5 thoughts on “ERRATA Sword Coast Adventurer’s Guide – Green-Flame Blade and Booming Blade FIX!

  1. Dreadwolf says:

    Did WotC not think this through or did they intentionally TOTALLY nerf Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade?

    Adding that the spells need a weapon with a cost means that they can’t be used with conjured weapons of any sorts.

    Adding that the range of the spells are now “Self” mean that they can’t be used with some meta magic options, in addition to not being useable with the War Caster feat to attack fleeing creatures, or with the Spell Sniper feat, increasing the range to 10 ft.

    • Peter says:

      It is my understanding that warcaster will still work. Self, does not mean you target yourself, but that you are the origin point. We also don’t think you are targeting yourself when you cast thunderwave.

      However, your other points hold, and it really is a shame. I see no good reason for these changes, and they hurt some cool builds.

      • D. Walker says:

        The “conjured weapons” complaint seems silly – a conjured version of any weapon that meets the gold requirement is still that kind of weapon, even if you couldn’t realistically sell that PARTICULAR weapon for money.

        If a Warlock takes a longsword as their pact weapon, it’s still ostensibly “worth” the same 15gp as any other longsword, even though it can’t be sold.

        If someone casts Shadow Blade, even though the weapon it conjures is not on the weapon table, if it WERE on that table it obviously would be worth much more than 1 silver piece, and thus it should qualify.

        The only weapons the gold value invalidates are Darts, which aren’t melee weapons to begin with, and certain improvised weapons at DM discretion. And even then, since improvised weapons are frequently just treated as equivalent to listed weapons (bar stool leg = club, broken glass shiv = dagger, etc), they would still qualify even then.

        ~~~

        Spell Sniper was always an extreme edge case, and frankly was monkeying around with rules lawyering a bit too much. It was clearly intended to be used for ranged spell attacks, and these cantrips were clearly meant to be melee.

  2. D. Walker says:

    Very slight nerfs to the cantrips, but only in the sense of preventing certain edge cases that I guess WoTC got tired of being asked about – basically just bringing the spells from this book in line with other books in terms of format, which is good.

    The bigger news is a pretty major stealth buff for Bladesingers – they get a newly added unnamed ability as part of their “Extra Attack” feature that is effectively a slightly superior analog to the Eldritch Knight’s “War Caster” ability – you can replace one attack per “Extra Attack” usage with a cantrip.

    As written, it might create some interesting edge case scenarios – for example, it’s unclear exactly how it would work if you can obtain more attacks per turn than the ordinary two for Bladesingers (such as by multi-classing).

    In the same vein, Bladesinger 6 / Fighter 2 could Action Surge, getting two Extra Attack actions, making it possible to switch out one attack each for cantrips, meaning you can cast two cantrips in one turn. Unclear how that would interact with the rule on bonus action spells – “You can’t cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.”

    In natural language, that could mean either A) if you cast a bonus action spell, the only other KIND of spell you can also cast that turn is a cantrip / cantrips with a casting time of 1 action, or B) you can only cast a single cantrip no matter what.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.