If you take Pact of the Blade, you can make a magical weapon, which would have a value more than 1 sp, into your pact weapon, which would then qualify for BB/GFB. Oddly, the weapon has to be magical, a mundane weapon cannot be made into a pact weapon. A weapon that you just create out of thin air would not qualify. Straight Hexblade, you need a real weapon for your Hex warrior features in any case.
I think you missed this bit of text that I quoted:
A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components — or to hold a spellcasting focus — but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.
I think you missed this bit of text that I quoted:
A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components — or to hold a spellcasting focus — but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.
I did see that. That line is from the rules on casting spells with material components which do not apply when the spell does not have material components.
Pact of the Blade does allow you to create and summon a weapon in your hand, but again, this weapon is not something you can buy or sell, and so is not eligible for use with Booming Blade. The second feature of the Pact allows you to designate one Magic Weapon as your pact weapon instead of just creating a weapon magically.
However, Magic Weapons do not have an inherent, stated monetary value. So if we are rules lawyering, than no, you can no longer cast Booming Blade with a Magic Weapon either. Seem silly? Yes it does. The cause of the silly? The weird errata requiring a monetary value for the weapon.
New would be builders, be wary, and as always discuss with your DM what you'd like to accomplish. By current RAW, you cannot use Booming Blade with Pact Blade, or Shadow Blade. Bizarre errata of a spell which required no changes.
There isn't anything that says that's how it works.
I'm inclined to agree with this assessment, and would rule along these lines at my table. If one can hold a staff and make somatic components for a spell which requires the staff, one can surely make somatic components while holding the staff regardless. I'm also more inclined to focus on and reward roleplay and creativity, so I might ask my players to describe the casting, and potentially make a sleight of hand check if they are, say, trying to conceal the gestures or something.
I can certainly see some DMs ruling that the intention is that spells with somatic components but not material components require more advanced hand gestures, though. Again, this illustrates the need to discuss with your DM the things you would like to accomplish with your build, so you are not surprised by a ruling that significantly impacts your vision for the character.
However, Magic Weapons do not have an inherent, stated monetary value. So if we are rules lawyering, than no, you can no longer cast Booming Blade with a Magic Weapon either. Seem silly? Yes it does. The cause of the silly? The weird errata requiring a monetary value for the weapon.
I mean.. Just because they don't have a stated value in the rules doesn't mean they don't have a value. It just varies between settings, and I think it's safe to assume it would at least be the same value as the base item, and that it would be worth more than 1 sp.
As a DM, you can of course do exactly as you please, and the 'no surprises' for players planning builds is well taken. However, many, many people disagree with your ruling. A simple google search for '5e spell casting focus somatic' will return pages of hits for discussing this very issue, including this one here on D&D Beyond.
For me, the idea that somatic/not material spells require a free hand makes perfect sense for the reason you suggest, the somatic component is more complicated than those for when a material component is required. I would also note that it also makes perfect sense to me that you can use the same hand for both material and somatic components, when both are required, since the somatic component very likely involves manipulating the material component in some way. Sometimes this is actually described in the spell description, such as, in Booming Blade, which reads "You brandish the weapon used in the spell’s casting ..."
A key consideration for me is balance. Loosening the restrictions on somatic components represents a significant boost to those classes that can use weapons or shields as spell casting focuses, which is already a very powerful feature. Allowing it also undermines the utility of Warcaster, a feat specifically designed to provide that functionality, which is gained only through a serious investment by the character. Under your ruling, your SwashLock can cast all their spells without restriction with weapons and shield in hand, while an equivalent level dual wielding Arcane Trickster, or Ranger with sword and shield, could not cast any at all, save Verbal only spells. That doesn't strike me as terribly balanced.
Bear in mind the only things War Caster enables in terms of the bit about S components while armed are:
You can now cast Booming Blade and Green-flame Blade with a Two-Handed weapon.
You can now cast Reaction spells in general (including the OA ones War Caster enables with a separate bullet point) with occupied hands without getting into a whole conversation about whether or not a Reaction in general can include non-actions, as you no longer even need to ask if you can legally drop your weapon just "before" the cast.
A big exception here is Feather Fall, which has no S component to deal with to begin with. You will need to touch your M component to cast Feather Fall, which can be overridden if you have the necessary focus shenanigans, like Improved Pact Weapon.
Another big exception is Soul Cage, which has a costly M component (so focus shenanigans do nothing for you) you have to touch to cast.
Other than the War Caster-enabled OA spells, that means the feat helps with:
Absorb Elements
Booming Blade
Counterspell
Green-flame Blade
Hellish Rebuke
Shield
That's it. A dual wielding Arcane Trickster can cast any spell they like in general because they need only carry one weapon at a time. A sword and board Ranger has a tougher time with the spell list above (not counting the two blade spells), but can otherwise cast whatever they like by dropping the sword for the cast.
Neither Booming Blade nor Green-Flame Blade require Warcaster, at least not when used with a one handed weapon, since the material component for both is the weapon used in the spell's casting, and the hand holding the material component can be used for the somatic component as per the rules for material components.
Yes, anyone that frees up a hand can cast whatever spell they want. But why should the rules be interpreted one way for classes that can use weapons or shields as focuses and differently for those that can't. Why, in order to cast Shield, which has no material component, does a Trickster that has a dagger in each hand have to drop one, but a SwashLock that has a dagger in each hand doesn't? In neither case are the weapons a part of the spell casting process - they're just objects in your hands - so the rules should be applied identically to both. The SwashLock must also be required to drop a weapon.
Neither Booming Blade nor Green-Flame Blade require Warcaster, at least not when used with a one handed weapon, since the material component for both is the weapon used in the spell's casting, and the hand holding the material component can be used for the somatic component as per the rules for material components.
Yes, anyone that frees up a hand can cast whatever spell they want. But why should the rules be interpreted one way for classes that can use weapons or shields as focuses and differently for those that can't. Why, in order to cast Shield, which has no material component, does a Trickster that has a dagger in each hand have to drop one, but a SwashLock that has a dagger in each hand doesn't? In neither case are the weapons a part of the spell casting process - they're just objects in your hands - so the rules should be applied identically to both. The SwashLock must also be required to drop a weapon.
Both have to drop a weapon. SwashLocks have no miraculous ability to avoid dropping a weapon in that context. What Swashlocks can do is, at level 3, take Improved Pact Weapon, which lets them avoid spending an attunement slot on a Ruby of the War Mage like an Arcane Trickster would, in order to cast Booming Blade with a greatsword or whatever. Shield is S only, no M, so you either need the Warcaster feat or to be an Artificer with an infused weapon to keep your weapon during the cast.
You're right about sword and boarding, my bad. I edited my post accordingly.
Not what I said at all. I ruled that, in cases where the somatic component is not specifically defined, you can define the somatic component of the spell, and holding a focus does not interfere with the casting. If your focus is an orb, a wand, a staff, a sword, a shield, an amulet, a dagger with a ruby of the war mage, a ring, a sprig of mistletoe, an oil lamp, or whatever else, it doesn't make a difference.
If the somatic component is specifically defined, and it requires something like placing your two hands palm to palm, you obviously can hold nothing for that spell to work.
That is not an unbalanced ruling, its equitable across casting classes. Warcaster allows even greater utility, as well as allowing a character to cast a spell as an opportunity attack reaction.
Regardless, the topic at hand is "Is this a viable multiclass, and how have you worked it?" To which I say yes it is, but as with all multiclassing, you must discuss with your DM to determine efficacy at your table. They may have an alternative, single-classed suggestion which can achieve the same things thematically that you are looking for. Perhaps an Eldrtich Knight Variant Human with the Pirate background and Mobile feat, and/or Skill Expert.
By current RAW, you cannot use Booming Blade with Pact Blade, or Shadow Blade. Bizarre errata of a spell which required no changes.
Pretty sure it was exactly because of Shadow Blade, or at least that's one of the reasons. It was a strong combo and a kind of spell stacking that they have rules in place to prevent elsewhere. Magic weapons very clearly and obviously have value of at least 1 sp, so they work.
I'd advise agreeing to disagree on the somatic component thing. There are multiple 20+ page arguments about this elsewhere on the forum and it just boils down to personal preference on how to interpret the rules.
Just to reiterate: If you cast a spell without material components and with somatic ex. Shield. You need a free hand or warcaster feat.
If you cast a spell with both material and somatic components, you can do both with the hand holding focus; whether it be a weapon, holy symbol (on a shield) or just regular focus of sorts.
This has answered and clarified in sage advice.
Supposedly the somatic component is more intricate when not channeled through materials or foci.
If it were otherwise, Warcaster would be much less useful and classes which can use weapons or shields as spell cast focuses are further advantaged over others.
Yes. Not all Feats are super useful, and there's an entire magic item that turns weapons into spell focuses specifically because of the clause:
A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components — or to hold a spellcasting focus — but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.
That's not specific to spells that use Materials, that's just a general comment about how spellcasting works. That means that you can hold a focus in one hand and with the same hand perform somatic components.
I really like this idea and I am currently playing a harengon swashbuckler rogue and hexblade warlock but im pretty new to the game and my table isn't great with helping me on what feats, spells or ASI to choose would you be willing to give me a step-by-step on how to optimize my character with the battlemaster sub class through lvl 20 I'm currently lvl 6 rogue and lvl 5 warlock looking to be more melee
I'm a very new player with a table that is fun but not helpful with building characters I have done alot of research but still need help optimizing my character who is a Harengon Sailor, swashbuckler rogue lvl 6 and hexblade warlock lvl5 but I like the idea of adding Battle Master after learning a little about them.
I really need help with optimizing him though idk what feats, spells or ASI I should have taken would you be willing to break down a build step by step using these 3 subclasses to lvl 20
I'm a very new player with a table that is fun but not helpful with building characters I have done alot of research but still need help optimizing my character who is a Harengon Sailor, swashbuckler rogue lvl 6 and hexblade warlock lvl5 but I like the idea of adding Battle Master after learning a little about them.
I really need help with optimizing him though idk what feats, spells or ASI I should have taken would you be willing to break down a build step by step using these 3 subclasses to lvl
Step-by-step guide is hard because it depends what exactly you want to get out of it, plus a guide is a lot of work. It's easier for us just to offer suggestions that you can then choose from. For me the first consideration when I'm levelling up is what fits the character best; that doesn't mean I ignore mechanical benefits, it's a balancing act, but I tend to think of them second.
What I will say is you probably want to get Rogue to level 7 first at the very least, as that will give you Evasion which is an excellent defensive feature (vs. Dexterity saves a failure is half damage, success is none), it will also get you another sneak attack dice (they go up on odd levels).
Battle Master requires three levels which is quite a big investment, but I think at Rogue 7/Warlock 5 you should have a solid mixture of abilities already so it's a decent time to go for it. If you're not sure if you want to spend that many levels (though Second Wind and Action Surge are great abilities to have) you might also take a look at Martial Adept; it gets you two manoeuvres though only one superiority dice, but it only costs an ability score increase. It's worth thinking about what exactly you're looking for, because if a single Brace or Riposte per short rest is all you really want then this is a cheaper way to get it.
As for spells on the Warlock, what's "best" will depend on what you actually find your role is in combat, or what role you want it to be. For example, as a swashbuckler you might be finding yourself just fighting things toe-to-toe rather than skulking, in which case you can't go wrong with armor of agathys for extra (temporary) hit-points plus bonus damage. At 5th-level Warlock you can also take 3rd-level spells, and there are a few good control options like hypnotic pattern which could make a huge difference against groups of enemies if you think your character and/or group need more flexibility to deal with that kind of thing? If you let us know what you're hoping to get out of your spellcasting then it'll be easier to give recommendations as there are a tonne of options these days.
Also, if you have some spare character slots on D&D Beyond, then one thing you could do is copy your character, then experiment with options on the copy.
As a haregon and swashbuckler I can get around alot and my initiative is outstanding so I would like to go toe to toe with a big shot and swashbuckler can evade with no A.O.O. from enemies so I was thinking Armor of ag and green flame blade but I was wanting to have more attacks and someone had mentioned 4 levels of battlemaster and it sounded nice to attack 2 times with one action.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If you take Pact of the Blade, you can make a magical weapon, which would have a value more than 1 sp, into your pact weapon, which would then qualify for BB/GFB. Oddly, the weapon has to be magical, a mundane weapon cannot be made into a pact weapon. A weapon that you just create out of thin air would not qualify. Straight Hexblade, you need a real weapon for your Hex warrior features in any case.
I think you missed this bit of text that I quoted:
I did see that. That line is from the rules on casting spells with material components which do not apply when the spell does not have material components.
There isn't anything that says that's how it works.
Pact of the Blade does allow you to create and summon a weapon in your hand, but again, this weapon is not something you can buy or sell, and so is not eligible for use with Booming Blade. The second feature of the Pact allows you to designate one Magic Weapon as your pact weapon instead of just creating a weapon magically.
However, Magic Weapons do not have an inherent, stated monetary value. So if we are rules lawyering, than no, you can no longer cast Booming Blade with a Magic Weapon either. Seem silly? Yes it does. The cause of the silly? The weird errata requiring a monetary value for the weapon.
New would be builders, be wary, and as always discuss with your DM what you'd like to accomplish. By current RAW, you cannot use Booming Blade with Pact Blade, or Shadow Blade. Bizarre errata of a spell which required no changes.
I'm inclined to agree with this assessment, and would rule along these lines at my table. If one can hold a staff and make somatic components for a spell which requires the staff, one can surely make somatic components while holding the staff regardless. I'm also more inclined to focus on and reward roleplay and creativity, so I might ask my players to describe the casting, and potentially make a sleight of hand check if they are, say, trying to conceal the gestures or something.
I can certainly see some DMs ruling that the intention is that spells with somatic components but not material components require more advanced hand gestures, though. Again, this illustrates the need to discuss with your DM the things you would like to accomplish with your build, so you are not surprised by a ruling that significantly impacts your vision for the character.
I mean.. Just because they don't have a stated value in the rules doesn't mean they don't have a value. It just varies between settings, and I think it's safe to assume it would at least be the same value as the base item, and that it would be worth more than 1 sp.
As a DM, you can of course do exactly as you please, and the 'no surprises' for players planning builds is well taken. However, many, many people disagree with your ruling. A simple google search for '5e spell casting focus somatic' will return pages of hits for discussing this very issue, including this one here on D&D Beyond.
For me, the idea that somatic/not material spells require a free hand makes perfect sense for the reason you suggest, the somatic component is more complicated than those for when a material component is required. I would also note that it also makes perfect sense to me that you can use the same hand for both material and somatic components, when both are required, since the somatic component very likely involves manipulating the material component in some way. Sometimes this is actually described in the spell description, such as, in Booming Blade, which reads "You brandish the weapon used in the spell’s casting ..."
A key consideration for me is balance. Loosening the restrictions on somatic components represents a significant boost to those classes that can use weapons or shields as spell casting focuses, which is already a very powerful feature. Allowing it also undermines the utility of Warcaster, a feat specifically designed to provide that functionality, which is gained only through a serious investment by the character. Under your ruling, your SwashLock can cast all their spells without restriction with weapons and shield in hand, while an equivalent level dual wielding Arcane Trickster, or Ranger with sword and shield, could not cast any at all, save Verbal only spells. That doesn't strike me as terribly balanced.
Bear in mind the only things War Caster enables in terms of the bit about S components while armed are:
Other than the War Caster-enabled OA spells, that means the feat helps with:
That's it. A dual wielding Arcane Trickster can cast any spell they like in general because they need only carry one weapon at a time. A sword and board Ranger has a tougher time with the spell list above (not counting the two blade spells), but can otherwise cast whatever they like by dropping the sword for the cast.
Neither Booming Blade nor Green-Flame Blade require Warcaster, at least not when used with a one handed weapon, since the material component for both is the weapon used in the spell's casting, and the hand holding the material component can be used for the somatic component as per the rules for material components.
Yes, anyone that frees up a hand can cast whatever spell they want. But why should the rules be interpreted one way for classes that can use weapons or shields as focuses and differently for those that can't. Why, in order to cast Shield, which has no material component, does a Trickster that has a dagger in each hand have to drop one, but a SwashLock that has a dagger in each hand doesn't? In neither case are the weapons a part of the spell casting process - they're just objects in your hands - so the rules should be applied identically to both. The SwashLock must also be required to drop a weapon.
Both have to drop a weapon. SwashLocks have no miraculous ability to avoid dropping a weapon in that context. What Swashlocks can do is, at level 3, take Improved Pact Weapon, which lets them avoid spending an attunement slot on a Ruby of the War Mage like an Arcane Trickster would, in order to cast Booming Blade with a greatsword or whatever. Shield is S only, no M, so you either need the Warcaster feat or to be an Artificer with an infused weapon to keep your weapon during the cast.
You're right about sword and boarding, my bad. I edited my post accordingly.
Not what I said at all. I ruled that, in cases where the somatic component is not specifically defined, you can define the somatic component of the spell, and holding a focus does not interfere with the casting. If your focus is an orb, a wand, a staff, a sword, a shield, an amulet, a dagger with a ruby of the war mage, a ring, a sprig of mistletoe, an oil lamp, or whatever else, it doesn't make a difference.
If the somatic component is specifically defined, and it requires something like placing your two hands palm to palm, you obviously can hold nothing for that spell to work.
That is not an unbalanced ruling, its equitable across casting classes. Warcaster allows even greater utility, as well as allowing a character to cast a spell as an opportunity attack reaction.
Regardless, the topic at hand is "Is this a viable multiclass, and how have you worked it?" To which I say yes it is, but as with all multiclassing, you must discuss with your DM to determine efficacy at your table. They may have an alternative, single-classed suggestion which can achieve the same things thematically that you are looking for. Perhaps an Eldrtich Knight Variant Human with the Pirate background and Mobile feat, and/or Skill Expert.
Pretty sure it was exactly because of Shadow Blade, or at least that's one of the reasons. It was a strong combo and a kind of spell stacking that they have rules in place to prevent elsewhere. Magic weapons very clearly and obviously have value of at least 1 sp, so they work.
I'd advise agreeing to disagree on the somatic component thing. There are multiple 20+ page arguments about this elsewhere on the forum and it just boils down to personal preference on how to interpret the rules.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Just to reiterate: If you cast a spell without material components and with somatic ex. Shield. You need a free hand or warcaster feat.
If you cast a spell with both material and somatic components, you can do both with the hand holding focus; whether it be a weapon, holy symbol (on a shield) or just regular focus of sorts.
This has answered and clarified in sage advice.
Supposedly the somatic component is more intricate when not channeled through materials or foci.
Yes. Not all Feats are super useful, and there's an entire magic item that turns weapons into spell focuses specifically because of the clause:
A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components — or to hold a spellcasting focus — but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.
That's not specific to spells that use Materials, that's just a general comment about how spellcasting works. That means that you can hold a focus in one hand and with the same hand perform somatic components.
I really like this idea and I am currently playing a harengon swashbuckler rogue and hexblade warlock but im pretty new to the game and my table isn't great with helping me on what feats, spells or ASI to choose would you be willing to give me a step-by-step on how to optimize my character with the battlemaster sub class through lvl 20 I'm currently lvl 6 rogue and lvl 5 warlock looking to be more melee
I'm a very new player with a table that is fun but not helpful with building characters I have done alot of research but still need help optimizing my character who is a Harengon Sailor, swashbuckler rogue lvl 6 and hexblade warlock lvl5 but I like the idea of adding Battle Master after learning a little about them.
I really need help with optimizing him though idk what feats, spells or ASI I should have taken would you be willing to break down a build step by step using these 3 subclasses to lvl 20
Step-by-step guide is hard because it depends what exactly you want to get out of it, plus a guide is a lot of work. It's easier for us just to offer suggestions that you can then choose from. For me the first consideration when I'm levelling up is what fits the character best; that doesn't mean I ignore mechanical benefits, it's a balancing act, but I tend to think of them second.
What I will say is you probably want to get Rogue to level 7 first at the very least, as that will give you Evasion which is an excellent defensive feature (vs. Dexterity saves a failure is half damage, success is none), it will also get you another sneak attack dice (they go up on odd levels).
Battle Master requires three levels which is quite a big investment, but I think at Rogue 7/Warlock 5 you should have a solid mixture of abilities already so it's a decent time to go for it. If you're not sure if you want to spend that many levels (though Second Wind and Action Surge are great abilities to have) you might also take a look at Martial Adept; it gets you two manoeuvres though only one superiority dice, but it only costs an ability score increase. It's worth thinking about what exactly you're looking for, because if a single Brace or Riposte per short rest is all you really want then this is a cheaper way to get it.
As for spells on the Warlock, what's "best" will depend on what you actually find your role is in combat, or what role you want it to be. For example, as a swashbuckler you might be finding yourself just fighting things toe-to-toe rather than skulking, in which case you can't go wrong with armor of agathys for extra (temporary) hit-points plus bonus damage. At 5th-level Warlock you can also take 3rd-level spells, and there are a few good control options like hypnotic pattern which could make a huge difference against groups of enemies if you think your character and/or group need more flexibility to deal with that kind of thing? If you let us know what you're hoping to get out of your spellcasting then it'll be easier to give recommendations as there are a tonne of options these days.
Also, if you have some spare character slots on D&D Beyond, then one thing you could do is copy your character, then experiment with options on the copy.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
As a haregon and swashbuckler I can get around alot and my initiative is outstanding so I would like to go toe to toe with a big shot and swashbuckler can evade with no A.O.O. from enemies so I was thinking Armor of ag and green flame blade but I was wanting to have more attacks and someone had mentioned 4 levels of battlemaster and it sounded nice to attack 2 times with one action.