For topic sake, I play 5e, so I get it. And I still believe it is an over powered munchkin mess. But it is what it is and my players like it so I tolerate it. You do remember what munchkins were re:2nd edition, from back in the mid-80's, right? They were just far less prevalent back then, then they are today. Todays 5e system is clearly the result of too many adults not saying NO often enough.
I think you underestimate how unbalanced previous editions were (based on the experience of those that I know that played those editions). 5e is by far the most balanced edition of D&D. Will there be exploits that powergamers take advantage of? Of course there will be. There's no way to prevent it. The more options you have in the game, by definition there will be more possible combinations.
I never played any previous edition, so I have absolutely no clue how many people were powergamers back then. I don't care, either. Powergaming isn't an issue. The issue is combining playstyles that would be better not combined. If everyone at a table is having fun, whether or not they're powergamers, they're playing D&D correctly.
Regarding your comment. I don't care what you think, any more then you care what I think about this topic. Everything is just an opinion. Take it or leave it. At least I was being nice in my replies, rather then telling those two to f___ off, as you did to me. I would think, given your post count, you would know better. Now let it drop.
No, not everything is an opinion. Opinions are opinions. Facts are facts.
I also don't think my reply was any less "nice" than any of yours. You were pretty blatant in your outright hatred of powergamers/munchkins/whateveryouwanttocallus, so I was a bit blunt in my reply. I never told anyone to **** off, I just suggested that if you prefer a previous edition, maybe you would have a better time in that edition.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Thank you both (6thLyranGuard & Mephista) for making my point. It was a simpler time, less ego, and far less ability to min/max. Fighters fought, clerics healed, mages threw spells, and rogues did roguey stuff. There was a real negative consequence for playing MC. Trade offs, balancing acts, more creativity required. Miss those days...
And all the splatbooks and Dragon magazine articles published dozens of new PC races and new kits for the classes each month so that you could play a cleric who was also a swashbuckler, or a fighter with psychic powers, or a rogue with elemental magic...
You are right. I have a couple hundred of the magazines, both Dungeon and Dragon versions. Some of those class combinations were quite creative. I just wonder if a game system risks collapsing under the weight of too many options. "Just because you can do a thing, does not mean you should."
The point is that first and second edition AD&D were far more bloated munchkin messes where min-maxing was required to have anything approaching a playable character. Nothing you're complaining about is actually something that couldn't be found already in the game back then. Second Edition was churning out about as much rules bloat every six months as 5E has received since it started.
Now, getting back to the original question of the thread, I like all three classes and am just fine playing any of them, depending on what sort of character I'm interested in running.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I played AD&as back in the 80’s and actually played a dragon magazine Monk to level 17 (I believe that version went to level 21) and it was insanely powerful, although not nearly as powerful as the dragon magazine ninja which I believe, at high levels, could dodge all attacks by rolling a 3+ on a d20.
You're still a full caster that is also a very capable low to mid level melee fighter, have amazing utility, and the flavor is great.
Hexblade is fun but can feel repetitive since many times your entire turn will consist of moving hex and attacking twice, whereas as bladesinger you've got a lot of options and flexibility.
EK is great, but you're definitely going to feel more like a fighter than can cast a few spells, rather than a badass wizard that uses their magics to make them capable in melee.
Which do you think is best in terms of rp, combat, and general fun? These are all separate so I mean which is best for each, not like which has basically the highest score average in all together.
Also which do you prefer yourself?
RP, I think Hexblade has the most roleplay ability. The potential interaction between a patron and their warlock is just too great to ignore from a RP standpoint.
Combat, this one really depends on party comp. I played an EK with Warcaster and a +2 Greataxe that was able to be wielded one handed and a shield, and this just destroyed things because EKs really focus on spells that aren't going to use their ability modifier. Even without the greataxe that was one handed, he was still strong with a Longsword. I think the general answer here is Bladesinger, because its a full spell casting class. Hexblade is great if the party does a lot of short rests. If they don't, its gonna seem very limited.
General fun, probably Hexblade? All Warlocks have such a great divergence in what their character can do thanks to their invocations. Again, short rests are gonna play a huge factor here. After that I'd say EK because what they can do is just so clearly defined, and with a fighter hit die pool, heavy armor, etc. It's the perfect "Give me some spells, but let me just HIT SHIT HARD FAM" class. It's great. Bladesinger is really fun for experienced players, and very torturous otherwise.
For me? EK. I love EK. I'm totally bias in this and I'm willing to say Hexblade is just a flat out better Eldritch Knight, but who cares. I'd play an EK before that all day.
Thank you both (6thLyranGuard & Mephista) for making my point. It was a simpler time, less ego, and far less ability to min/max. Fighters fought, clerics healed, mages threw spells, and rogues did roguey stuff. There was a real negative consequence for playing MC. Trade offs, balancing acts, more creativity required. Miss those days...
That’s not true at all. Because specifically if your DM didn’t pay attention (or know), when you specifically combined stuff from the Complete Elves, Fighters, Rogues, and Wizards books with the stuff from the three Players’ Options books it broke the game. It was absolutely that min-maxy back then, because of all the bloat. (And it’s starting to get pretty bloated again.) All that’s really changed is how they approached it this time. Back in 2e & 3e, all of these subclasses existed, they were just whole classes back then, or prestige classes. But it’s the same thing now, just simplified.
Honestly... I never felt the appeal of Eldritch Knight. I mean, I totally get the appeal of a magic knight gish type; its one of my favorites. But the specific mechanics for Eldritch Knight always felt off and clunky to me.
How bad did I think it was? I'd rather play a four element monk. And speaking of other physical+caster types.... no Arcane Trickster? I -love- Arcane Trickster! That one would be a huge running on top choice.
Seams to work but you also need Int, so you have to roll really lucky or get very many tomes to get to it.
Just Dex and Int which as a Wizard were a focus anyway. With a high elf you could start 16 in both going point buy and could get both to 20 with ASIs.
I did roll good stats and we did get tomes, so I ended up with even higher.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
A Bladesinger with Tenser's Transformation is frightening.
With shield spell my bladesinger reached AC 40.
You can't cast spells with Tenser's Transformation. And I'm still not sure how you could reach 40AC even with shield.
The point of a bladesinger is that you don't need to cast that many spells. You cast your buffs if needed, then tenser's and beat the target silly with advantage to all attacks and 2d12 extra force damager per hit. 2d8 (rapier) + 2x dex mod + 2x int mod (level 14 featue) + 4d12. If both Dex and Int were 5 that's 55 per turn not factoring crits which are more likely now with advantage to all attacks.
The +int bonus to ac with defensives you can cast beforehand like mage armour, mirror image, fire shield, etc plus the bladesinger's ability to reduce damage, longstrider for extra mobility, and you have a rather tanky build which, thanks to racial dex bonus and mobility feat can be a good skirmisher as well. Oh and then there's the 50 temp HP the spell gives you too.
If you have elven accuracy then tenser's auto-advantage to all attacks seriously ups your crit-rate.
If you get 9th level spells choose Time Stop to give you the time to apply the buffs, then tensers then play whackamole with the enemy's spleen.
-
As for my character's high AC, that's level 18 with a lot of magic items.
Robes of Archmagi +6 Dex Cha and Int (good starting stats and getting tomes) Blue Dragon Mask
For big boss battles I'd put Glyphs of Warding storing buff spells into a Demiplane. One would be Haste, +2 AC. Alternative to this is having Bracers of Defense. This gets 35 and a Shield spell if needed.
Never really needed it, the one time an enemy got a hit in was because of a crit. It's good for tanking the melee opponents. Of course this is a focus in melee duelling, the AC does squat against enemies that make you use saving throws and such. But it was neat.
you could add an animated shield to that for another +2 to ac, and it wouldnt effect bladesinging because its not in your hand
Honestly... I never felt the appeal of Eldritch Knight. I mean, I totally get the appeal of a magic knight gish type; its one of my favorites. But the specific mechanics for Eldritch Knight always felt off and clunky to me.
How bad did I think it was? I'd rather play a four element monk. And speaking of other physical+caster types.... no Arcane Trickster? I -love- Arcane Trickster! That one would be a huge running on top choice.
I love the EK and am playing one in a campaign right now. I do agree though that some of the core mechanics in the EK design is clunky. The war magic feature directly works against the extra attack feature that the fighter gets instead of working together synergistically.
I'm playing a Hexblade right now and enjoy it. Our DM gave us a free feat when we started because we did a commoner preclude adventure with our characters so I was able to use Fey Touched for a free cast of Hex and Misty Step so I can get more use out of my 2 spell slots. The RP options have been great and being a Charisma based class means I get to be a lot of use outside of combat when dealing with NPCs and my character feels powerful which is important to me.
I'm not really a fan of half casters so I'm not really interested in EK but BS and Swords/Valor Bard are on my list of classes to try out. Another good melee caster class is Tempest Cleric. Love that class.
“Now back to our regularly scheduled thread, already in progress”
For RP I always thought Warlock gave the most latitude although I think Hexblade can be a bit more limiting than the other patrons.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I think you underestimate how unbalanced previous editions were (based on the experience of those that I know that played those editions). 5e is by far the most balanced edition of D&D. Will there be exploits that powergamers take advantage of? Of course there will be. There's no way to prevent it. The more options you have in the game, by definition there will be more possible combinations.
I never played any previous edition, so I have absolutely no clue how many people were powergamers back then. I don't care, either. Powergaming isn't an issue. The issue is combining playstyles that would be better not combined. If everyone at a table is having fun, whether or not they're powergamers, they're playing D&D correctly.
No, not everything is an opinion. Opinions are opinions. Facts are facts.
I also don't think my reply was any less "nice" than any of yours. You were pretty blatant in your outright hatred of powergamers/munchkins/whateveryouwanttocallus, so I was a bit blunt in my reply. I never told anyone to **** off, I just suggested that if you prefer a previous edition, maybe you would have a better time in that edition.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
The point is that first and second edition AD&D were far more bloated munchkin messes where min-maxing was required to have anything approaching a playable character. Nothing you're complaining about is actually something that couldn't be found already in the game back then. Second Edition was churning out about as much rules bloat every six months as 5E has received since it started.
Now, getting back to the original question of the thread, I like all three classes and am just fine playing any of them, depending on what sort of character I'm interested in running.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I played AD&as back in the 80’s and actually played a dragon magazine Monk to level 17 (I believe that version went to level 21) and it was insanely powerful, although not nearly as powerful as the dragon magazine ninja which I believe, at high levels, could dodge all attacks by rolling a 3+ on a d20.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
IMO Bladesinging.
You're still a full caster that is also a very capable low to mid level melee fighter, have amazing utility, and the flavor is great.
Hexblade is fun but can feel repetitive since many times your entire turn will consist of moving hex and attacking twice, whereas as bladesinger you've got a lot of options and flexibility.
EK is great, but you're definitely going to feel more like a fighter than can cast a few spells, rather than a badass wizard that uses their magics to make them capable in melee.
RP, I think Hexblade has the most roleplay ability. The potential interaction between a patron and their warlock is just too great to ignore from a RP standpoint.
Combat, this one really depends on party comp. I played an EK with Warcaster and a +2 Greataxe that was able to be wielded one handed and a shield, and this just destroyed things because EKs really focus on spells that aren't going to use their ability modifier. Even without the greataxe that was one handed, he was still strong with a Longsword. I think the general answer here is Bladesinger, because its a full spell casting class. Hexblade is great if the party does a lot of short rests. If they don't, its gonna seem very limited.
General fun, probably Hexblade? All Warlocks have such a great divergence in what their character can do thanks to their invocations. Again, short rests are gonna play a huge factor here. After that I'd say EK because what they can do is just so clearly defined, and with a fighter hit die pool, heavy armor, etc. It's the perfect "Give me some spells, but let me just HIT SHIT HARD FAM" class. It's great. Bladesinger is really fun for experienced players, and very torturous otherwise.
For me? EK. I love EK. I'm totally bias in this and I'm willing to say Hexblade is just a flat out better Eldritch Knight, but who cares. I'd play an EK before that all day.
That’s not true at all. Because specifically if your DM didn’t pay attention (or know), when you specifically combined stuff from the Complete Elves, Fighters, Rogues, and Wizards books with the stuff from the three Players’ Options books it broke the game. It was absolutely that min-maxy back then, because of all the bloat. (And it’s starting to get pretty bloated again.) All that’s really changed is how they approached it this time. Back in 2e & 3e, all of these subclasses existed, they were just whole classes back then, or prestige classes. But it’s the same thing now, just simplified.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Honestly... I never felt the appeal of Eldritch Knight. I mean, I totally get the appeal of a magic knight gish type; its one of my favorites. But the specific mechanics for Eldritch Knight always felt off and clunky to me.
How bad did I think it was? I'd rather play a four element monk. And speaking of other physical+caster types.... no Arcane Trickster? I -love- Arcane Trickster! That one would be a huge running on top choice.
Just Dex and Int which as a Wizard were a focus anyway. With a high elf you could start 16 in both going point buy and could get both to 20 with ASIs.
I did roll good stats and we did get tomes, so I ended up with even higher.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
you could add an animated shield to that for another +2 to ac, and it wouldnt effect bladesinging because its not in your hand
I love the EK and am playing one in a campaign right now. I do agree though that some of the core mechanics in the EK design is clunky. The war magic feature directly works against the extra attack feature that the fighter gets instead of working together synergistically.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
I'm playing a Hexblade right now and enjoy it. Our DM gave us a free feat when we started because we did a commoner preclude adventure with our characters so I was able to use Fey Touched for a free cast of Hex and Misty Step so I can get more use out of my 2 spell slots. The RP options have been great and being a Charisma based class means I get to be a lot of use outside of combat when dealing with NPCs and my character feels powerful which is important to me.
I'm not really a fan of half casters so I'm not really interested in EK but BS and Swords/Valor Bard are on my list of classes to try out. Another good melee caster class is Tempest Cleric. Love that class.