No I wouldn't. It would be situational, but booming blade and bonus action disengage against an oponent who needs to move and melee is going to generally outdo 2 or 3 attacks at the levels you get 2 or 3 attacks respectively. Same with GFB if there are two enemies next to each other.
D&D 5E House rule: Extra Attacks for martials at 5,11,17
jmartkdr2
Hero
You could tweak the blade cantrips to scale normally but only add damage to the first hit, which should bring them back in line but create potentially powerful synergies.
If the blade cantrips scale with caster level, you might end up in an odd spot where a sorcerer adds a ton of fire to one strike whereas a fighter adds a little damage to many strikes (note that in this case I would allow the cantrip to apply to all attacks you get from multiattack, and possibly bonus actins attacks as well.) An artificer might split the difference if their caster level = 1/2 class level, since I would assume their "attacking level" would also be 1/2 class levels. (for battlesmith and armored at least, artillerist might just count as full class level for cantrips.)
For fighters, you'd need a big boost - like double weapon dice or something equally dramatic. This might vary by subclass (ie champions = double weapon dice, EK = full class level for attacks and cantrips and you can split as you please, battlemaster gets one free superiority die per turn in addition to X per SR, etc.)
If the blade cantrips scale with caster level, you might end up in an odd spot where a sorcerer adds a ton of fire to one strike whereas a fighter adds a little damage to many strikes (note that in this case I would allow the cantrip to apply to all attacks you get from multiattack, and possibly bonus actins attacks as well.) An artificer might split the difference if their caster level = 1/2 class level, since I would assume their "attacking level" would also be 1/2 class levels. (for battlesmith and armored at least, artillerist might just count as full class level for cantrips.)
For fighters, you'd need a big boost - like double weapon dice or something equally dramatic. This might vary by subclass (ie champions = double weapon dice, EK = full class level for attacks and cantrips and you can split as you please, battlemaster gets one free superiority die per turn in addition to X per SR, etc.)
TwoSix
Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
Not sure I agree, especially considering that extra attacks also means greater chance to land sneak attack.
BB only increases 2d8 per tier, assuming the target moves. That's pretty close to identical to the 1d6+5 or 1d8+5 of an extra attack. The possibility of a magic weapon and greater chance of landing a sneak attack only further tilts the scales towards extra attacks. BB's only real benefit would be the initial 1d8 on move at Tier 1.
Considering the opportunity cost, I think extra attacks would move BB/GFB from "Nearly must-have" to "Possible option" for most melee rogue builds.
TwoSix
Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
Honestly, if I move forward with this change, I'll either drop the bladetrips or limit them to 1/turn. They don't really play nice with what I'm trying to do.
jmartkdr2
Hero
In my head I had a whole complicated "if you devote two cantrips to GFB it adds two dice of damage to your next attack" which could work but might not be worth the effort unless someone really wants to play a 4e swordmage in your game.
Or just makes them an EK feature and give something else for other gishes.
One thing to consider: bladelocks. Do they need to take Thirsting Blade more than once or does the one invocation scale?
Uni-the-Unicorn!
Hero
Why not go the other way and have fighters increase damage at levels 11 and 17?
The scaling is similar, but you have extra dice to start with:
BB/GFB/extra attack (assumes 14 casting stat)
level 1: 2d8+5/1d8+7/1d8+5
Level 5: 4d8+5/3d8+7/2d8+10
Level 11: 6d8+5/5d8+7/3d8+15
You do have a point about chances to land sneak attack. Like I said it is situational. My real point is the Feat you use to get the Cantrip is heavily nerfed.
Clint_L
Hero
I don't understand the rationale at all.
Melee classes, especially fighter and barbarian are already great at delivering on-demand damage - fighter and barbarian are the highest DPR classes in the game, along with paladins. The usual knock against them is that they lack flexibility. Meanwhile casters do lower DPR but have great flexibility. Your house rule would make melee classes, aside from paladin, even better at DPR (WAY better), and casters even more flexible. Seems like if anything you would want to go the opposite direction.
Except for the extra attack for rogue - I could get behind that. For one thing, it wouldn't be as big a buff relative to their current baseline, and they lag on DPR a bit compared to other melee. The monk's problems are too fundamental; this doesn't address them at all.
TwoSix
Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
To be fair, I never gave any rationale.
This isn't intended as a balance patch; I'm more thinking through the implications of a universal attack progression and what other class features and feats would be impacted.
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
This effectively makes Fighters even worse, because now everyone gets the Fighter's core special feature by default, on top of their own class-specific equivalents (e.g. Rage damage bonus, Improved Divine Smite, Sneak Attack, etc.)
It also makes attack-based cantrips more powerful, because now each individual cast can crit--it's not 35% no damage, 60% hit, 5% double damage. Instead it's a much broader spectrum that can do nothing, or anything from 1dN to 8dN--essentially turning every attack-based cantrip into an equivalent of eldritch blast.
It also makes attack-based cantrips more powerful, because now each individual cast can crit--it's not 35% no damage, 60% hit, 5% double damage. Instead it's a much broader spectrum that can do nothing, or anything from 1dN to 8dN--essentially turning every attack-based cantrip into an equivalent of eldritch blast.
Similar Threads
