D&D 5E (2024) Thoughts on New Bladesinger?

[WanderingMystic]

Once your 11th level or around their using your action to attack isn't worth it but honestly that is only your 6th level ability and a ribbon on your 3rd level. You don't loose all of your subclass.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I feel like the best way to encapsulate the issue with "gish" design is to compare the Bladesinger to the Eldritch Knight.

The Eldritch Knight gets one-third of the spellcasting that a Wizard gets.
The Bladesinger gets better AC and a better Extra Attack in tier 2 than what other martials get.

Which sums up the issue with "gish" subclasses and player expectations: rather than these subclasses being made as "something the character can do in addition to their core competencies", they have to be not just a primary fixture of the playstyle but top-tier in that area in order to be worthwhile. You have to have that element of "they do [martial thing] better than actual martials" or they get dismissed as useless.

I would offer a slight correction: This "have to be top-tier" thing only applies in one direction, namely, the spellcaster picking up martial ability. Even then, different implementations handle it differently. The Blade Warlock basically has to invest half their character resources into it, a significant opportunity cost relative to what they could get (e.g. investing into Chain for an actually fairly powerful pet, or having to pass/delay on Devil's Sight or similar useful and uniquely Warlock features). The Bladesinger? Gives up the mostly-pretty-weak subclass features of other alternative Wizard subclasses (Diviner being a meaningful but complicated exception), in order to get very powerful Fighter(-like) features.

Blade Warlocks are not top-tier for martial capability, even when they invest everything they can into it. They're more or less a weaker, less-versatile Paladin when they do so. Getting the best martial capability as a Warlock requires functionally building yourself like a Fighter with good Charisma. By comparison, Bladesinger Wizards out-tank tanky Fighters, and with even a modicum of investment can begin to outpace in damage too. Faster than Zardnaar gives credit for, but, I admit, not as fast as it sometimes seems.

Conversely, a Fighter choosing to pick up spellcasting? Absolutely cannot be very good at spells. Hard-capped to being only one third as effective as a Wizard at spellcasting. So....the Wizard-who-studies-Fighting gets to be at least half as good, usually much more, as the Fighter--but the Fighter-who-studies-Wizardry doesn't get to be more than one-third as good as the Wizard. Because that's totally fair and reasonable and not at all clearly biased toward one class over the other!

Which is where Bladesinger falters for me, especially the 2024 incarnation: they haven't fixed the needlessly overpowered aspects of the subclass, nor have they worked what the subclass does into something that feels like a natural but balanced option for the player rather than "you get better Extra Attack than martials themselves get".

Well sure. It's a Wizard subclass. It has to be the best, by demand.

I'm not even joking here. That was openly and explicitly the reason folks gave for things like killing certain proposed Sorcerer and Warlock features in UA, back before TCoE was published: an Illusionist Wizard needs to not just be very, very good at illusions, they need to be the BEST at illusions, better than any other spellcaster; an Evoker Wizard needs to not just be very good at evocation, they need to be the BEST at evocation; etc. (That first one, illusions, was openly said on this very forum, as I recall.)

Spellcasters generally, and Wizards very specifically, need to be the best at what they choose to specialize in. That's what the vocal minority demands. And what the Wizard fanboys want, the Wizard fanboys get, because their voice was one of the engines that drove the edition war.

(It also suffers from the usual 2024 problem of "gish" classes/subclasses that omit Weapon Mastery and thus become significantly empowered by a one-level dip for such and other features.)

That said, a one-level Fighter dip has always been useful for "gish" classes/subclasses, so that's not really much of a change. It just makes more pointedly clear what the impact is. Cards on the table, I can't be TOO mad about this myself, because I literally have a Fighter 1/Warlock 4 character I'm playing on Saturdays now. I do in fact have skin in the game, so I can't really judge folks too harshly without being a hypocrite myself.

 

[Zardnaar]

I would offer a slight correction: This "have to be top-tier" thing only applies in one direction, namely, the spellcaster picking up martial ability. Even then, different implementations handle it differently. The Blade Warlock basically has to invest half their character resources into it, a significant opportunity cost relative to what they could get (e.g. investing into Chain for an actually fairly powerful pet, or having to pass/delay on Devil's Sight or similar useful and uniquely Warlock features). The Bladesinger? Gives up the mostly-pretty-weak subclass features of other alternative Wizard subclasses (Diviner being a meaningful but complicated exception), in order to get very powerful Fighter(-like) features.

Blade Warlocks are not top-tier for martial capability, even when they invest everything they can into it. They're more or less a weaker, less-versatile Paladin when they do so. Getting the best martial capability as a Warlock requires functionally building yourself like a Fighter with good Charisma. By comparison, Bladesinger Wizards out-tank tanky Fighters, and with even a modicum of investment can begin to outpace in damage too. Faster than Zardnaar gives credit for, but, I admit, not as fast as it sometimes seems.

Conversely, a Fighter choosing to pick up spellcasting? Absolutely cannot be very good at spells. Hard-capped to being only one third as effective as a Wizard at spellcasting. So....the Wizard-who-studies-Fighting gets to be at least half as good, usually much more, as the Fighter--but the Fighter-who-studies-Wizardry doesn't get to be more than one-third as good as the Wizard. Because that's totally fair and reasonable and not at all clearly biased toward one class over the other!


Well sure. It's a Wizard subclass. It has to be the best, by demand.

I'm not even joking here. That was openly and explicitly the reason folks gave for things like killing certain proposed Sorcerer and Warlock features in UA, back before TCoE was published: an Illusionist Wizard needs to not just be very, very good at illusions, they need to be the BEST at illusions, better than any other spellcaster; an Evoker Wizard needs to not just be very good at evocation, they need to be the BEST at evocation; etc. (That first one, illusions, was openly said on this very forum, as I recall.)

Spellcasters generally, and Wizards very specifically, need to be the best at what they choose to specialize in. That's what the vocal minority demands. And what the Wizard fanboys want, the Wizard fanboys get, because their voice was one of the engines that drove the edition war.


That said, a one-level Fighter dip has always been useful for "gish" classes/subclasses, so that's not really much of a change. It just makes more pointedly clear what the impact is. Cards on the table, I can't be TOO mad about this myself, because I literally have a Fighter 1/Warlock 4 character I'm playing on Saturdays now. I do in fact have skin in the game, so I can't really judge folks too harshly without being a hypocrite myself.

High level bladesingers can be nasty. By the time that happens any other wizard is also ascending to A/S tier. Except invoker they're kinda B tier.

If you mix in some 5.0 stuff and lenient DM, very few encounters a tier 2 lvl 6 bladesinger might be very good.

But the bladesinger and illusionist are the two that are good at level 6.

I regard good at level 6 my basic bar to clear. Level 9-11 not so much nor hoping for lenient DM or campaign/DM dependent.

My new campaign involves Netheril, bastions, vendors, and wizard loot. No one's picked 1 yet.

New party

Paladin
Knowledge cleric
Probably Barbarian
Ranger or Rogue
Something simple or moon druid/druid.

One players in Malaysia not sure what she wants to play. Might have a few player she wants something simple. Probably run a starter set.

 

[Tessarael]

If I was going to build a mid-level Bladesinger to maximize melee weapon damage output, I would go with say Fighter 2/Wizard 8:

• For your ability scores, go with something like STR 10, DEX 17, CON 14, INT 16, WIS 8, CHA 8.
• Fighter at 1st character level for proficiency in Martial Weapons, Constitution saving throws, Two-Weapon Fighting style, and Weapon Mastery in weapons with the Nick mastery property - Scimitar is a good choice.
• 2nd level Fighter gives you action surge, for two more attacks on a turn, once per short rest.
• 4th level Wizard, take the Dual Wielder feat for an extra attack with a Light weapon as a bonus action, and +1 Dexterity.
• 6th level Wizard gives you Extra Attack from the Bladesinger archetype. You can also substitute a Wizard cantrip for one of those attacks, so Booming Blade for +d8 thunder damage on one attack, +2d8 thunder damage if the target moves.
• 7th level Wizard, you get the Conjure Minor Elementals (CME) spell, which adds +2d8 damage per attack.
• 8th level Wizard take +2 Dexterity for your feat.

Then at character level 10 with say two Scimitars +2, you have STR 10, DEX 20, CON 14, INT 16, WIS 8, CHA 8, and 62 HP. Add in False Life cast at say level 2 for 2d4+9 temporary HP to make your HP total more reasonable for a melee combatant.

• 4 attacks per round (3 on your action with nick + 1 from dual wielder), doing d6 + 5 DEX + 2 magic + 2d8 CME.
• Additionally, one of those attacks is with Booming Blade for +d8 damage, +2d8 at character level 11.
• So that's an average of 82.5 damage per round if all attacks hit, no critical hits.
• And when you Action Surge, I presume you cannot cast Booming Blade again, but that gives you 3 attacks, for an additional +58.5 damage if all attacks hit, no critical hits.

When Bladesinging, your AC is 20 = 10 + 5 DEX + 3 INT +2 Bracers of Defense. Have the Shield spell memorized for +5 AC as a reaction when hit by an attack. There are various other spells you can use to trade-off increased offense or defense (e.g., Blur), when you run of 4th level spells slots to cast Conjure Minor Elementals.

It's a good melee damage build with good defense too. Probably the biggest limitation of this build is that the number of uses of Bladesong per long rest is determined by your Intelligence modifier + 1 back on a Short Rest when you use Arcane Recovery, so 4 uses per long rest. Without Bladesong running, your AC is only 17, as you won't have the +3 Intelligence modifier. For an extra use of Bladesong with +1 AC and +1 spell save DC, you can go for DEX 18 and INT 18 at character level 10, rather than DEX 20 and INT 16, at the cost of -4 damage/round and -1 to attack.

 

[Tessarael]

(It also suffers from the usual 2024 problem of "gish" classes/subclasses that omit Weapon Mastery and thus become significantly empowered by a one-level dip for such and other features.)

This is true, but folks underestimate the loss of spell casting damage progress with the level dip. Comparing a single-classed 10th level Wizard vs. the Fighter 2/Wizard 8 build I just gave, the latter multi-classed build misses out on two 5th level spell slots and one 4th level spell slot. That's two castings of Hold Monster and one of Polymorph - very effective nerfs on monsters, which is often much more effective than just trying to inflict raw damage.