D&D 5E Opinions on Bladesinger

[Celtavian]

Not sure. Looks ok. A fighter/wizard with heavy armor and shield can have an AC of 21 all the time without magic. A bladesinger with a 20 dex and 20 intelligence with light armor can have an AC of 18 all the time and 23 when bladesinging. You have to be fairly generous with stat generation to have a 20 dex and intelligence any time soon whereas the fighter/wizard has a 21 with a 10 Dex.

If they cast shield, the fighter/wizard's AC shoots to 26 and the bladesinger to 23 when not bladesinging and 28 when bladesinging.

I don't know. Seems like a huge stat investment to do what a Fighter or Paladin/wizard or sorcerer can obtain with coin quite early in levels. I imagine most will take the bladesinger to play a concept, but I don't think it is as powerful as a fighter/wizard.

 

[psychophipps]

I'm not sure how everyone else plays their game, but we strongly tend to get a short rest at least every other serious combat or so. With this in mind, the "*GASP!* Only two uses of the Trance!?!" argument is largely moot at my personal gaming table.

The other thing that folks seem to continually missing is the fact that this class can flip-flop back and forth between front and second line pretty much at will with enhanced movement spells and the extra movement from the trance. Add to this that these extra movement spells are pretty much all low-level spells and they can not only get you in to attack if necessary, but they are also fantastic for getting back a bit to crank off some sort of distinct unpleasantness with minimal fear of immediate retaliation.

As for the AC discussion, I have found that once you break a natural AC of 21 or so, you can basically wade into whatever for a pretty large portion of the enemies you will typically run into. Add that you can boost this easily with first-level spells like Shield of Faith and the ubiquitous Shield for when they roll high but not a Natty 20, and you are even more safe against almost any but the most fearsome of foes. While the threat of the Almighty One-Shot is certainly a risk with the lower HP of Wizards, when was the last time you had one of those actually come up that didn't result in pretty much an instantaneous Healing Word or other healing ability (party make-up allowing)?

They basically removed the biggest negative of playing Wizards, the lousy melee ability. Double Attack with decent Martial weapons just means you have another person to worry about winning Rock, Paper, Scissors for the next magic sword that comes down the pike. The good thing is that they have Mage Armor plus bonuses so they most likely won't be asking for any magic armor that comes along.

As for the other goodies that are constantly being tossed around from other Specialty Wizard options in the PHB, I see it largely as a moot point. The typical player wanting to play a Bladesinger isn't a Wizard player thinking about getting into the occasional tussle for fun, it's a melee player wanting to have a chance to light fires and blow stuff up while not deserting their preference of getting into a scrap. Also, for the Old Skool guys like me that used to have to cast Light as a 1st level spell slot rather than a freebie, I've never had any of that stuff anyway so I wouldn't miss it one little bit when you get right down to brass tacks.

 

[garnuk]

I'm currently trying to make a bladesinger for one of the games I play in to replace our sorcerer.


One thing that I can't quite figure out yet, is if the Bladesinger needs two stats (dex/int) or if it really needs 3 stats (dex/int/con) or if it can get by with only a +1 or +0 on it's con stat.

Also, I'm sad that Rapier isn't listed as a special animal style since its the obvious weapon choice. I think trying to use a longsword, and needing good dex/int and str and maybe con is just too much.

The other thing which is a bit disappointing, is the snake style of the bladesinger. 1). It's not a blade... 2). There are only 6 poison or disease based spells to use... Or am I missing something here?

One thing to look out for however, I think is the Aracana Cleric using the cantrips. That seems more deadly than the bladesinger to me.

 

[Mirtek]

I'm not sure how everyone else plays their game, but we strongly tend to get a short rest at least every other serious combat or so. With this in mind, the "*GASP!* Only two uses of the Trance!?!" argument is largely moot at my personal gaming table.

You can certainly do that but then you are vastly altering the intended balance between short rest and long rest classes.

It's your game but be aware that's not what the classes were designed and playtested for

They basically removed the biggest negative of playing Wizards, the lousy melee ability.

But he pays for it by being a worse wizard

As for the other goodies that are constantly being tossed around from other Specialty Wizard options in the PHB, I see it largely as a moot point. The typical player wanting to play a Bladesinger isn't a Wizard player thinking about getting into the occasional tussle for fun, it's a melee player wanting to have a chance to light fires and blow stuff up while not deserting their preference of getting into a scrap. Also, for the Old Skool guys like me that used to have to cast Light as a 1st level spell slot rather than a freebie, I've never had any of that stuff anyway so I wouldn't miss it one little bit when you get right down to brass tacks.

Regardless of whether you're missing them, they're still there and not having them is the payment for better melee.

That's like saying the champion fighter with his 18-20 crit is the best and he gets it for free, since as an old school guy your fighters never had superiorty die and thus you don't miss them when you have to give them up for getting the better crit range.

When an evoker caught in melee just drops a fireball on himself excluding himself and all allies in the area completely from the effect, that's the opportunity cost for being a bladesinder. When a diviner makes the enemy fail the important save without the enemy even getting the roll (even on an enemy with legendary resistance) or an ally just succeed on a roll without even having to rollit, that's the opportunity cost of being a bladesinder, etc.

Also, I'm sad that Rapier isn't listed as a special animal style since its the obvious weapon choice.

well, the styles are just meaningless fluff, the rapier will certainly the most common bladesinger weapon

 

[garnuk]

well, the styles are just meaningless fluff, the rapier will certainly the most common bladesinger weapon

It's a setting book. The fluff is not meaningless.
It would have made more sense for them to make the longsword a finesse weapon when wielded one handed by a bladesinger.

 

[Mirtek]

It's a setting book. The fluff is not meaningless.

It is mechanically meaningless for everyone and it's "fluffically" meaning less for everyone not playing FR

 

[CapnZapp]

The Int-to-AC from bladesong however is not written like the other extra-ability-to-AC abilities and would stack with any of them. Personally I am on the side that believes this was a screw up rather than done intentionally

You need to differentiate between abilities that set an AC and abilities that add to your AC.

You gain a bonus to your AC equal to your Intelligence
modifier (minimum of+ 1).

The bladesinger's ability is clearly meant as a bonus to your AC. I cannot fathom how you can read into it that it is a screw up - the language makes it crystal clear it stacks to your regular AC.

Contrast this with abilities that set your AC. The rules say you must choose one and only one of these. You may have several option on how to calculate your AC but you must choose only one of them.

For instance, Barbarian's Unarmored Defense:

your Armor Class
equals 10 + your Dexterity modifier + your Constitution
modifier.

Note how the language sets your AC instead of giving you a bonus to it. This difference in rules language is significant, intentional and impossible to confuse.

Let's pick another example, Mirtek. Let's take Light Armor. Yes, the very basics of the game:

If you wear light armor, you add
your Dexterity modifier to the base number from your
armor type to determine your Armor Class.

Again, this sets your AC. It doesn't add to it.

Now, if you're a Barbarian, you have both these. But they can't be combined simply by virtue of both setting your AC. Use one, and it "overwrites" the other.

They don't stack.

But if you find a shield or Ring of Protection, that adds to your AC. Thus its bonus stacks with your regular AC.

And this is clearly and intentionally true of Bladesingers too.

Cheers,

 

[Mirtek]

You need to differentiate between abilities that set an AC and abilities that add to your AC.

I know, that's why I see bladesong as a screw up

The bladesinger's ability is clearly meant as a bonus to your AC. I cannot fathom how you can read into it that it is a screw up - the language makes it crystal clear it stacks to your regular AC.

It clearly is a bonus to your AC as written, I am just not sure it's meant to have been written that way. I see the screw up in that whoever wrote it used the old editions wording of "gain as a bonus" instead of the new edition's wording, aka "your AC becomes" on accident created specifically to prevent any stacking

 

[CapnZapp]

No, there are two ways of phrasing it, and the Bladesinger is clearly using one and not the other.

Look, you are trying to make it look like the ability is using some dodgy language when it isn't.

It's time to let that particular train of thought rest.

Feel free to continue wanting the Bladesinger to set your AC, Mirtek but please stop casting doubt on the designer intent.

They couldn't have been more clear. There isn't a more unambiguous way to phrase it.

It's not just that the wording is clear - there's nothing in that wording that suggest an error.

 

[psychophipps]

You can certainly do that but then you are vastly altering the intended balance between short rest and long rest classes.
When an evoker caught in melee just drops a fireball on himself excluding himself and all allies in the area completely from the effect, that's the opportunity cost for being a bladesinder. When a diviner makes the enemy fail the important save without the enemy even getting the roll (even on an enemy with legendary resistance) or an ally just succeed on a roll without even having to rollit, that's the opportunity cost of being a bladesinder, etc.
well, the styles are just meaningless fluff, the rapier will certainly the most common bladesinger weapon

This where we have another strong disconnect. You see the ability to drop an Arc Light (B-52 strike or in this case the D&D equivalent) on yourself and/or your comrades without fear of harm to yourself and/or <insert random target here> as some sort of great thing.

With the phenomenal toolbox available to Wizards due to the great variety of spells, the best solution to a given tactical situation that hops into the game designers's heads was "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if they could just crank off whatever, whenever?" I'm sorry, but as an Old Skooler that actually likes to think and stuff, I don't see that as "Man that's a great addition to the Wizarding toolbox!" I see it as "It's Wizardarding for Idiots!"