I'm glad you brought up Green-Flame Blade/Booming Blade, too. And that doesn't get in the way of loading/firing their ranged weapon, all without having to worry about swapping/dropping weapons. Indeed, also a decent use idea! A Ranger or ranged Fighter/Rogue perhaps who just wants a backup melee option for the odd melee moments that's stronger than their unarmed strike (particularly for the DEX attacks for a Rogue since it's finesse). Leaving the potential users as ranged attackers who cannot wear shields. It's also really useful for builds that want to leave grappling open as an option. Though I can definitely see some who want the dual-wielding vibe without interfering with performing somatic components for spells. (Or just downtime training if your DM is cool!)Įven offensive two-handed builds would prefer 1d6 weapons - regardless of the ability to cast spells. Indeed, it's most effective on casters who aren't otherwise proficient with martial weapons, so they would need some way to get proficiency with this of course, such as via their race, a feat, or multiclassing. Unless you have no access to Warcaster, this is completely irrelevant to any martial caster class as a +2 AC is far better. It's classified as a martial weapon: " An armblade is a martial weapon that weighs 2 pounds and costs approximately 5 gp." It is missing a classification between Simple and Martial. Which means only Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster, and Bladesinger Wizards (perhaps Rangers) are your main targets due to access to weapon cantrips while dual-wielding. Warlock can use their Pact Weapon as focus Ranger can use quarterstaff as druidic focus which means a single spellcasting focus is enough:Īrtificer can use their infused shield or weaponĭruid can use quarterstaff as druidic focus ![]() The cool ones (GFG and BB) are both somatic AND material based. In a world without warcaster - well, there are not many spells you can cast that ONLY need a somatic component. Which totally goes against the fantasy of these things. Even offensive two-handed builds would prefer 1d6 weapons - regardless of the ability to cast spells. Edit: I was wrong in overlooking, but right in assessing! Considering the dagger to be simple, this one being superior (no hand), this is probably martial. (And, of course, you could feasibly get a magical armblade that has other properties attached to it.) Only real difference there is that this deals piercing/slashing damage instead of their unarmed strike's bludgeoning. So their unarmed strikes already deal the same damage. Making it a monk weapon would just allow them to use their martial arts die for it, which is already, baseline, a d4. Regarding the Monk thing, that's a neat thought, but I believe it'd mostly be useless on them even if it counted as a monk weapon. (You can only use the hand/object holding your spellcasting focus to perform somatic components if it's also performing material components for that spell. And that still doesn't account for the whole pedantic "spell with somatic components but no material components" dilemma. Even still, there are several builds that could see good use from this that don't have easy access to a feature that enables that. ![]() That's a fair assessment since there are several ways to make your weapon be your spellcasting focus now (though it wasn't always that way). ![]() It's a rare caster that both uses martial weapons and can't use the martial weapon for spellcasting at the same time.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |