Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6769948" data-attributes="member: 5834">I stated what I would do in another SCAG thread: I would have built a class (chassis I guess you would refer to it) like the Pathfinder Magus and made Bladesinger an archetype. Building Bladesinger off of a wizard is a bad idea in my opinion. I would have waited until I did some more with the game before I incorporated one of the more popular FR archetypes. I might have even built the Bladesinger off the bard, which in this edition might have made more sense allowing them to use Inspiration in interesting ways. With this current version, I'll explore multiclass options to see if  can make an interesting bladesinger. At the moment I think there are more interesting wizard archetypes than the Bladesinger, which I find doesn't do what it should do conceptually. It should have at least had the ability to cast a spell and make an attack in the same turn as the bare minimum without having to use on of those awful cantrips. To me it's more of a disconnect by the game designers:1.  They don't test the damage against other builds at higher level.  This problem is common to most class based RPGs.2. They have mechanics that breakdown once you incorporate things like feats. The math starts to break down once you incorporate these options. Since D&D provided these options, it would be nice if the game designers included in each book optional feats to balance things out for those of us using them.</blockquote>

Verification