Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="auburn2" data-source="post: 8059270" data-attributes="member: 6855259">That is a good build and it can work well in some cases because of the disengage.&nbsp; But it won't stand up to a pure bladesinger, it is not really even close, especially when there are a lot of enemies or limited room.&nbsp; Shadowblade works against you too by taking up concentration that a bladesinger would use for defense.&nbsp; Also the the BB/disengage combo is fairly easy to counter with ready action to attack you when you move in to attack next (or with missile weapons if the enemy has them).As an example - at level 5 (rogue 2, wizard 3) going solo against 10 Goblins in mage armor; that build gets hit about 1 time in 17 attacks (it would be 1 in 20 but about a third of the Goblins will get advantage).&nbsp; Even with the free disengage, most of the goblins will be able to attack you most rounds.&nbsp; You will run through all your spell slots in probably 4 rounds after which they will hit you regularly.&nbsp; A single class level 5 bladesinger running blur gets hit about 1 time in 50 attacks because the Goblins will have disadvantage normally (needing a double 20) and when they would get advantage it cancels and it is a straight 1 in 20 roll.&nbsp; She has 7 spell slots to spend vs 4 and uses shield less.&nbsp; A pure bladesinger being level 5 could also use blink and blur simultaneously (at the cost of another slot) and do even better. Blink denies a lot of the attacks completely and although unpredictable, over the course of most battles it will avoid more attacks than disengage will.The rogue build will be better in terms of melee damage, a lot better if you take a lot of Rogue levels. It is a good build and if you are in a party that build may be better for the party in combat (especially if you have more than one fighter or barbarian), but by itself it is not the equivalent of a bladesinger in melee.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="auburn2, post: 8059270, member: 6855259"] That is a good build and it can work well in some cases because of the disengage. But it won't stand up to a pure bladesinger, it is not really even close, especially when there are a lot of enemies or limited room. Shadowblade works against you too by taking up concentration that a bladesinger would use for defense. Also the the BB/disengage combo is fairly easy to counter with ready action to attack you when you move in to attack next (or with missile weapons if the enemy has them). As an example - at level 5 (rogue 2, wizard 3) going solo against 10 Goblins in mage armor; that build gets hit about 1 time in 17 attacks (it would be 1 in 20 but about a third of the Goblins will get advantage). Even with the free disengage, most of the goblins will be able to attack you most rounds. You will run through all your spell slots in probably 4 rounds after which they will hit you regularly. A single class level 5 bladesinger running blur gets hit about 1 time in 50 attacks because the Goblins will have disadvantage normally (needing a double 20) and when they would get advantage it cancels and it is a straight 1 in 20 roll. She has 7 spell slots to spend vs 4 and uses shield less. A pure bladesinger being level 5 could also use blink and blur simultaneously (at the cost of another slot) and do even better. Blink denies a lot of the attacks completely and although unpredictable, over the course of most battles it will avoid more attacks than disengage will. The rogue build will be better in terms of melee damage, a lot better if you take a lot of Rogue levels. It is a good build and if you are in a party that build may be better for the party in combat (especially if you have more than one fighter or barbarian), but by itself it is not the equivalent of a bladesinger in melee. [/QUOTE]

Verification