So right now bladesingers is a subclass for wizards witch seems cool but when you get into there lore makes zero sense, all the lore I have read up on them says they are elfs who are who use a type of martial arts and who also use a bit of magic and not wizards who use swords, matter of fact they are alot like witchers! both witchers and bladesingers wield swords with finesse and accuracy rather than just strength, both have various schools who practice variations on there fighting styles, both use simple magic to augment there fighting styles and for support and both use intelligence rather than brute force to there advantage. Also getting on the subject on how they don't make sense despite there name bladesingers have nothing to do with singing, the singing in there title refers to the sound there blades make as they swing them around, using them with such a degree of precision they make sound much like tuning folks do so that makes there current features "bladesong" "song of defense" and "song of victory" make 0 sense because it implies the bladesinger has to start singing in some way to start using there abilities, the second a bladesinger draws there sword is when they start bladesinging, it has nothing to do with songs or singing. and lastly bladesingers do use magic, much more than lets say a paladin would so on paper I guess that would translate to being similar to hexblade warlock, having access to cantrips, a pretty big list of spells, spell slots up to around level 5-6 and a way to cast sells higher than that. I think wizards should start working on this class asap and making it right, I think they should have something alone the lines of a cross between kensei monks and hexblades having a unarmored defense feature (probably dex and int to calculate AC) and a feature that lets them use there schools weapon (each of the bladesinger schools have a weapon of choice) with either dex or strength and then a halfcaster features, maybe even give them a few smite spells unique to them based around elements like fire, cold, lighting and so on, maybe even give them a "sonic sword" ability that deals thunder damage (for those who don't know what a sonic sowed ability is, it is a technique popular in anime and video games in witch a skilled swordsman swings there sword and uses the sound wave or wind generated to make a ranged attack in the form of a slash, the damage would be thunder as for whatever reason while the damage type is named "thunder" it has nothing to do with thunder and refers to the damage caused by loud sounds, I guess they would have named it sonic damage but that doesn't sound too fantasy-ish) And that's why I think bladesingers should get the respect they deserve and get there own more accurate class because what is the world of forgotten realms if a vital peace of lore around a class is wrong, whats next? druids wearing metal! I would also like to end with the fact I dabble in making a bit of homebrew here and there and I wouldn't mind working with some people in making our own homebrew bladesinger class and play test it so it will be on par with other classes balance.
I love Bladesingers and I think looking at the 2nd ed lore they fit well as the Elvish versions of a Paladin because elves couldn't be paladins. Also as they are more magical it make since. I do also agree they should be seem more as fighters than wizards. I feel that the main reason they are brought back now is because fans were requesting them and they don't really fit the rules well for 5th ed. Especially when fighters already have arcane archer as well as Rune Knight. I will say this, when I played mine, they would always sing their spells, matching the tone of the their blade as it moved in the air, singing in high elven.
I do think they should be redone as a fighter class, or even a ranger class where there are martial using spells to help in the fight. When they are able to gain the second attack, they are able to stab one monster in the face with their sword while sending an acid arrow to hit some archer lining up a shot against healer of the party. I think looking at the 2nd ed kit would help with homebrew. I think maybe a ranger that way it gives them spells and pretty good combat ones at that just limiting the level adding some cantrips. or using rangers as a base and make a whole new class with a limited spell list. just some things I thought about this...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have been playing RPG's and especially D&D since 1st ed AD&D and D&D Basic. Since those early years I have played a good number of more popular games. I enjoy playing with groups and DM/GM groups that are from diverse backgrounds. I feel any and everyone brings something special and wonderful to a gaming table. I tend to play more magic users though with 5ed I do have ideas for classes I normally would play. My favorites in the past are Wizards/mage, Rangers and Druids.
I am not against this idea because well, them being full wizards with full spell progression doesn't sit well with me. It is clear lore-wise that while bladesingers were known to rely on arcane magic, they were known as elite fighters first and foremost. The only problem here is that the good practice of designing a new class requires at least two archetypes and I dunno what those could be for a bladesinger if it were a full class. The other problem is distinguishing them from Eldritch Knights that happen to be elves.
I have been toying with the idea that I might try to push to my DM - designing a generic Elven Blademaster class with two archetypes chosen at level 2 - a Bladesinger and a Bladedancer (that one heavy influenced by Lineage 2 Bladedancer, aka dual wielding party support with dances invoking magical energy that buffs everyone around for a short period of time). Don't have much time for that right now and nothing concrete but could be fun.
The things I'd like to bring back mechanically is longsword support (something like "you are proficient with a longsword and treat it as a finesse weapon. It loses the versatile property if you use your Dexterity modifier for attack and damage" - thus, eliminating the need to reskin rapiers) and elven chain as well.
Hot take: bladesingers shouldn't exist in the first place. It feels more like an Eldritch Knight than a wizard, so yeah it's a funky subclass, but I don't think it's archetypical enough to be its own class either.
The only problem here is that the good practice of designing a new class requires at least two archetypes and I dunno what those could be for a bladesinger if it were a full class.
Well there are like 12 potential subclasses my dude XD there are several fighting styles they employ each with it's own school: lion style uses longsword, red tiger two short swords, then bird styles like eagle style with axes, ravens with warlocks, and snake styles like viper with whips.
Each style would have it's own subclass much like monk archetypes each would reflect a different martial style while still carrying the same core discipline
The only problem here is that the good practice of designing a new class requires at least two archetypes and I dunno what those could be for a bladesinger if it were a full class.
Well there are like 12 potential subclasses my dude XD there are several fighting styles they employ each with it's own school: lion style uses longsword, red tiger two short swords, then bird styles like eagle style with axes, ravens with warlocks, and snake styles like viper with whips.
Each style would have it's own subclass much like monk archetypes each would reflect a different martial style while still carrying the same core discipline
You could even do a subclass for each of the schools of magic, using each one to give a set of spells they can use while in combat and that also be a part of their fight style as well. Divination would start with like Hunter's Mark and they would be ranged fighters while Necromancy would start with like Ray of enfeeblement and use maybe Flails and Morning stars and cause slow pain enjoy the weakening of their foes. Abjuration is more secondary fighter, they shield to spear man if you... just a thought
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have been playing RPG's and especially D&D since 1st ed AD&D and D&D Basic. Since those early years I have played a good number of more popular games. I enjoy playing with groups and DM/GM groups that are from diverse backgrounds. I feel any and everyone brings something special and wonderful to a gaming table. I tend to play more magic users though with 5ed I do have ideas for classes I normally would play. My favorites in the past are Wizards/mage, Rangers and Druids.
well from what I gathered each of the styles do focus on a different schools of magic, I mean they probably all use smite like spells and stuff like booming blade and green flame blade and so on but one would think each school would have spells that supplement there style
I know it was an elf subclass in 2e, i dont remember it it was wizard or fighter/mage. Anyhoo it makes as much sence as a eldritch knight or arcane trickster being a subclass. Well back in the day rouges could use scrolls, rods, and wands after a certain level so i guess A.T. makes a bit more sense.
I can't fully embrace the idea that the Bladesinger is just like a Witcher. That is like saying a cleric is like a wizard. Sure the Witcher and the Bladesinger both use magic at a lesser degree and a sword, but that seems to be where the differences end.
I like the idea of this being a Ranger Subclass. And adding in some "Witcher" like abilities would really resonate with the overall feel that 5E puts forth for the blade singer. But some of this really does seem repetitive as various home-brews and certain lines wanted to have a "Wicher" or "Van Helsing" class. So the real questions is where do you want this class to sit? Is it some mystic warrior who creates magic with the finesse of a sword? Is it the Fighter/Wizard we have tried to reinvent 20 times? It really seems like a repackage character class we have seen before. Maybe it might be time to finally retire the Bladesinger?
I definitely don't have a good answer! But if I knew what the end goal that was needed, I might add some ideas. Remember, this is a game first. So have some fun!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am not sure what my Spirit Animal is. But whatever that thing is, I am pretty sure it has rabies!
So right now bladesingers is a subclass for wizards witch seems cool but when you get into there lore makes zero sense, all the lore I have read up on them says they are elfs who are who use a type of martial arts and who also use a bit of magic and not wizards who use swords, matter of fact they are alot like witchers! both witchers and bladesingers wield swords with finesse and accuracy rather than just strength, both have various schools who practice variations on there fighting styles, both use simple magic to augment there fighting styles and for support and both use intelligence rather than brute force to there advantage.
You say the lore doesn't make sense, but never give a reason why, and then just compare them to witchers. The lore is merely open ended in some ways, but closed off in others. I play with an elvish bladesinger currently, and he has worked with the DM on developing bladesigner culture in our world to something that fits within its bounds and grows from them. So, the lore isn't necessarily bad
Also getting on the subject on how they don't make sense despite there name bladesingers have nothing to do with singing, the singing in there title refers to the sound there blades make as they swing them around, using them with such a degree of precision they make sound much like tuning folks do so that makes there current features "bladesong" "song of defense" and "song of victory" make 0 sense because it implies the bladesinger has to start singing in some way to start using there abilities, the second a bladesinger draws there sword is when they start bladesinging, it has nothing to do with songs or singing.
Bladesinging is an art of swordsmanship. The idea is not that they are bard-like performers, although you could certainly play into that. Instead, the idea is that bladesong is an art, the blade sings while you dance, hence the benefits of blade song.
and lastly bladesingers do use magic, much more than lets say a paladin would so on paper I guess that would translate to being similar to hexblade warlock, having access to cantrips, a pretty big list of spells, spell slots up to around level 5-6 and a way to cast sells higher than that. I think wizards should start working on this class asap and making it right, I think they should have something alone the lines of a cross between kensei monks and hexblades having a unarmored defense feature (probably dex and int to calculate AC) and a feature that lets them use there schools weapon (each of the bladesinger schools have a weapon of choice) with either dex or strength and then a halfcaster features, maybe even give them a few smite spells unique to them based around elements like fire, cold, lighting and so on, maybe even give them a "sonic sword" ability that deals thunder damage (for those who don't know what a sonic sowed ability is, it is a technique popular in anime and video games in witch a skilled swordsman swings there sword and uses the sound wave or wind generated to make a ranged attack in the form of a slash, the damage would be thunder as for whatever reason while the damage type is named "thunder" it has nothing to do with thunder and refers to the damage caused by loud sounds, I guess they would have named it sonic damage but that doesn't sound too fantasy-ish) And that's why I think bladesingers should get the respect they deserve and get there own more accurate class because what is the world of forgotten realms if a vital peace of lore around a class is wrong, whats next? druids wearing metal! I would also like to end with the fact I dabble in making a bit of homebrew here and there and I wouldn't mind working with some people in making our own homebrew bladesinger class and play test it so it will be on par with other classes balance.
Yes, bladesingers use magic. But you never say why this supports your argument, and I don't quite understand the sidenote on the whole 'sonic-blade' thing. It's a little complex and feels mechanically just like trying to come up with something to fill a hole, whereas is bladesinger is truly badly desgined, the holes should be apparent and fill themselves. however, them using magic doesn't mean we should reassign them to their own class. In fact, the 'changes' you describe above are pretty much the bladesinger already as is. You also point out a similarity to hexblade, which is fair, but they're different. Trying to make a bladesinger class and comparing it hexblade automatically makes me think that if that class were released, it would smack too much of both old bladesinger and hexblade. You also make an error in the final paragraph in assuming, 1), that bladesingers aren't respected, and 2), that a class devoted to them would be more accurate. They are respected, and I think the wizard forum threads alone prove that, and for 2), a class isn't really the solution. It's clear to me that you see the subclass as having problems. What isn't clear is how you think making it a class will fix them. Help flesh that out, and maybe I can understand where you're coming from better.
Additionally, if you really like the idea of a "Witcher" style subclass (and the more I type the more I do as well), check out the blood hunter profane soul. Seems very similar to the idea of what you're describing. They get a decent number of spells, especially with this subclass, can be strength or dexterity based as you described, and even get the elemental type blade feature you mentioned. Also, to your final point, I absolutely do want a homebrew class feature, and I believe there was a thread about it (if I can find it, I'll edit this thread to link it). I believe some of the Mods commented and said that it was in the works, but could be a year to maybe three. Although I don't agree necessarily with your premise, I would like to see what you came up with. Hope this helps
Personally, I feel like the natural location for "Bladesinger" is as a subclass of *Bard*.
They use swords. Check. They cast spells. Check. Their key feature is "bladesong" (aka "music'). Check.
So, bladesinger = bard subclass.
I... guess? Feels like some square peg round hole logic there. I could have an eldritch knight who happens to play a lute and make the same argument, but they're totally different in functionality and action. Bladesingers do cast spells, yes, but they also have many spells that are supposed to implement them and support their combat capabilities, whereas bards are far more support focused (yes, even swords bards). Also, bladesong isn't really meant to be a form of music in itself, although you could roleplay it that way. Think of it as more less of an actual song being sung and more the act of composing, albeit a violent composition. I'm not opposed to the idea, but I think the subclass would need more tweaking before being made into a bard subclass. The OP's original point was that they should be their own class, and yours is that they should be a bard, but really the answer to both is they are simply comfortable as wizards. It's definietly a reach from other wizard subclasses, but that's what makes it interesting. It would be a cool bard subclass, after some ability changes, but sometimes the best subclasses are ones that borrow the theme of other classes (hexblade, scout, profane soul, zealot, etc., etc...) and make them part of their own class in practice.
whereas bards are far more support focused (yes, even swords bards).
This is in part due to the R&D team kind of butchering what the Bard originally was while trying to give it a 'niche' to fit into. Go back to 2E AD&D (chosen because of the ease of referring to its mechanics through games such as the Baldur's Gate series) - Bard was not the "magical support caster" that they've been molded into by 5e. They were originally, a multiclass-type character without the Multiclass xp penalties.
They were part-fighter, part-rogue, and part-mage -- with that mage half being considerably stronger and more powerful than what we have now. Originally, Bards possessed access to the entire slew of arcane spells, same as wizards. The tradeoff was that they did not learn any spells while leveling up and had to entirely learn through copying scrolls into their spellbook, which they then prepared same as wizards did. This allowed you to make bards into capable offensive and defensive casters, not just focusing solely on support spells -- some offensive spells were even more powerful on Bards back then because of the way classes leveled up at different rates. Bard, being a Rogue archetype class, leveled at the fastest rate; so level-scaling spells like Magic Missle or Chromatic Orb back then were stronger on Bards during the level-up progression than wizards due to faster caster level progression.
I do think, however, the Bladesinger would have made a really good Bard subclass option that really leaned more into their original roots. It just feels off and out of place because of how much Bard was butchered down to be a support role. Bards get College of Swords, which is arguably pretty similar/the same as the Blade subclass from 2e+; College of Valor is the Skald. Both of those subclasses, at least in 2e, were the 'more fighter' type of Bard subclass that helped benefit their martial fighting.
Bladesinger, however, would be different in that it is arguably even better at doing that than Blade/Skald while encouraging the use of spells (2e Blade/Skald pretty much cut out your spellcasting in favor of fighting). While most people overlook it, the +INT to AC, 10 ft movement speed increase, and +INT to Concentration saves are pretty ridiculous on any high-stat build that can use DEX and INT effectively. The restriction to light armor is minimal - Mage Armor exists anyway which is 1 point better than base Studded Leather. And honestly, if Bladesinger was a Bard subclass - most likely the Bladesong would be +CHA to AC/Concentration saves. It's only INT really because it's Wizard-based so they lean into the Wizard's casting stat to help them not need to be more MAD than DEX/CON/INT. (Constitution is arguable. You can perform just fine with lower CON, regardless of what some tables think XD).
Couple all that with Bladesinger's beautifully unique Extra Attack feature and it is a powerful Gish-capable subclass. The only reason I say no to putting it on Bards in 5e - is because Bards need their spell lists severely expanded and revised so they go back to being the 'part-mage' they used to be instead of default support stick.
Welcome to the problems of where and how to fit the Gish character. Trying to create a single class that encompasses everyone’s take on what a sword wielding spellcaster/spellcasting sword wielder should be like is essentially impossible. Right now we have 2 different types of fighting bards, the Eldritch knight, the Arcane trickster, the Paladin, Ranger and Artificer, the He blade and the Bladesinger.so we range from minimal spell casting (EK, AT) with a focus on combat to a range of half casters to the 3 full casters (bards & BS). Part of the problem is that, whether true or not, there is a belief that casters are far more powerful at higher level than martials so any sort of mixed fighter/caster will end up shifting their focus from martial to casting as they rise through the tiers. I tried crafting a Swordmage class drawing on both the benefits of mage and fighter subclasses to try to keep it as a martial into the upper tiers but it became to OP for use. The 1D&D ranger actual is non rangers enough that if it were changed to allow evocation spells and your choice of types of magic (arcane/clerical/primal) it would be a very good chassis to create half caster Gishes from to suite most folks needs/desires. Personally I would eliminate the 1/3 caster subclasses and convert them into 1/2 casters then move the bladesinger over to bard and reuse the 3e title “ Blade Dancer” for the subclass Allowing them to draw something like “maneuvers” instead of instruments and allowing them access to evocation spells instead of charm/illusion spells.
I always thought they were just the "elves" class from 0E given playable form. Based on how rules have changed over the years, I think wizard's is the best spot for them in 5E.
The base concept of the 5E Bladesinger is it is an "Elven Samurai". Other races can perpetuate this tradition, but it's origins come from the Elven lineage. They dance with a blade as if it were an artists tool. They say the swift movement of a Bladesinger's blade is not only elegant, but it creates a melody that is an event to witness. It is this dance, that allows them to put magic into devastating attacks and cunning defense.
The bladesong is again a way to focus your art using your intelligence to gain benefits from your movements provided you are not wearing or using anything that would work against your coordination. Personally I feel the reason some people think that the Bladesinger is underpowered is that they lack the finesse of playing a character that can change roles when the situation arises. However, it is a wizard focusing their spell ability into their martial weapon. That is how they decided to run it, and since they gave good sub classes to Bard and Rangers that easily fit just right, it just feels right how they have things put together. But if you still need something different from everyone else, just home brew it. From a DM's standpoint though, I would keep the rules as is, especially since I have seen players do exceptionally as a Bladesinger.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am not sure what my Spirit Animal is. But whatever that thing is, I am pretty sure it has rabies!
Lore-wise maybe, but I think we have enough martial quarter casters and half casters already. EK, Trickster, Ranger, Paladin, Artificer. I fear that a new bladesinger would just dip a little bit into everything and be boring/lacking at everything. I think paladin is the only satisfying and interesting of these. Artificer for one would IMO be much more interesting as a full caster.
But I think we need a full caster that utilizes destructive combat magic and melee. Martial bards and clerics have mostly support/control spells to accompany their martial abilities and warlocks sacrifice much of their arcane ability when going blade.
A wizard or sorcerer martial subclass is very much needed one way or another. Blasting fireballs and swinging shadowblade. 😄
Lore-wise maybe, but I think we have enough martial quarter casters and half casters already. EK, Trickster, Ranger, Paladin, Artificer. I fear that a new bladesinger would just dip a little bit into everything and be boring/lacking at everything. I think paladin is the only satisfying and interesting of these. Artificer for one would IMO be much more interesting as a full caster.
But I think we need a full caster that utilizes destructive combat magic and melee. Martial bards and clerics have mostly support/control spells to accompany their martial abilities and warlocks sacrifice much of their arcane ability when going blade.
A wizard or sorcerer martial subclass is very much needed one way or another. Blasting fireballs and swinging shadowblade. 😄
Yes! So true - know wisdom when you see it, and take heed! =)
Seriously, I think there's some validity to disliking bladesingers. I don't, but I can see where it comes from. But then, if you dislike it, just ban it from games. There's literally alternatives enough.
I've only seen it in action one, a friend played one in a campaign I was in. It seemed rather weak? At least, he either played as a full caster and made a difference, or was forced into actual melee, and went down in seconds. Maybe the GM had the monsters hitting too well and too hard. That could be, I played a bard and tended to be on the ground as well =)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So right now bladesingers is a subclass for wizards witch seems cool but when you get into there lore makes zero sense, all the lore I have read up on them says they are elfs who are who use a type of martial arts and who also use a bit of magic and not wizards who use swords, matter of fact they are alot like witchers! both witchers and bladesingers wield swords with finesse and accuracy rather than just strength, both have various schools who practice variations on there fighting styles, both use simple magic to augment there fighting styles and for support and both use intelligence rather than brute force to there advantage.
Also getting on the subject on how they don't make sense despite there name bladesingers have nothing to do with singing, the singing in there title refers to the sound there blades make as they swing them around, using them with such a degree of precision they make sound much like tuning folks do so that makes there current features "bladesong" "song of defense" and "song of victory" make 0 sense because it implies the bladesinger has to start singing in some way to start using there abilities, the second a bladesinger draws there sword is when they start bladesinging, it has nothing to do with songs or singing.
and lastly bladesingers do use magic, much more than lets say a paladin would so on paper I guess that would translate to being similar to hexblade warlock, having access to cantrips, a pretty big list of spells, spell slots up to around level 5-6 and a way to cast sells higher than that.
I think wizards should start working on this class asap and making it right, I think they should have something alone the lines of a cross between kensei monks and hexblades having a unarmored defense feature (probably dex and int to calculate AC) and a feature that lets them use there schools weapon (each of the bladesinger schools have a weapon of choice) with either dex or strength and then a halfcaster features, maybe even give them a few smite spells unique to them based around elements like fire, cold, lighting and so on, maybe even give them a "sonic sword" ability that deals thunder damage (for those who don't know what a sonic sowed ability is, it is a technique popular in anime and video games in witch a skilled swordsman swings there sword and uses the sound wave or wind generated to make a ranged attack in the form of a slash, the damage would be thunder as for whatever reason while the damage type is named "thunder" it has nothing to do with thunder and refers to the damage caused by loud sounds, I guess they would have named it sonic damage but that doesn't sound too fantasy-ish)
And that's why I think bladesingers should get the respect they deserve and get there own more accurate class because what is the world of forgotten realms if a vital peace of lore around a class is wrong, whats next? druids wearing metal!
I would also like to end with the fact I dabble in making a bit of homebrew here and there and I wouldn't mind working with some people in making our own homebrew bladesinger class and play test it so it will be on par with other classes balance.
I love Bladesingers and I think looking at the 2nd ed lore they fit well as the Elvish versions of a Paladin because elves couldn't be paladins. Also as they are more magical it make since. I do also agree they should be seem more as fighters than wizards. I feel that the main reason they are brought back now is because fans were requesting them and they don't really fit the rules well for 5th ed. Especially when fighters already have arcane archer as well as Rune Knight. I will say this, when I played mine, they would always sing their spells, matching the tone of the their blade as it moved in the air, singing in high elven.
I do think they should be redone as a fighter class, or even a ranger class where there are martial using spells to help in the fight. When they are able to gain the second attack, they are able to stab one monster in the face with their sword while sending an acid arrow to hit some archer lining up a shot against healer of the party. I think looking at the 2nd ed kit would help with homebrew. I think maybe a ranger that way it gives them spells and pretty good combat ones at that just limiting the level adding some cantrips. or using rangers as a base and make a whole new class with a limited spell list. just some things I thought about this...
I have been playing RPG's and especially D&D since 1st ed AD&D and D&D Basic. Since those early years I have played a good number of more popular games. I enjoy playing with groups and DM/GM groups that are from diverse backgrounds. I feel any and everyone brings something special and wonderful to a gaming table. I tend to play more magic users though with 5ed I do have ideas for classes I normally would play. My favorites in the past are Wizards/mage, Rangers and Druids.
I am not against this idea because well, them being full wizards with full spell progression doesn't sit well with me. It is clear lore-wise that while bladesingers were known to rely on arcane magic, they were known as elite fighters first and foremost. The only problem here is that the good practice of designing a new class requires at least two archetypes and I dunno what those could be for a bladesinger if it were a full class. The other problem is distinguishing them from Eldritch Knights that happen to be elves.
I have been toying with the idea that I might try to push to my DM - designing a generic Elven Blademaster class with two archetypes chosen at level 2 - a Bladesinger and a Bladedancer (that one heavy influenced by Lineage 2 Bladedancer, aka dual wielding party support with dances invoking magical energy that buffs everyone around for a short period of time). Don't have much time for that right now and nothing concrete but could be fun.
The things I'd like to bring back mechanically is longsword support (something like "you are proficient with a longsword and treat it as a finesse weapon. It loses the versatile property if you use your Dexterity modifier for attack and damage" - thus, eliminating the need to reskin rapiers) and elven chain as well.
Hot take: bladesingers shouldn't exist in the first place. It feels more like an Eldritch Knight than a wizard, so yeah it's a funky subclass, but I don't think it's archetypical enough to be its own class either.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Well there are like 12 potential subclasses my dude XD there are several fighting styles they employ each with it's own school: lion style uses longsword, red tiger two short swords, then bird styles like eagle style with axes, ravens with warlocks, and snake styles like viper with whips.
Each style would have it's own subclass much like monk archetypes each would reflect a different martial style while still carrying the same core discipline
You could even do a subclass for each of the schools of magic, using each one to give a set of spells they can use while in combat and that also be a part of their fight style as well. Divination would start with like Hunter's Mark and they would be ranged fighters while Necromancy would start with like Ray of enfeeblement and use maybe Flails and Morning stars and cause slow pain enjoy the weakening of their foes. Abjuration is more secondary fighter, they shield to spear man if you... just a thought
I have been playing RPG's and especially D&D since 1st ed AD&D and D&D Basic. Since those early years I have played a good number of more popular games. I enjoy playing with groups and DM/GM groups that are from diverse backgrounds. I feel any and everyone brings something special and wonderful to a gaming table. I tend to play more magic users though with 5ed I do have ideas for classes I normally would play. My favorites in the past are Wizards/mage, Rangers and Druids.
well from what I gathered each of the styles do focus on a different schools of magic, I mean they probably all use smite like spells and stuff like booming blade and green flame blade and so on but one would think each school would have spells that supplement there style
I know it was an elf subclass in 2e, i dont remember it it was wizard or fighter/mage. Anyhoo it makes as much sence as a eldritch knight or arcane trickster being a subclass. Well back in the day rouges could use scrolls, rods, and wands after a certain level so i guess A.T. makes a bit more sense.
I can't fully embrace the idea that the Bladesinger is just like a Witcher. That is like saying a cleric is like a wizard. Sure the Witcher and the Bladesinger both use magic at a lesser degree and a sword, but that seems to be where the differences end.
I like the idea of this being a Ranger Subclass. And adding in some "Witcher" like abilities would really resonate with the overall feel that 5E puts forth for the blade singer. But some of this really does seem repetitive as various home-brews and certain lines wanted to have a "Wicher" or "Van Helsing" class. So the real questions is where do you want this class to sit? Is it some mystic warrior who creates magic with the finesse of a sword? Is it the Fighter/Wizard we have tried to reinvent 20 times? It really seems like a repackage character class we have seen before. Maybe it might be time to finally retire the Bladesinger?
I definitely don't have a good answer! But if I knew what the end goal that was needed, I might add some ideas. Remember, this is a game first. So have some fun!
I am not sure what my Spirit Animal is. But whatever that thing is, I am pretty sure it has rabies!
You say the lore doesn't make sense, but never give a reason why, and then just compare them to witchers. The lore is merely open ended in some ways, but closed off in others. I play with an elvish bladesinger currently, and he has worked with the DM on developing bladesigner culture in our world to something that fits within its bounds and grows from them. So, the lore isn't necessarily bad
Bladesinging is an art of swordsmanship. The idea is not that they are bard-like performers, although you could certainly play into that. Instead, the idea is that bladesong is an art, the blade sings while you dance, hence the benefits of blade song.
Yes, bladesingers use magic. But you never say why this supports your argument, and I don't quite understand the sidenote on the whole 'sonic-blade' thing. It's a little complex and feels mechanically just like trying to come up with something to fill a hole, whereas is bladesinger is truly badly desgined, the holes should be apparent and fill themselves. however, them using magic doesn't mean we should reassign them to their own class. In fact, the 'changes' you describe above are pretty much the bladesinger already as is. You also point out a similarity to hexblade, which is fair, but they're different. Trying to make a bladesinger class and comparing it hexblade automatically makes me think that if that class were released, it would smack too much of both old bladesinger and hexblade. You also make an error in the final paragraph in assuming, 1), that bladesingers aren't respected, and 2), that a class devoted to them would be more accurate. They are respected, and I think the wizard forum threads alone prove that, and for 2), a class isn't really the solution. It's clear to me that you see the subclass as having problems. What isn't clear is how you think making it a class will fix them. Help flesh that out, and maybe I can understand where you're coming from better.
Cheers
-Gh0styy
Updog
Additionally, if you really like the idea of a "Witcher" style subclass (and the more I type the more I do as well), check out the blood hunter profane soul. Seems very similar to the idea of what you're describing. They get a decent number of spells, especially with this subclass, can be strength or dexterity based as you described, and even get the elemental type blade feature you mentioned. Also, to your final point, I absolutely do want a homebrew class feature, and I believe there was a thread about it (if I can find it, I'll edit this thread to link it). I believe some of the Mods commented and said that it was in the works, but could be a year to maybe three. Although I don't agree necessarily with your premise, I would like to see what you came up with. Hope this helps
Here's the Link: Homebrew Classes? - D&D Beyond Feedback - D&D Beyond General - D&D Beyond Forums - D&D Beyond (dndbeyond.com), no clear consensus was really reached on the thread from what I can tell by scanning over it, although things have changed since what with OneD&D and the Wizards buy out and whatnot
Updog
Personally, I feel like the natural location for "Bladesinger" is as a subclass of *Bard*.
They use swords. Check.
They cast spells. Check.
Their key feature is "bladesong" (aka "music'). Check.
So, bladesinger = bard subclass.
I... guess? Feels like some square peg round hole logic there. I could have an eldritch knight who happens to play a lute and make the same argument, but they're totally different in functionality and action. Bladesingers do cast spells, yes, but they also have many spells that are supposed to implement them and support their combat capabilities, whereas bards are far more support focused (yes, even swords bards). Also, bladesong isn't really meant to be a form of music in itself, although you could roleplay it that way. Think of it as more less of an actual song being sung and more the act of composing, albeit a violent composition. I'm not opposed to the idea, but I think the subclass would need more tweaking before being made into a bard subclass. The OP's original point was that they should be their own class, and yours is that they should be a bard, but really the answer to both is they are simply comfortable as wizards. It's definietly a reach from other wizard subclasses, but that's what makes it interesting. It would be a cool bard subclass, after some ability changes, but sometimes the best subclasses are ones that borrow the theme of other classes (hexblade, scout, profane soul, zealot, etc., etc...) and make them part of their own class in practice.
Updog
This is in part due to the R&D team kind of butchering what the Bard originally was while trying to give it a 'niche' to fit into. Go back to 2E AD&D (chosen because of the ease of referring to its mechanics through games such as the Baldur's Gate series) - Bard was not the "magical support caster" that they've been molded into by 5e. They were originally, a multiclass-type character without the Multiclass xp penalties.
They were part-fighter, part-rogue, and part-mage -- with that mage half being considerably stronger and more powerful than what we have now. Originally, Bards possessed access to the entire slew of arcane spells, same as wizards. The tradeoff was that they did not learn any spells while leveling up and had to entirely learn through copying scrolls into their spellbook, which they then prepared same as wizards did. This allowed you to make bards into capable offensive and defensive casters, not just focusing solely on support spells -- some offensive spells were even more powerful on Bards back then because of the way classes leveled up at different rates. Bard, being a Rogue archetype class, leveled at the fastest rate; so level-scaling spells like Magic Missle or Chromatic Orb back then were stronger on Bards during the level-up progression than wizards due to faster caster level progression.
I do think, however, the Bladesinger would have made a really good Bard subclass option that really leaned more into their original roots. It just feels off and out of place because of how much Bard was butchered down to be a support role. Bards get College of Swords, which is arguably pretty similar/the same as the Blade subclass from 2e+; College of Valor is the Skald. Both of those subclasses, at least in 2e, were the 'more fighter' type of Bard subclass that helped benefit their martial fighting.
Bladesinger, however, would be different in that it is arguably even better at doing that than Blade/Skald while encouraging the use of spells (2e Blade/Skald pretty much cut out your spellcasting in favor of fighting). While most people overlook it, the +INT to AC, 10 ft movement speed increase, and +INT to Concentration saves are pretty ridiculous on any high-stat build that can use DEX and INT effectively. The restriction to light armor is minimal - Mage Armor exists anyway which is 1 point better than base Studded Leather. And honestly, if Bladesinger was a Bard subclass - most likely the Bladesong would be +CHA to AC/Concentration saves. It's only INT really because it's Wizard-based so they lean into the Wizard's casting stat to help them not need to be more MAD than DEX/CON/INT. (Constitution is arguable. You can perform just fine with lower CON, regardless of what some tables think XD).
Couple all that with Bladesinger's beautifully unique Extra Attack feature and it is a powerful Gish-capable subclass. The only reason I say no to putting it on Bards in 5e - is because Bards need their spell lists severely expanded and revised so they go back to being the 'part-mage' they used to be instead of default support stick.
Welcome to the problems of where and how to fit the Gish character. Trying to create a single class that encompasses everyone’s take on what a sword wielding spellcaster/spellcasting sword wielder should be like is essentially impossible. Right now we have 2 different types of fighting bards, the Eldritch knight, the Arcane trickster, the Paladin, Ranger and Artificer, the He blade and the Bladesinger.so we range from minimal spell casting (EK, AT) with a focus on combat to a range of half casters to the 3 full casters (bards & BS). Part of the problem is that, whether true or not, there is a belief that casters are far more powerful at higher level than martials so any sort of mixed fighter/caster will end up shifting their focus from martial to casting as they rise through the tiers. I tried crafting a Swordmage class drawing on both the benefits of mage and fighter subclasses to try to keep it as a martial into the upper tiers but it became to OP for use. The 1D&D ranger actual is non rangers enough that if it were changed to allow evocation spells and your choice of types of magic (arcane/clerical/primal) it would be a very good chassis to create half caster Gishes from to suite most folks needs/desires. Personally I would eliminate the 1/3 caster subclasses and convert them into 1/2 casters then move the bladesinger over to bard and reuse the 3e title “ Blade Dancer” for the subclass Allowing them to draw something like “maneuvers” instead of instruments and allowing them access to evocation spells instead of charm/illusion spells.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I always thought they were just the "elves" class from 0E given playable form. Based on how rules have changed over the years, I think wizard's is the best spot for them in 5E.
The base concept of the 5E Bladesinger is it is an "Elven Samurai". Other races can perpetuate this tradition, but it's origins come from the Elven lineage. They dance with a blade as if it were an artists tool. They say the swift movement of a Bladesinger's blade is not only elegant, but it creates a melody that is an event to witness. It is this dance, that allows them to put magic into devastating attacks and cunning defense.
The bladesong is again a way to focus your art using your intelligence to gain benefits from your movements provided you are not wearing or using anything that would work against your coordination. Personally I feel the reason some people think that the Bladesinger is underpowered is that they lack the finesse of playing a character that can change roles when the situation arises. However, it is a wizard focusing their spell ability into their martial weapon. That is how they decided to run it, and since they gave good sub classes to Bard and Rangers that easily fit just right, it just feels right how they have things put together. But if you still need something different from everyone else, just home brew it. From a DM's standpoint though, I would keep the rules as is, especially since I have seen players do exceptionally as a Bladesinger.
I am not sure what my Spirit Animal is. But whatever that thing is, I am pretty sure it has rabies!
Lore-wise maybe, but I think we have enough martial quarter casters and half casters already. EK, Trickster, Ranger, Paladin, Artificer. I fear that a new bladesinger would just dip a little bit into everything and be boring/lacking at everything. I think paladin is the only satisfying and interesting of these. Artificer for one would IMO be much more interesting as a full caster.
But I think we need a full caster that utilizes destructive combat magic and melee. Martial bards and clerics have mostly support/control spells to accompany their martial abilities and warlocks sacrifice much of their arcane ability when going blade.
A wizard or sorcerer martial subclass is very much needed one way or another. Blasting fireballs and swinging shadowblade. 😄
Finland GMT/UTC +2
bladesingers are just wrong
Yes! So true - know wisdom when you see it, and take heed! =)
Seriously, I think there's some validity to disliking bladesingers. I don't, but I can see where it comes from. But then, if you dislike it, just ban it from games. There's literally alternatives enough.
I've only seen it in action one, a friend played one in a campaign I was in. It seemed rather weak? At least, he either played as a full caster and made a difference, or was forced into actual melee, and went down in seconds. Maybe the GM had the monsters hitting too well and too hard. That could be, I played a bard and tended to be on the ground as well =)
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.