Gith Advice? Looking to play a Warrior / Mage


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

I'm looking for ideas on building a Warrior/Mage. I'd like to stick to Pathfinder Core rules, standard 15 point buy, etc.

What are the different approaches to this archetype? There's the classic Fighter/Wizard/EK, of course, but what else? Fighter/Sorcerer/DD/EK? I might be able to swing the "base monk stuff on Int instead of Wis' feat from Dragon Compendium, so how would a Monk/Wizard go?


BobChuck wrote:

I'm looking for ideas on building a Warrior/Mage. I'd like to stick to Pathfinder Core rules, standard 15 point buy, etc.

What are the different approaches to this archetype? There's the classic Fighter/Wizard/EK, of course, but what else? Fighter/Sorcerer/DD/EK? I might be able to swing the "base monk stuff on Int instead of Wis' feat from Dragon Compendium, so how would a Monk/Wizard go?

I wouldnt do a monk wizards, monk is too dependant on going straight monk for its abilities to be maintained (unarmed damage, flurry, etc). I personally am a fan of the Sorceror/Dragon Disciple route and am playing one in a game im running. I took a high strength and just an ok charisma, since I made melee my primary focus.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

There's always the bard option.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

It always boggles me that there's such a strong desire for a fighter/wizard type character (I HATE the word gish, btw... pet peeve of mine), but at the same time there's such a low opinion of the bard.

The bard is pretty much the best option outside of the Eldritch Knight for the fighter/wizard route. The upcoming Advanced Player's Guide will hopefully help to drive this fact home a bit more, with several new bard spells that work well with the fact that he's basically a weapon-wielding armor-wearing spellcaster... something that 3.5's lazy bard spell selection didn't encourage and unfortunately got grandfathered in to PFRPG.

But if you want to play the character that's TWO main characters in one (the super bad-ass fighter and the hard-core explosive wizard), one thing to keep in mind is that the game is built with checks and balances for a purpose. It's hard to do that kind of character for a reason.


James Jacobs wrote:

It always boggles me that there's such a strong desire for a fighter/wizard type character (I HATE the word gish, btw... pet peeve of mine), but at the same time there's such a low opinion of the bard.

The bard is pretty much the best option outside of the Eldritch Knight for the fighter/wizard route. The upcoming Advanced Player's Guide will hopefully help to drive this fact home a bit more, with several new bard spells that work well with the fact that he's basically a weapon-wielding armor-wearing spellcaster... something that 3.5's lazy bard spell selection didn't encourage and unfortunately got grandfathered in to PFRPG.

But if you want to play the character that's TWO main characters in one (the super bad-ass fighter and the hard-core explosive wizard), one thing to keep in mind is that the game is built with checks and balances for a purpose. It's hard to do that kind of character for a reason.

I think the reason that the bard is not looked on for this often is because 3.5 tried to make him the jack of all trades instead of the magic wielding armor wearing, weapon swinging guy. Because he doesnt just do those things. He can fight ok, he has some pretty good spells, he has a ton of skills, lots of buffs, can do some healing. The bard can to some degree do just about anything, but doesnt do anything particularly well (in my view) except maybe buffing but even that I feel can be done with good wizard or cleric spell selection. The general concept I've always had with a fighter mage is achieved through the sorc/dragon disciple, where someone is melee focused, but not as good as a straight martial character would be, but can make up most of that groud with good self buffs. A bard cant do this because his abilities are directed in way to many directions. Too much of the bards 'character currency' is (rightly so) devoted to songs and skills for him to really shine as a fighter mage.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

James Jacobs wrote:
The upcoming Advanced Player's Guide will hopefully help to drive this fact home a bit more, with several new bard spells that work well with the fact that he's basically a weapon-wielding armor-wearing spellcaster.

Having been an unabashed bard-lover since its reinvention as a base class in 2nd Edition, I want to express my gratitude. :)

Liberty's Edge

Yeah, in my opinion, the Bard as Gish works about as well as the Monk/Wizard as Gish; there's some potential and coverage, but too much is spent on other things.

Also, Bards fight by walking into dungeons and singing at people: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0128.html

The Gish is a popular concept for the same reason fighters and wizards are popular: they are iconic. Gandalf goes toe-to-toe with the Balrog, swinging a staff in one hand and a sword in the other. Elves have been doing the Blade Dancer thing since second edition. Clerics are basically Divine Gishs, which is part of the problem "priest" style classes runs into, as the spells aren't as good.

I started the thread because I didn't see any threads about it, and I was looking for ideas. I've got the basic mechanics, but I'm not sure what works and what doesn't. For instance, does Arcane Power pay off for EKs? for DDs? What should the wizard EK prepare? What are good spells for the DD? I don't know these things, and while I don't believe in min-maxing, I want a character that actually works.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

James Jacobs wrote:

It always boggles me that there's such a strong desire for a fighter/wizard type character (I HATE the word gish, btw... pet peeve of mine), but at the same time there's such a low opinion of the bard.

The bard is pretty much the best option outside of the Eldritch Knight for the fighter/wizard route. The upcoming Advanced Player's Guide will hopefully help to drive this fact home a bit more, with several new bard spells that work well with the fact that he's basically a weapon-wielding armor-wearing spellcaster... something that 3.5's lazy bard spell selection didn't encourage and unfortunately got grandfathered in to PFRPG.

James, that's good news. I'm playing a bard now, specifically trying to make him the best spellcasting fighter that I can, but with the versitility to also be a skill character/diplomat, and a problem solver utility character through spells.

So far, at 5th level he's working out great, and I'd suggest that how you make your bard character matters a lot. I've seen lots of people try making a fighting bard by going weapon finesse and high dex, but I'm going the opposite. High str, arcane strike, and medium armor proficiency using mithril breastplate to not interfere with spellcasting has made him quite sucessful in a fight. When you then add in the right spells (heroism, mirror image, alter self, and unseen servant) and inspire courage he does great. Plus, he can heal if needed, be stealthy, and influence NPCs.


James Jacobs wrote:

It always boggles me that there's such a strong desire for a fighter/wizard type character (I HATE the word gish, btw... pet peeve of mine), but at the same time there's such a low opinion of the bard.

The bard is pretty much the best option outside of the Eldritch Knight for the fighter/wizard route. The upcoming Advanced Player's Guide will hopefully help to drive this fact home a bit more, with several new bard spells that work well with the fact that he's basically a weapon-wielding armor-wearing spellcaster... something that 3.5's lazy bard spell selection didn't encourage and unfortunately got grandfathered in to PFRPG.

But if you want to play the character that's TWO main characters in one (the super bad-ass fighter and the hard-core explosive wizard), one thing to keep in mind is that the game is built with checks and balances for a purpose. It's hard to do that kind of character for a reason.

Well that bard is sort of is, but it isn't. It is a primary buffer with little to no flashy offensive spells. Bard don't go throwing fireballs as they wade into battle, but a fighter/mage can and often does. I recall back in the days of AD&D no stinking edition numeration of any kind just AD&D and your fighter/magic-users threw fireballs, melee'd, and flew about. They were limited by level and the fact that they were generally 2 or more levels behind their group. The odd fighter/illusionist gnome was always a nice change and in many ways he can be well represented by the present day bard, but the old fighter/wizard, no so much so.

Also the bard comes with some extrainous abilities that most fighter/,agic-users never had, the songs and healing take the place of what would be wanted which would be more offensive power.

This isn't to say that bard is a bad class or anything just that it isn't really a replacement for the old style fighter/magic-user.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

And what I'm saying is that a character who does everything a fighter does as good as a fighter does AND does everything a wizard/sorcerer does as good as a wizard/sorcerer does is not good game design.

Eldritch Knight is a pretty good solution. So is Dragon Disciple. So is arcane archer. But if that's not good enough... I'd suggest checking out Unearthed Arcana's rules for gestalt classes.

Liberty's Edge

Just wanted to second my dislike of 'gish' as a term. In a perfect world, I'd also like to see a moratorium on 'nerf' and 'gimp'

Heck, I'd also love to see people actually <gasp> spell out words when they type instead of doing the LOL thing - it took me a couple minutes to part the mist and figure out that EK was Eldritch Knight for example.

Oh well, I can dream


James Jacobs wrote:

And what I'm saying is that a character who does everything a fighter does as good as a fighter does AND does everything a wizard/sorcerer does as good as a wizard/sorcerer does is not good game design.

Eldritch Knight is a pretty good solution. So is Dragon Disciple. So is arcane archer. But if that's not good enough... I'd suggest checking out Unearthed Arcana's rules for gestalt classes.

I am a fan of both prestige classes. I agree about the poor game design if the fighter mage is as good as the fighter or mage at what they do. I am not certain anyone was disputing that. I was just saying I think the bard is spread in too many directions to be effective. My definition of effective is not "equal to the classes that do just the one thing". But the bard for instance is out fought by just about every other class (exception is the spell casting wizard and sorceror). And their spells are not really of an offensive nature that I envision for a fighter mage. Certainly a fighter mage shouldnt be on par with a full caster, but I envision the two abilities (casting and fighting) meshing somehow, along the lines of the 3.5 duskblade, where he could cast a small selection of his spells into his attacks.


James Jacobs wrote:

And what I'm saying is that a character who does everything a fighter does as good as a fighter does AND does everything a wizard/sorcerer does as good as a wizard/sorcerer does is not good game design.

Eldritch Knight is a pretty good solution. So is Dragon Disciple. So is arcane archer. But if that's not good enough... I'd suggest checking out Unearthed Arcana's rules for gestalt classes.

Agreed but I was replying to trying to use the bard, which truthfully doesn't cover the fighter/magic-user combo as well as you might think.

Personally I like both the eldritch knight and the arcane archer, both can do what I'd like. I just dislike the arcane armor training thing, but heck who doesn't fix that with house rules anyway.


James Jacobs wrote:
The bard is pretty much the best option outside of the Eldritch Knight for the fighter/wizard route. The upcoming Advanced Player's Guide will hopefully help to drive this fact home a bit more, with several new bard spells that work well with the fact that he's basically a weapon-wielding armor-wearing spellcaster... something that 3.5's lazy bard spell selection didn't encourage and unfortunately got grandfathered in to PFRPG.

That does sound interesting. I liked the private sanctuary version of the bard with its different schools. I would like to see more martial in my bard

The Runeblade from the Book of Experimental Might looks very interesting.

Scarab Sages

Just what exactly is a "Gith/Gish" anyways

I see the term, but a forums search wasnt helpful, pulled up a bunch of archive posts


Marc Radle 81 wrote:

Just wanted to second my dislike of 'gish' as a term. In a perfect world, I'd also like to see a moratorium on 'nerf' and 'gimp'

...fluff...

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

James Jacobs wrote:

And what I'm saying is that a character who does everything a fighter does as good as a fighter does AND does everything a wizard/sorcerer does as good as a wizard/sorcerer does is not good game design.

Yeah, but he has a freaking gee-tar in a dungeon. The 2e bard was a great option for this type of class. The 3e/PFRPG bard? Not so much.


"Yeah, but he has a freaking gee-tar in a dungeon. "

Yup, or he's doing a free-form-jazz-exploration on the bongos to help someone pick a lock or something.

I love the idea of an "officer" type class that is a little more weapons and armor focused, and less musical.

Paladin/ Sorcerer/ EK ? That could be cool...
I found it worth going Wiz6 F1 before taking the first level of EK.

As for good caster/melee stuff:
Shocking Grasp, Mage Armor, Shield spell, ability boost spells, Mirror image, Displacement, Heroism (NICE!), Vampiric Touch, (and melee and ranged touch spells of all kinds). Wands of the above spells avoid attacks of opportunity. Pearls of Power.
Everything that increases movement or lets you fly or teleport is important.
Spell Penetration and Greater SP.
Dodge- Mobility- Spring Attack is good.
Look into the polymorh spells.
Remember that things like a wand of Scorching Ray, or wand of Shocking Grasp level 5, might be better then any bows or swords.

You can probably skip most of the Summoning spells, and some other spells that are "best" when you first get them, but don't scale well.

Bards need their own table of magic items to round out the class... That could be a good category in the 2010 RPG Superstar contest...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Of the classes in Pathfinder I like the bard the most however the bard as a fighter-mage has two problems. The first is lack of feat slots to work with. Better than 3.5 but still limiting to a single style of combat. The second is access to some of the better spells. In 3.0 the bard had access to mage armor, magic weapon, keen and greater magic weapon. In the absense of any real way to get access to these spell a bard is dependant solely on magical items. What I would really like is the option to build a bard similar to what I can with a psychic warrior and have a self buffing character who can pick up any weapon and within a few rounds be ready to take on the hordes.

After having looked at the Cavalier and Oracle classes I was inclined to pass on the Advanced Players Guide. The prospect of getting some good options for my bard will have me look at it.

Doug


heimdallsgothi wrote:

Just what exactly is a "Gith/Gish" anyways

I see the term, but a forums search wasnt helpful, pulled up a bunch of archive posts

Its derived from the Githyanki and has come to mean a character or class that combines arcane magic with a fighter's skills. Like a Eldritch Knight or Bladesinger is a gith


Gish, right? It is the Gith who have gish; to them let's reserve this dish.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
heimdallsgothi wrote:

Just what exactly is a "Gith/Gish" anyways

I see the term, but a forums search wasnt helpful, pulled up a bunch of archive posts

I believe that it is an "Anime" term referring to a warrior/mage who usually wields a sword bigger than they are in one hand.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Thurgon wrote:
Agreed but I was replying to trying to use the bard, which truthfully doesn't cover the fighter/magic-user combo as well as you might think.

I disagree. But then, I'm not scared of UMD. :)


Mistwalker wrote:
heimdallsgothi wrote:

Just what exactly is a "Gith/Gish" anyways

I see the term, but a forums search wasnt helpful, pulled up a bunch of archive posts

I believe that it is an "Anime" term referring to a warrior/mage who usually wields a sword bigger than they are in one hand.

Gish are a caste of warrior-mages in the Githyanki society. The term 'gish' has been around for ever, at least from 1st ed AD&D fiend folio, but its common meaning as a generic fighter/wizard multiclass is harder to determine...

The Exchange

What I have always wanted and am now trying my meager hand in making is sort of an Arcane Ranger. Not as good as a Fighter, not as good as a Wizard. But more of a combat oriented character then the Bard. The Bard has a great niche'. He really does. He just isn't this type of class. Never was and even with the advanced players guide I highly doubt he ever will be. none of the new classes seem to fit this mold either. The prestige classes work fine for different routes, but you should not have to wait till you are 7-9th level to play the character you wanted at first. You can multi-class Sorcerer/Fighter but this not only feels restrictive it still doesn't work well. In fact a multi-class at 10th level fights only slightly better then the bard and though he has a better spell selection (or could) for combat his abilities and skills are still sub par. If the Bard had better options he might be able to compensate for this but right now he just doesn't fit the bill. Even with Jasons rewrite.

The Exchange

Laurefindel wrote:

Gish are a caste of warrior-mages in the Githyanki society. The term 'gish' has been around for ever, at least from 1st ed AD&D fiend folio

You have just won Jeapordy!!!!!!!!!!!!


Crimson Jester wrote:
some stuff I agree with.

This is why I liked the duskblade, although it usually felt a bit strong compared to other classes.


tejón wrote:
Thurgon wrote:
Agreed but I was replying to trying to use the bard, which truthfully doesn't cover the fighter/magic-user combo as well as you might think.
I disagree. But then, I'm not scared of UMD. :)

In a game were the purchasing of magic items is easy, sure I guess. But in a game that doesn't hand them out with levels well then it aint such a good choice. Even then though frankly the Bard doesn't really do the job well because he's got skills that a fighter/mage wouldn't and so he sacrifices combat power for versitility.


Go HERE...click on "Bards" and go to Melee Bard.

If Bards aren't your style flavor wise - I guess the next question would be:

Does it need to be an ARCANE caster?

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Thurgon wrote:
In a game were the purchasing of magic items is easy, sure I guess.

In a game where it isn't, item creation feats are even more worth the investment. Granted this won't give you access to Sor/Wiz scrolls, wands and staffs; but everything else is open.

Edit:

Treantmonk wrote:
Go HERE...click on "Bards" and go to Melee Bard.

Psst... can't take EWP:Net as a 1st level bard. :P


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
BobChuck wrote:

I'm looking for ideas on building a Warrior/Mage. I'd like to stick to Pathfinder Core rules, standard 15 point buy, etc.

What are the different approaches to this archetype? There's the classic Fighter/Wizard/EK, of course, but what else? Fighter/Sorcerer/DD/EK? I might be able to swing the "base monk stuff on Int instead of Wis' feat from Dragon Compendium, so how would a Monk/Wizard go?

The first thing you need to decide is whether you want a melee focus or a ranged focus.

For melee focus, a bard/fighter/eldritch knight can make a good choice for those more interested in battlefield control and buff/de-buff spells than blowing things up. Your BAB is high enough (especially with heroism), that you can hold your own in combat. Being able to cast spells in light armor (i.e., mithral breastplate) and while using a shield (without needing to take Arcane Armor Training/Mastery feats) helps you keep your AC fairly high, as well.

A bard/dragon disciple (or even bard/fighter/dragon disciple/eldritch knight) can also be a decent melee combatant. Your BAB won't be quite as good, but the draconic bloodline powers can add to your damage-causing options and you gain a few extra hit points.

IMO, the "classic" fighter/wizard/eldritch knight can make a pretty good caster and light combatant, but gives up too much in the way of BAB to shine in melee. Likewise, a sorcerer/dragon disciple also gives up too much when it comes to either BAB or spellcasting to make a really effective warrior/mage.

For a ranged focus, the fighter/wizard/eldritch knight works fairly well.

Another option for a ranged combatant is arcane archer, although you are limited to elf or half-elf and need to make some hard choices between BAB and spellcasting (maybe fighter 1/wizard 5/eldritch knight 3/arcane archer X?); a bard, bard/fighter, or bard/ranger could also work as an arcane archer.

Sebastian wrote:
Yeah, but he has a freaking gee-tar in a dungeon.

That depends on which Perform you take ranks in. The only Bardic Performance with a requirement for playing an instrument or singing is countersong. Perform (Act) can work for a bard who quotes plays (insert St. Crispin's Day speech), Perform (Oratory) can work for a bard that gives inspiring "pep-talks," etc. for everything else.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

James Jacobs wrote:

It always boggles me that there's such a strong desire for a fighter/wizard type character (I HATE the word gish, btw... pet peeve of mine), but at the same time there's such a low opinion of the bard.

The bard is pretty much the best option outside of the Eldritch Knight for the fighter/wizard route. The upcoming Advanced Player's Guide will hopefully help to drive this fact home a bit more, with several new bard spells that work well with the fact that he's basically a weapon-wielding armor-wearing spellcaster... something that 3.5's lazy bard spell selection didn't encourage and unfortunately got grandfathered in to PFRPG.

I would politely suggest that this is because the bard has a ton of class abilities that have nothing to do with spellcasting or stabbin' and no class abilities that have anything to do with melee except Inspire Courage, and on top of the relatively few spells that enhance stabbin'. This is on top of the middling HP and BAB, bad AC, and lack of access to most decent 2h weapons.

Basically, there is no reason to try to make a gish in PF core. Multiclass builds of this sort are terrible at low levels and come into their own at higher levels, but at higher levels as a wizard or sorcerer you're better off just being a wizard or sorcerer single-class even if you really want to wade into melee and smash people. More on why later.


James Jacobs wrote:

And what I'm saying is that a character who does everything a fighter does as good as a fighter does AND does everything a wizard/sorcerer does as good as a wizard/sorcerer does is not good game design.

Eldritch Knight is a pretty good solution. So is Dragon Disciple. So is arcane archer. But if that's not good enough... I'd suggest checking out Unearthed Arcana's rules for gestalt classes.

Personally this is not what I want. I want a class that is a melee fighting class which relies on spells rather than brute strength to do damage and harry opponents. Duskblade was a very good class, though it had its problems, and is more like what I personally look for.

Look, we have these character archetypes largely because of fiction characters. Frickin rangers only have dual wield because of Drizzt. What about your Rand al'Thors or Elrics of Melnibone, thoughtful but powerful warriors that relied as much on magical might as brawn.

I really don't think that a well thought out option along these lines could tip the scales any more than PF paladin!!!

Dark Archive

Marc Radle 81 wrote:

Just wanted to second my dislike of 'gish' as a term. In a perfect world, I'd also like to see a moratorium on 'nerf' and 'gimp'

Heck, I'd also love to see people actually <gasp> spell out words when they type instead of doing the LOL thing - it took me a couple minutes to part the mist and figure out that EK was Eldritch Knight for example.

Oh well, I can dream

Ahh, a kindred soul at last! I'm with you, my friend. Maybe someone can post a guide to all the abbreviations so that people like us don't have to google them anymore.


Dragon Age has this option, and I am loving it. I'd love to see something similar in Pathfinder. DA has a specialization that takes your magic ability and substitutes it for strength for the purpose of wearing armor and weilding weapons. At higher levels (4 ranks total) you can take mana damage instead of health damage, and get damage reduction as part of the damage is shunted into another dimension.

This allows me to have a mage who can go toe to toe at the frontlines, toss out a fireball, and swing her spell enhancing sword while waiting for her next AOE spell to recharge (mana permitting). It is nice to be able to hit decently for good damage with my weapon, take the hits from foes, and cast the ocassional spell without being equal to a warrior or a pure mage. I see myself as utility DPS on the frontlines. A real Battlemage.

I would love to see something similar make it into Pathfinder. Eldritch Knight and Dragon Disciple don't quite reproduce the concept. I am not sure how to get enough feats in Pathfinder to pick up heavy armor and weapon use (minus special attacks with them, no shield bash or cleave) and still cast normally (quick spells are a plus, can still get interrupted or knocked around) while taking the hits.


Crimson Jester wrote:
Laurefindel wrote:

Gish are a caste of warrior-mages in the Githyanki society. The term 'gish' has been around for ever, at least from 1st ed AD&D fiend folio

You have just won Jeapordy!!!!!!!!!!!!

First appeared in White Dwarf #12 April/May '79 by C. Stross

Along with: Assassin Bug, Iron Pig, Desert Raider, Three Headed Skrat, Giant Bloodworm and...

For the star prize what two other iconic critters were also to be found in that same issue of Fiend Factory?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Treantmonk wrote:

Go HERE...click on "Bards" and go to Melee Bard.

If Bards aren't your style flavor wise - I guess the next question would be:

Does it need to be an ARCANE caster?

Corrected the link:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/extras/community-creations/treatmonks-lab

Treantmonk - please be sure to give out the correct (ie, the d20pfsrd.com) links :)

The Exchange

Treantmonk wrote:


If Bards aren't your style flavor wise - I guess the next question would be:

Does it need to be an ARCANE caster?

Why yes. For Iconic reasons and for play style.

The Exchange Kobold Press

Further goodies for sword mage types are available in the Maegriel's Manual posts (1st one is up, another next week) at Kobold Quarterly.com.

Monte tweeted about the article recently, and it has been getting a lot of favorable attention lately.

The Exchange

Wolfgang Baur wrote:

Further goodies for sword mage types are available in the Maegriel's Manual posts (1st one is up, another next week) at Kobold Quarterly.com.

Monte tweeted about the article recently, and it has been getting a lot of favorable attention lately.

I new I needed to check my twitter more.

Thanks Mr. Baur


The only thing that hurts the bard as the fighter/mage is his spell list. If that was to be expanded he would fit the role well. As a GM I would prob expand it if my player had such a concept

As to the "bardic" ablitys being a bad fit, not really. You could take preform Dance or chant and would fit th theme(blade dancer or mystic chants)

Myself I may allow players to trade out the bard spell list for the wizard/socrer one, but not sure if that is balanced. Adding limited combat spells may be a better fit


seekerofshadowlight wrote:

The only thing that hurts the bard as the fighter/mage is his spell list. If that was to be expanded he would fit the role well. As a GM I would prob expand it if my player had such a concept

As to the "bardic" ablitys being a bad fit, not really. You could take preform Dance or chant and would fit th theme(blade dancer or mystic chants)

Myself I may allow players to trade out the bard spell list for the wizard/socrer one, but not sure if that is balanced. Adding limited combat spells may be a better fit

While I'm not sure if I'd say that the bard as written is a good alternative for a fighter/wizard, I think that the 'model' of the bard could serve as a good platform for a warrior/mage class.

'findel

The Exchange

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

The only thing that hurts the bard as the fighter/mage is his spell list. If that was to be expanded he would fit the role well. As a GM I would prob expand it if my player had such a concept

As to the "bardic" ablitys being a bad fit, not really. You could take preform Dance or chant and would fit th theme(blade dancer or mystic chants)

Myself I may allow players to trade out the bard spell list for the wizard/socrer one, but not sure if that is balanced. Adding limited combat spells may be a better fit

I was thinking of maybe limiting it to say one school of magic. IDK I can see a different theme being used for this but in truth not all of the bardic abilities fit for a combat oriented character.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Laurefindel wrote:
While I'm not sure if I'd say that the bard as written is a good alternative for a fighter/wizard, I think that the 'model' of the bard could serve as a good platform for a warrior/mage class.

And it does. Give the Duskblade a spin. It's in PHB2, and drops into PF pretty much as-is.

The Exchange

A Man In Black wrote:
Laurefindel wrote:
While I'm not sure if I'd say that the bard as written is a good alternative for a fighter/wizard, I think that the 'model' of the bard could serve as a good platform for a warrior/mage class.
And it does. Give the Duskblade a spin. It's in PHB2, and drops into PF pretty much as-is.

Actually I have given it a look but with the amount of people who say that they like it I might give it a second look. Truth be told though with new base classes coming out and this being an Iconic class I was hoping that this type of class would be on the radar to make. I also Like Monte Cook's Runeblade. I have been giving some thought for my own version of the class so we will see.


I like base classes that aren't just multi-class wannabes. My initial review of the book of experimental might, the runeblade does do just that. By inscripting runes into the blade it can perform arcane like things.

Its a neat and new take on gish

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

MerrikCale wrote:
I like base classes that aren't just multi-class wannabes.

Like the paladin and ranger and bard, amirite?

1 to 50 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Gith Advice? Looking to play a Warrior / Mage All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.