D&D 5E Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade Nerfed in TCoE

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

What, econ 101 lied to me?!

Perish the thought.

I certainly hope that is not what they taught you in Econ 101!

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Well, here's a possible combination. The Bladesinger's Extra Attack allows for you to replace an attack from the Attack action with a cantrip, and Haste gives you an extra Attack action. The transitive property then suggests that you can combine those features to use the Hasted action to cast BB/GFB. What do you all think?

(I know this is slightly off topic, but just wanted to see what the people in this thread thought about this.)

Doesn’t the language of the BS EA feature specify “as part of the attack action” or some such?

If so, then no, it doesn’t work RAW.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Doesn’t the language of the BS EA feature specify “as part of the attack action” or some such?

If so, then no, it doesn’t work RAW.

Yes, it does, and no, that doesn't disqualify it, because Haste gives you an Attack action.

 

[cbwjm]

Yes, it does, and no, that doesn't disqualify it, because Haste gives you an Attack action.

A limited attack action but still an attack action. Reading the level 6 ability and haste, I can't see why it wouldn't let you replace the haste attack with a cantrip as well. If it said once on your turn, sure, but since it doesn't, I'd say it's good to go.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yes, it does, and no, that doesn't disqualify it, because Haste gives you an Attack action.

Had to check, you’re right. I had thought Haste avoiding calling it an Attack Action.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

My Rogue/Bladesinger is gonna murder. Especially with Crawford’s clarification that BB with Shadowblade is RAI.

 

[Charlaquin]

Haste says, “Until the spell ends, the target's speed is doubled, it gains a +2 bonus to AC, it has advantage on Dexterity Saving Throws, and it gains an additional action on each of its turns. That action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon Attack only)”

A cantrip is not a weapon attack.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Haste says, “Until the spell ends, the target's speed is doubled, it gains a +2 bonus to AC, it has advantage on Dexterity Saving Throws, and it gains an additional action on each of its turns. That action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon Attack only)”

A cantrip is not a weapon attack.

But a Bladesinger can replace an attack with a cantrip. Even if the "one weapon Attack only" still restricts it, that would still allow for Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade.

 

[Charlaquin]

But a Bladesinger can replace an attack with a cantrip. Even if the "one weapon Attack only" still restricts it, that would still allow for Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade.

Hmm... Yeah, that checks out.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

But a Bladesinger can replace an attack with a cantrip. Even if the "one weapon Attack only" still restricts it, that would still allow for Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade.

I suppose it depends on which specific rule takes precedence over which other specific rule (specific beats general wont help here since it’s two specifics).

If you start by assuming the existence (or potential future existence) of features that might allow you to do unusual things with the Attack action, and then read haste, it would seem haste is disallowing such unusual options to apply by limiting it to one weapon attack.

If, on the other hand, you assume that the potential existence of such features is not contemplated by haste, then it might seem that such a feature could specifically overwrite the haste restriction.

The argument for the second position draws strength from the lack of such features (unless I’m forgetting one, which I may be) at the time of the publication of haste. This is a point in its favor, but it isn’t an automatic validation of the position, because we do not know if such potential features were anticipated at the time of publication, and even if they were not it is a possibility that design intent would best align with such a contemplation (supporting the first position).

Personally I would favor the first position because I do not think being able to make two green-flame blade attacks plus another weapon attack is within intended power level of a Bladesinger’s melee output.

(But then, I also stick with the original version, since I think the attack buff was unneeded and the defense debuff was crippling in such a way that you aren’t even going to be able to effectively use the attack buff, so what do I know.)