LogFAQs > #896862254

shadowsword87 posted...

Consider it like this: you spend your action to make an attack no matter what. If you cast this spell instead you still get a single attack, but if you hit, you get an extra d6 of damage. You still would get whatever damage from smacking someone with a big sword, there's just some nice extra damage, that's all.

Yeah, but if you're a spellcaster there are likely far better options than making a crappy melee attack to attach the extra damage to, and if you're a Paladin then you're probably already slapping smites onto those attacks for more damage. So it doesn't seem like it necessarily fits with the build I've been discussing.

It seems to me that it exists solely to be given to Bladesinger/Hexblade type characters who are deliberately hybrid magic/melee, but who don't necessarily already have alternative means of boosting damage (like, again, Paladins). Which is fine. I'd probably be more inclined to like it as a spell choice if I were playing one of those classes.

Then again, if I was playing Wizard or Warlock, I'd be far more likely to be playing pure blasting classes than I would either of those anyway.



shadowsword87 posted...

Yeah, but there are some feats that are just too good to pass up.
Like Sentinel, which says if you hit someone with an attack of opportunity, their speed just automatically goes to 0. It's really fun.

Sure, but I was mostly talking about the purely mechanical/mathematic sense. ie, whether or not the 2 stat points you're losing hurt you more than the average Feat can help you, or if a lot of the Feats are overpowered enough that it's almost always worth taking them if you have the option.

In my case, I was thinking about giving the Paladin Athlete at level 4 and Martial Adept at level 8, mainly for thematic/flavorish purposes rather than straight powergaming logic.



shadowsword87 posted...

Outside of high level spells (and broken subclasses), there's not a lot of mechanics to really break the game. It's what you got.

And, to be fair, there's also the fact that good DMs will cater their games to the players. The main reason why groups like the ones on Critical Role or Dice Camera Action weren't TPK'd a long time ago is because their DMs tailor their adventures to the group as played, rather than for a hypothetical fully-optimized group of similar classes and levels.



shadowsword87 posted...

Boo, hisss.

The weird thing with that particular case is that there are Chaotic Good elves with Moonblades in previous editions of the game, but for some reason they made the one in the 5e DMG limited to Neutral Good only. Which is doubly odd with the focus on elves being more of a Chaotic race in general.

My assumption is that they were trying to emphasis the need for the wielder to be dedicated to improving elf society as a whole rather than simply being a lone wanderer with selfish motivations, but "Good" sort of fits that particular mold well enough without having to force a "Neutral" as well (and what makes it especially odd is that you can't be a Lawful Good elf either, in spite of that seemingly being the ideal person to own such a blade).

---

"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family