D&D 5E No Bladesinger?

[Cap'n Kobold]

I think Crawford is on the Spectrum. (I don't mean that as an insult, but as an explanation. A lot of us here probably are.) He has a great grasp of rules minutia, but sometimes he's WAY too RAW for my tastes. Here he answers a vaguely worded rule with a vaguely worded ruling! (Kinda explains how the rules get written so vaguely in the first place.)

Being RAW in response to a question about RAW is part of his job. The question posed wasn't about how he would rule it. It was a question about rules interaction so he answered it as RAW.

And . . . I would really suggest avoiding discussing whether or not someone might suffer from any particular mental disorder here. Whether a fellow poster or not.

Arcane Archer is an explicitly ‘elven method’ that other races can learn as well.

Likewise, Bladesinger could easily be an explicitly ‘elven tradition’ that other races can learn as well.

Arcane archer is a tradition that may have started with the elves, but has spread to other races: Ruleswise it is unrestricted in who can learn it.

Bladesinger is an elven tradition that is kept as a racial secret: Ruleswise only elves can be that subclass.

Thus bladesinger requires DM houseruling to be of interest to more than a small subset (people who want to be that particular style of gish) of a small subset (people who want to play en elf.)

XGtE is intended to have a much broader appeal, and anyone who really wants to play a bladesinger can probably access a copy of SCAG anyway.

 

[DEFCON 1]

As such, the original post still stands. Why did Xanathars Guide leave out Bladesinger? What makes it ‘less fit’, if anything?

The book includes two new subclasses focused on weapon fighting for explicitly spellcasting classes-- the College of Swords and the Hexblade. Perhaps they felt adding another one to the book was unnecessary. There were other stories they wanted to tell with their subclass choices.

 

[Ancalagon]

Nope. I never said that. I do not like any reprinting of material.

It would have been clearer if you had addressed the main crux of the thread instead of a small parallel discussion

 

[jaelis]

Best answer to the OP is that we'll probably never know.

 

[CapnZapp]

5e is a surprise because the spellcasters are balanced (mostly because of the concentration mechanic). This allows full casters to master melee combat, while remaining balanced.

Psst... Don't mention that to von klaude...



Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[Yaarel]

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION]

Yeah, there are probably some spells that do better to remove concentration and some that probably need it.

But generally, the worst offending spells have concentration, and this goes an enormous way to keep the entire game balanced.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

My feeling is that Tenser's Transformation + Bladesinging = BROKEN.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

And . . . I would really suggest avoiding discussing whether or not someone might suffer from any particular mental disorder here. Whether a fellow poster or not.

This would be why I tried to point out that I wasn't saying it to insult the guy in any way. I don't see it as a "mental disorder" so much as a different (sometimes amazing and sometimes difficult) way of thinking. But you're right, I will refrain from saying anything like that in the future, lest I offend.

 

[Greenmtn]

The one time I have seen someone try a bladesinger they ended up regretting not going with an Eldritch Knight instead.

Maybe they just didn't feel it was ready.

 

[Yaarel]

The one time I have seen someone try a bladesinger they ended up regretting not going with an Eldritch Knight instead.

Maybe they just didn't feel it was ready.

The Bladesinger is a fullcaster while the Eldritch Knight is a halfcaster. Different concepts.

But I agree the Bladesinger can benefit from more finetuning.