D&D 4E Spell concept to replicate 4e Bladesingers

[Paraxis]

I enjoyed playing the 4e bladesinger very much, the class is built around making a melee attack and getting off a minor magical attack at the same time against a nearby creature. I have liked the bladesinger concept since 2e, and I am trying to design a spell that will allow for this in 5e, without having to make a new class or subclass and to be used by multiple existing classes.

Yes I know about EK's and Valor bards, but I don't like waiting until 7th or 14th level to fulfil a character concept.
_____________

Elemental Arc
Evocation cantrip (bards, sorcerers, and wizards)
Casting Time: 1 bonus action
Range: 30 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
Save: Dexterity for no effect

You cause an elemental burst of energy to arc off of your weapon to target one creature that you can see within range. You must take the Attack action and make a melee attack this turn, in order for you may cast this spell. The target must make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, the target takes 1d4 (varies) damage, and it suffers an effect based on the damage type chosen.

Acid: target takes 1 (acid) damage at the start of it’s next turn.
Cold: targets speed is reduced by 5’
Fire: target suffers disadvantage on vision based perception checks until start of it’s next turn do to flash.
Lightning: target has disadvantage on save to resist if wearing metal armor

The spell’s damage increases when you reach 5th level (1d6), 11th level (1d8), and 17th level
(1d10).
_________________

The damage scales poorly because it is a bonus action, think of it more like an off-hand attack with a weapon than a full blown damage dealing cantrip.

The damage type being variable allows for a selection of minor effects which is desired as the 4e Bladesinger had a selection of different types of damage and effects. It also allows for the spell to be useful in some way during most every encounter.

The extra effects are the part I don't like so much as it sits right now, I don't want them to be too powerful but want them to be useful and fun. I was trying to think of something better for Lightning but drew a blank.

What are your thoughts, concerns, all that stuff?

 

[SkidAce]

Just to be sure, the weapon attack and the elemental arc do not have to be the same creature, but they could?

 

[Paraxis]

Just to be sure, the weapon attack and the elemental arc do not have to be the same creature, but they could?

Yes that is the idea. The spell can target any creature the spellcaster can see within range of the spell.

 

[DEFCON 1]

My first thought is always to compare it to other similar options already in the game and then see where the new one might be over or underpowered in comparison.

So what we have here essentially (at it's highest form) is a 1d12 or 2d6 weapon attack with an Action, plus a potential 1d4 extra damage and an effect with a Bonus action. The closest thing in the game we have to this is the Polearm Master feat, which grants a 1d10 weapon a Bonus action attack for 1d4 damage and an effect (creatures entering the wielder's reach provoke an OA.) So this cantrip grants four boons over Polearm Master-- there is no Feat (or ASI) cost to acquire it; you get an extra point of damage on the primary attack; you get four effects to choose from rather than just one; you can attack a second target at range rather than needing it to be adjacent to you.

Thus, my initial thought is that no, this cantrip is too good. Gaining four distinct advantages over Polearm Master says to me that it's overpowered, as there are no costs to acquiring it. If you were an human EK wielding a halberd, what would you rather take... this cantrip or spend your Feat on Polearm Master? I don't see why anyone would take the feat when they acquire so much more from the spell.

 

[Paraxis]

Well polearm master is amazing.

The bonus attack is a d4+str mod, usable at 10' reach just like any other attack with a polearm. It counts as a two handed weapon so other damage modifiers like great weapon fighting apply, and since it is made with a weapon once the fighter gains a magic polearm all those bonuses apply to the d4 attack.

Plus with somatic component and the timing of the spell being made as apart of the attack action, it ensures that the caster using this cantrip would need to have a hand free and thus limited to d8 weapons.

 

[TwoSix]

So what we have here essentially (at it's highest form) is a 1d12 or 2d6 weapon attack with an Action, plus a potential 1d4 extra damage and an effect with a Bonus action. The closest thing in the game we have to this is the Polearm Master feat, which grants a 1d10 weapon a Bonus action attack for 1d4 damage and an effect (creatures entering the wielder's reach provoke an OA.)

Since it's a spell that requires a S component, it would require either one hand free or the War Caster feat, n'est-ce pas? The free hand + the bonus action requirement make it more similar to dual wielding with an off-hand hand crossbow than anything else.

And while the 4 effects are nice, none of them are nearly as comparable in utility or damage to the free OA from polearm master.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Plus with somatic component and the timing of the spell being made as apart of the attack action, it ensures that the caster using this cantrip would need to have a hand free and thus limited to d8 weapons.

I'm pretty sure you can just take your hand off a two-handed weapon to cast a spell with somatic components. That's what EKs do all the time.

But if you are saying that you cannot use a two-handed weapon with this cantrip because you need to have both hands on the weapon for the Attack action... and the magic from the Bonus action casting of Elemental Arc isn't manifesting UNTIL a successful attack with that Attack action-- I'm not sure if that's actually legal. You are essentially casting a magical effect with part of an Attack action and I don't think that's technically allowed. Any other Bonus action spell manifests during the Bonus action itself. Unless I'm mistaken, I can't think of any other magical Bonus action spell whose completion happens not during said Bonus action, but only during the paired Action of the player.

Thus, you have a conundrum. If you say the Elemental Arc spell *is* completely cast with a Bonus action but just doesn't manifest until a successful Attack action with a weapon... the character wouldn't need a hand free during that Attack action because the actual casting is already done and they can use a two-handed weapon for the attack while the magical effect manifests during it. The magical effect just occurs later that the Bonus action used to cast it. If, however, you are saying that you do need a hand free during the Attack action when the spell manifests (and by free, you mean completely open and not coming off of a two-handed weapon, thus one-handed weapons only and no shields/lanterns etc.)... then you are actually *casting* part of the spell during an Attack action (since the Somatic requirement is part of the casting process.) Which causes two problems-- one being you can't cast a spell with an Attack action, and two, you are technically casting two spells in the same turn (a Bonus action spell, and a paired required Attack action spell.)

Now of course, all that being said... since this would be for your home game, you can just say "Those nitpicky adjudications of the rules be damned! The effect is cool and I like it!" and I'd say go for it. Truth be told, it doesn't matter all that much in the long run since the balancing only matters when its put directly up against a fighter with the Polearm Master feat. And if you have no players playing one, then you're balancing against nothing and the spell might be fine for your game. I was just throwing out what my own concerns would be were I to need to adjudicate the spell.

Best of luck!

 

[TwoSix]

I'm pretty sure you can just take your hand off a two-handed weapon to cast a spell with somatic components. That's what EKs do all the time.

Gah, you're right. I wish changing weapons just took an action, straight up. It would make these fiddly "hand" rules with spell components and switching to different weapons go away entirely. Using both hands to attack should provide you with less tactical flexibility, I think. Oh well.

But if you are saying that you cannot use a two-handed weapon with this cantrip because you need to have both hands on the weapon for the Attack action... and the magic from the Bonus action casting of Elemental Arc isn't manifesting UNTIL a successful attack with that Attack action-- I'm not sure if that's actually legal. You are essentially casting a magical effect with an Attack action and I don't think that's technically allowed. Any other Bonus action spell manifests during the Bonus action itself. Unless I'm mistaken, I can't think of any other magical Bonus action spell whose completion happens not during said Bonus action, but only during the paired Action of the player.

I believe the intent was that the bonus action functions similarly to the bonus action grapple provided by the Tavern Brawler feat, wherein taking the bonus action is contingent on the melee attack specified in the spell functioning as the bonus action trigger. I don't think [MENTION=13009]Paraxis[/MENTION] was thinking about the "two-hand attack, free action to drop a hand to cast" idea, although I don't want to speak for him as the drafter of the spell.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I believe the intent was that the bonus action functions similarly to the bonus action grapple provided by the Tavern Brawler feat, wherein taking the bonus action is contingent on the melee attack specified in the spell functioning as the bonus action trigger. I don't think [MENTION=13009]Paraxis[/MENTION] was thinking about the "two-hand attack, free action to drop a hand to cast" idea, although I don't want to speak for him as the drafter of the spell.

I don't have the book with me so maybe I'm misremembering... but I think the Tavern Brawler feat states that if you make an Attack action and are successful on the hit, you can use your Bonus action to Grapple? If indeed that's how it works, then it does give a blueprint for how Elemental Arc *could* work, but which would be different than how Paraxis currently has written it.

The easiest way to explain the spell (to match the formatting of Tavern Brawler) is that you use a Bonus action to cast Elemental Arc, but which can only occur after a successful hit with an Attack action. The magical effect and extra damage then occurs during said Bonus action (as opposed to how it currently is written, when it doesn't happen until it's inside the Attack action.)

If you write it that way... then part two of the conundrum is solved, because the spell uses a Bonus action and occurs during the Bonus action. But it doesn't solve the potential original imbalancing, which was that you could use a two-handed weapon like a greataxe or greatsword for the extra potential damage for the Attack, and then during the Bonus action take one hand off of the weapon to cast Elemental Arc.

But Paraxis' point that Polearm Master does add in the extra STR mod damage to the 1d4 (which I had forgotten it does), does boost the feat's damage potential enough to probably offset the extra damage gained from using a greataxe or greatsword. So maybe that concern I had about the damage is a whole lot of wind and fury signifying nothing? I would go along with that.

Which just leaves the other three boons Elemental Arc has over Polearm Master (not using a Feat/ASI slot, four potential effects rather than one, and the second target up to 30' away rather than 10'). Does that make the cantrip signifcantly better then still? Maybe? I guess it might depend. But you probably could go with it and just see what happens? Maybe it wouldn't be that big of a deal.

 

[TwoSix]

I don't have the book with me so maybe I'm misremembering... but I think the Tavern Brawler feat states that if you make an Attack action and are successful on the hit, you can use your Bonus action to Grapple? If indeed that's how it works, then it does give a blueprint for how Elemental Arc *could* work, but which would be different than how Paraxis currently has written it.

Yea, I would probably have written it like this:
"You must have taken the Attack action to have made a melee attack this turn, in order to take a bonus action to cast this spell. You may cast this spell whether the melee attack hits or misses."

The easiest way to explain the spell (to match the formatting of Tavern Brawler) is that you use a Bonus action to cast Elemental Arc, but which can only occur after a successful hit with an Attack action. The magical effect and extra damage then occurs during said Bonus action (as opposed to how it currently is written, when it doesn't happen until it's inside the Attack action.)

You could make the spell cast contingent on the success of the attack, but that would really lower the damage potential, well below Polearm Master. Even with the non-dependence on the hit, it's still several points below.

Since the 1d4 is the same, the difference is the 1.5 damage difference between 2d6 and 1d10 versus a doubling of the Strength mod.

Which just leaves the other three boons Elemental Arc has over Polearm Master (not using a Feat/ASI slot, four potential effects rather than one, and the second target up to 30' away rather than 10'). Does that make the cantrip signifcantly better then still? Maybe? I guess it might depend. But you probably could go with it and just see what happens? Maybe it wouldn't be that big of a deal.

I don't think it's a big deal, since the one effect of Polearm Master (a free OA at 1d10+Str damage) is so much more powerful than any of the riders on the Elemental Arc.
But since it's something that's mostly free to the classes that like it best (EKs, Valor Bards) and it's comparable to one of the best feats in the game, I'd probably nerf it slightly. Maybe make it no damage, but strengthen the rider effects.