Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6771763" data-attributes="member: 5834">130% of the defensive abilities? How do you figure? AC is lower. Hit points are lower. No good con saves for concentration. You can get the shield spell as an eldritch knight. Using spell slots to avoid damage is pretty pointless. Better to use spells like absorb elements for energy damage and shield for AC. You really going to blow a 5th level slot to absorb 25 damage because you made a foolish choice to enter melee?The problem with the bladesinger is that it is a suboptimal play-style. It looks cool on paper, but will prove suboptimal in play. Wizards aren't meant to enter melee. The Bladesinger to take full advantage of his abilities must have a very good dex, intelligence, and con. When you lack hit points, you take a beating.I've played a gnome wizard and a dwarf wizard. Even with a focus on Con, it's hard to stay alive with d6 hit points and no heavy armor when you get targeted by the monsters. It's just a bad idea. The Bladesinger is meant to be viable in melee combat. That's why the Eldritch Knight with maybe a few level dip of Bladesinger is likely a better option to create the old style Bladesinger from previous editions. Maybe that is as intended. A 16 wizard and 4 ftr or 14 wizard and 6 ftr would likely be a much better way to emulate the bladesinger give or take some fighter or wizard levels to get abilities that allow you to cast and hit with a melee weapon. I'm beginning to think the designers know that the Bladesinger as written is a better multiclass than single class.</blockquote>

Verification