e.

Doing sufficient damage to remain a threat is always a part of tanking, particularly in a system with limited aggro-management abilities. The PHB includes Goading Attack maneuver, Compelled Duel spell, and the Sentinel feat as the primary methods of aggro-management. Which, to be fair, is about 1 column of text out of the entire book.

Also, any of the concentration spells that provide multi-target buffs to the rest of the party create a psuedo tanking situation if the enemies are smart enough to work it out.

But no, there's not much in the way of proper tanking in the core rules as presented in the PHB.

 

[Valmarius]

From my reading of bladesong, you can dual-wield while singing. What you can't do is perform the somatic components of any spell you wanted to cast.
All the new cantrips, and plenty of bladesinger-useful spells are V or V,M only.