D&D 5E Need a better houserule to fix Bladesinger's mechanics not supporting lore issue

[Cap'n Kobold]

I'm willing to accept some variance in level of martial and magical for a Bladesinger, as a Bladesinger is a specific flavor of the classic fighter/magic-user, rather than identical to the concept. For a classic fighter/mage, I'd want a 20th level character to be about 15th or 16th level in each class. For this 5e iteration, I'm okay with having it be mostly mage, with a cleric level of melee ability.



I see it switching on and off between attacks and spells, probably 60-70% melee attacks. I feel that either green flame blade or booming blade are pretty essential to the 5e version for damage purposes (since a Bladesinger concept needs decent melee damage), but getting that damage through spells isn't essential. Decent damage doesn't mean on par with a rogue or single classed fighter. It does mean keeping up with a melee cleric or their own ranged cantrip damage. Basically, I see them casting one concentration spell (if the situation warrants it) then spending the rest of the combat alternating between melee attacks and a variety of spells that fit their personal style. Fireball, fly, magic missile, dispel magic, stinking cloud, invisibility, haste, whatever. They are warrior with one hand and wizard with the other in combat. For bonus actions, I have no particular thoughts on their frequency. My image of the playstyle doesn't require them, although if it has useful spells that can be cast with bonus actions that is a great opportunity to swing a weapon and cast a spell on the same round--always a good thing.

Running off that description, what is it that you think you need for a bladesinger character that isn't provided by the current Eldritch Knight or EK/wizard multiclass?
Other than the name of the subclass?

 

[CapnZapp]

Yes, that's one more option.

An Eldritch Knight Fighter 10/Bladesinger Wizard 10 would have, on average, a d8 HD. He would go with Dex primary, Int secondary, Con tertiary.

He wouldn't need heavy armor proficiencies (since Dex primary and Bladesinger) or martial weapons (since Elf) but would probably go Fighter first anyway (better low-level survivability, better Concentration saves).

He would gain (hope I'm doing this correctly) 7th level spells (level 13 mc spellcaster). All the limits on Eldritch Knight spellcasting would essentially disappear.

Longsword? Still no. But we have already established that you could and should reskin the Rapier into whatever you want to call your sword.

Chainmail? Still not compatible with bladesinging (for good reasons). AC 12 + Dex + Int is still very good (not to mention +1 with mage armor); you will end up with AC 22 even before any magics, which is top tier AC.

Elven Chain? You don't need it. In fact, you don't want it - your Dex will be too good.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

In my opinion, the design failure of the 5e starts with giving it far too attractive spell options, rather than any relatively minor ability score or armor related issue. Yes, you CAN enter melee as a 5e Bladesinger, but why on earth would you ever?

All the benefits conferred by Bladesinging are excellent... for your survival. But you lose little by staying at a traditional safe distance for a spellcaster. You still have access to excellent ranged cantrips.

Of course, a Bladesinger can avoid melee entirely and be fine, and going into melee doesn't really help effectiveness much (if at all). That is actually fine. All that matters is that they can be doing better damage swinging a weapon than throwing a firebolt, which they can with green flame blade so the design is fine there. You don't go into melee with the 5e Bladesinger because you have to; you do it because you want to and because you can.

About the only significant mechanical benefit is that you can make good use of magical weapons. Since this is sitting on a full wizard chassis, it's probably good that it doesn't give you too much benefit.

One wild idea I haven't checked out in detail: Have you considered what would happen if you applied the Bladesinger subclass on top of the Bard or Cleric base class?

Lack of traditional spell options (and bard can only mitigate that so much) is main objection to that method. Interesting thought experiment though.

PS. Oh, one more thing - please remember that you don't actually need level 9 spells to become a fearsome caster in 5th edition. This is because your save DC increases automatically with your level (actually your spellcasting stat): a Fireball or Hold Person is just as fearsome from somebody with only access to 5th level spells as those who can cast Wish.

So one simple option might be to create a variant of Eldritch Knight to serve as your Bladesinger. As I see it, you might not have to do more than to give it the full Wizard spell list, perhaps in exchange for a lower hit die, and you're done...?

It's the higher level utility spells that make me feel like a higher level wizard. Fireball in a high level spot is ho-hum. Plane shift to the Elemental Plane of Fire, because I'm a *wizard* is what makes it feel right for me.

Running off that description, what is it that you think you need for a bladesinger character that isn't provided by the current Eldritch Knight or EK/wizard multiclass?
Other than the name of the subclass?

High-level spells. I like Eldritch Knight as a dabbler, but I can't come close to recreating fighter/wizard (of which Bladesinger is a sub-type) character concepts from AD&D with it.

An Eldritch Knight Fighter 10/Bladesinger Wizard 10 would have, on average, a d8 HD. He would go with Dex primary, Int secondary, Con tertiary.

He wouldn't need heavy armor proficiencies (since Dex primary and Bladesinger) or martial weapons (since Elf) but would probably go Fighter first anyway (better low-level survivability, better Concentration saves).

He would gain (hope I'm doing this correctly) 7th level spells (level 13 mc spellcaster). All the limits on Eldritch Knight spellcasting would essentially disappear.

5th-level spells with 7th-level slots. EK 9/Wizard 11 is a better route for 6th level spells, or EK 7/Wizard 13 for 7th level spells with 9th level slots. That's as close as you can get to a traditional fighter/mage that is also effective. You get War Magic and 7th level spells, but you are low on hit points, and you advance in relevant abilities like molasses.

Fighter/Bladesinger isn't a good combination though (other than a 1 or 2 level fighter dip, which can be worth it depending on what you're going for), because fighter is overlapping features and providing similar ways to accomplish melee prowess Bladesinger while taking spellcasting away.

Longsword? Still no. But we have already established that you could and should reskin the Rapier into whatever you want to call your sword.

I'm pretty flexible with my weapon fluff, but there are a still a lot more random magical longswords than rapiers in my games, forcing me to customize rewards to a character, which isn't how my general philosophy of play runs.

Elven Chain? You don't need it. In fact, you don't want it - your Dex will be too good.

Lol...yes, but that's the thing. Bladesinger should want it!

 

[CapnZapp]

Sorry but if you need the exact mechanics as opposed to the general feeling I don't see any solution that will satisfy you than to play AD&D.

I consider the inability of 5e to model a Fighter/Wizard with both martial capabilities and full wizard spellcasting a feature.

This might sound harsh, but the way you shoot down everything that means any compromise makes me think you want an old-style dual-classed character, and nothing else.

In more modern lingo we call that a gestalt build. The reason you aren't finding support for it is that there isn't really any interest in obviously overpowered builds - simply smush together two classes and call it a day.

Sorry
Zapp

TL;DR: I can't help you since I can't see what your Bladesinger does worse than either Fighter or Wizard - and be assured, it absolutely needs at least one such weak area (i.e. the essential balancing part that explains why a Fighter Wizard would choose any other option)

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Sorry but if you need the exact mechanics as opposed to the general feeling I don't see any solution that will satisfy you than to play AD&D.

I'm pretty flexible with mechanics, as long as the actual feeling I'm going for is captured. My initial feeling for the AD&D fighter/magic-user was being not quite as good at being a fighter or mage as a single classed character, but feeling like a party level appropriate member of each class. You could have a fighter/magic-user as your only mage and feel like the party has a real mage. It doesn't work with Eldritch Knight.

As an example of where I'm flexible, I think the Bladesinger mostly does a good job of capturing the feel of that kit. It doesn't do what I consider a sufficient job of fighter/mage, but it has the unique feel of Bladesinger enough to be interesting.

I consider the inability of 5e to model a Fighter/Wizard with both martial capabilities and full wizard spellcasting a feature.

This might sound harsh, but the way you shoot down everything that means any compromise makes me think you want an old-style dual-classed character, and nothing else.

In more modern lingo we call that a gestalt build. The reason you aren't finding support for it is that there isn't really any interest in obviously overpowered builds - simply smush together two classes and call it a day.

Over on the other multiclassing thread (there are a couple links to it on this one), I discussed a few different approaches I'd considered for a balanced gestalt multiclass, which is what they really need to do to capture the concept.

But as far as this discussion goes, to show I'm not being completely unreasonable, I actually derived a solution from suggestions given on the first page and posted it here:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...g-lore-issue&p=7009269&viewfull=1#post7009269

It's only a few simple house rules that allows Bladesinger to be the longsword and chain shirt (or elven chain) character I envision them as, as well as allowing for other normally Strength-based martial weapons if someone wants a different style.

The thread continued on after that with suggestions that didn't take into account the solution I had come up with (probably because people weren't reading the whole thread to get there--which is the same thing I frequently do when someone is asking for advice) and for some reason I kept responding to them. I think you came in at about that point, so my basic mindset was just trying to point out how none of the solutions that have been recommended really worked out as well as the one we figured out on the first couple of pages; then we got sidetracked a bit into fighter/mage general thoughts (which really need some balanced gestalt rules to satisfy me).

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Cool. It sounds like you have what you need to houserule in to get what you want.
Since you carried on, I assumed that you were looking for somewhat less intrusive options, or ones fitting within the current rules better. (For example you wanted to play a what you consider a Bladesinger, and wanted suggestions a DM would be more likely to allow or similar.)

 

[CapnZapp]

I'm pretty flexible with mechanics, as long as the actual feeling I'm going for is captured. My initial feeling for the AD&D fighter/magic-user was being not quite as good at being a fighter or mage as a single classed character, but feeling like a party level appropriate member of each class. You could have a fighter/magic-user as your only mage and feel like the party has a real mage. It doesn't work with Eldritch Knight.

Problem is - only the Wizard will do for the "real mage" feeling. Check out the spell lists of Sorcerer et al - sure they have Fireball, but they can't fulfil the traditional role of "party mage".

On the other hand, this concept is largely obsolete. Sure you might find a use for [insert favorite Wizard spell here], but generally 5e adventures are way less dependant on "use spell X here or be severely inconvenienced". 5e simply does not expect a "party mage" in the way many 3e adventures do (especially high level Monte Cook ones). Magic overall is much less a requirement in this edition - the monsters and challenges you can't just brute force your way through are much much less common.

So, again - could it be that you're chasing the ghost of editions past...?

The Eldritch Knight is definitely supposed to be able to used as a wizardy character (especially with a level of Wizard or ten, so the character can pick up whatever spells she wants). Sure, the EK is a first-rate martial fighter, and so I completely understand a reluctance to "waste" her actions on utility spellcasting... but still.

 

[CapnZapp]

As an example of where I'm flexible, I think the Bladesinger mostly does a good job of capturing the feel of that kit. It doesn't do what I consider a sufficient job of fighter/mage, but it has the unique feel of Bladesinger enough to be interesting.

But the main reason why it doesn't, or can't, or shouldn't, do the job of a fighter is that is 100% the best spellcaster in the game.

I would still want you to discuss the question of how martial a character can be allowed to be (assuming full spellcaster) and still not break the game.

The argument "sure he can cast spells but I want him to enter melee" does not count, I'm afraid.

For your home campaign, such a solution might work wonderfully, of course, but for a general solution, the character needs to NEED to enter melee because his other options aren't strong enough.

Having a character be able to stand back casting spells but freely choose to enter melee is a luxury. Another word for this luxury is "overpowered". If you were seeking some kind of "prestige class" solution for your Bladesinger that might be okayish, but so far I understand you want a pretty basic build option, comparable with any other fighter or wizard choice.

For instance, imagine a Valor Bard with the Wizard's spell list. (Let's ignore the question of what to remove to compensate for the better spell list for the moment) I'm sure you just missed this suggestion previously, but I would be interested to know what, exactly, this solution would lack in your eyes.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Problem is - only the Wizard will do for the "real mage" feeling. Check out the spell lists of Sorcerer et al - sure they have Fireball, but they can't fulfil the traditional role of "party mage".

On the other hand, this concept is largely obsolete. Sure you might find a use for [insert favorite Wizard spell here], but generally 5e adventures are way less dependant on "use spell X here or be severely inconvenienced". 5e simply does not expect a "party mage" in the way many 3e adventures do (especially high level Monte Cook ones). Magic overall is much less a requirement in this edition - the monsters and challenges you can't just brute force your way through are much much less common.

So, again - could it be that you're chasing the ghost of editions past...?

Editions past feel is alive and well in my campaigns, so need to resurrect them.

I agree that sorcerer struggles a bit in the role. There are just going to be things you can't do with them, the same as with a bard, and you have to accept that if your party has the sorcerer as their mage.

The only official 5e adventure we've played has been LMoP, but I'm not surprised if they down-played the importance of particular spells. In concept my preference is that you don't need any particular class combination, but that some party configurations are significantly better in certain situations, whether that's a cleric for turning, a wizard for utility, a tanky fighter, a natury ranger or druid, etc. If your party doesn't feel like its composition matters for what areas it excels or suffers in, then it's a rather bland world.

Thanks for the forewarning on 5e adventures. I will be running some of the official ones, and now I know I might need to spice them up a bit to let different classes shine.

The Eldritch Knight is definitely supposed to be able to used as a wizardy character (especially with a level of Wizard or ten, so the character can pick up whatever spells she wants). Sure, the EK is a first-rate martial fighter, and so I completely understand a reluctance to "waste" her actions on utility spellcasting... but still.

I find is exceedingly hard to get a satisfying mix of EK and Wizard levels that feels right for its entire career rather than just for the first few and last couple of levels, but maybe it works better for some.

But the main reason why it doesn't, or can't, or shouldn't, do the job of a fighter is that is 100% the best spellcaster in the game.

I would still want you to discuss the question of how martial a character can be allowed to be (assuming full spellcaster) and still not break the game.

I agree with that premise. You can't be the best at everything. I'm just not convinced that the wizard is so much better than other casters that having a subclass with cleric or valor bard level of melee competency is an issue. That's why I think bladesinger is fine for balance, it just needs those tweaks for feel.

As far as the general concept of a better fighter/wizard blend, I think the easiest solution is some sort of balanced hybrid or gestalt that reduces the raw power of both the fighter and wizard features compared to other characters of the same level, but still hands out enough stuff to let them do their things.

The argument "sure he can cast spells but I want him to enter melee" does not count, I'm afraid.

For your home campaign, such a solution might work wonderfully, of course, but for a general solution, the character needs to NEED to enter melee because his other options aren't strong enough. [/quote]

But it does work for the Bladesinger as designed, unless you think it is overpowered. That's why I tried to keep my lore restoration desired fixes from upping the power, because then it would be overpowered.

Having a character be able to stand back casting spells but freely choose to enter melee is a luxury. Another word for this luxury is "overpowered". If you were seeking some kind of "prestige class" solution for your Bladesinger that might be okayish, but so far I understand you want a pretty basic build option, comparable with any other fighter or wizard choice.

So you do think that the Bladesinger is overpowered then?

For instance, imagine a Valor Bard with the Wizard's spell list. (Let's ignore the question of what to remove to compensate for the better spell list for the moment) I'm sure you just missed this suggestion previously, but I would be interested to know what, exactly, this solution would lack in your eyes.

If we're talking about my general fighter/mage interest (we kind of keep switching back and forth between the two topics, so I'm trying to clarify which issue I'm on), I think it's a great precedent. I don't think it truly captures the feel I'm going for though.

First, there is the question of whether wizard casting is overall better than bard casting at all, given Magical Secrets.

However, setting that aside for a moment, we can look at the rest of the bard. One problem is that they come loaded with stuff that is really bardy. They have Bardic Inspiration and other support focused elements that don't scream "traditional warrior mage" to me. They also have other unnecessary items like Expertise, musical instruments...pretty much everything but their spellcasting and a Valor Bard's bit of combat and War Magic stuff.

Since we're just theorizing, how much of that would have to be dropped to justify giving them wizard spellcasting? Or to take it in the other direction, if you gave a wizard the Valor college as its subclass, would it be balanced? With other wizard traditions; with the Valor bard?

If you just switched spell lists (rather than the entire spellcasting feature), but kept the rest of the bard class, then I think there would be very little you'd want to take away from the class. You could probably yank out Bardic Inspiration and call it close enough, though you'd still be left with other bardic features which probably would be better replaced with something that fits better, since eliminating them would weaken the class too much compared to the official options.

From class design, it looks to me like WotC agrees with you that the wizard spell list is supreme and justifies giving a whole lot of stuff to bards to make up for it. Or it could just be that they were more concerned with making bards rock this edition than making sure wizards stayed magically on top. They certainly did a great job with the bards.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Cool. It sounds like you have what you need to houserule in to get what you want.
Since you carried on, I assumed that you were looking for somewhat less intrusive options, or ones fitting within the current rules better. (For example you wanted to play a what you consider a Bladesinger, and wanted suggestions a DM would be more likely to allow or similar.)

I actually would be very interested in more streamlined options than the best ones that we've been able to come up with, as long as they fit as well with the various considerations I'm concerned with.

I haven't played a Bladesinger yet, but it probably would be useful to be able to get the feel I want without my house rules. The best bet for that would most likely be to see if the DM would be generous on the fluff (rapier -> elven thinblade, not musketeer sword; studded leather stats -> light chain shirt) and if I got elven chain make a lore pitch for an indulgence to let my Bladesinger treat it as light armor.