Kevin Mack wrote:
Seltyiel = 3 Different Kinds of Awesome
1) Multiclass Iconic
Time for me to show my ignorance - I understand fluff, crunch, and DPR - what's "Gish"?
Oooh, it's rare to see someone who doesn't know nowadays...
Anyway, A "gish" was originally what you called a githyanki with fighter and wizard levels.
It has now come to mean any charater that has full-ish casting and enough BAB for 3-4 attacks. They can usually cast in some sort of armor too. Various classes, feats, and prestige classes are used to achieve this.
Others may explain it differently/better.
EDIT: Also, there are a few people wh do not like it when Gish is used to refer to non-githyanki.
I think it was githyanki anyway...
My only wish for the Magus is that it uses the new magic system mentioned in the book and not the stanard casting system the other casters have. That would ensure it remains a different class than any of the other casters, or than an eldritch knight multi-class build, or a bard for that matter.
This would be awesome!
The Speaker in Dreams wrote:
My problem w/a Bard class (straight) to accomplish this is that I don't see the fighter/mage(I HATE "gish" myself for many of the same reasons presented by the developer, but mostly ... I'm NOT talking about githiyanki even remotely!) hopping around the battle-field, SINGING as he fights or casts spells.
"I'll stab you,you can't beat me,
Killing me's a fantasy..."
Now imagine the Evolved Paladin is a Thri-kreen with the Multi-Weapon Fighting feats...
I'm not particularly fond of the term myself, I tend to use Fighter/Mage when referring to that type of character.
It doesn't bother me really. ;)
I also must point out that the entire foundation for his game came from that same other game, and there was never any secret about that.
This is true, but it is a different game now, and should have a different term fo a Fighter/Mage, such as the Arcane Blade mentioned earlier.
I can't believe you think his is openly patronizing and condescending towards people who play his game(Pathfinder), but are using a term that came from another game(3.5/Wizards of the Coast DnD). It's like quoting Docter Who in a episode of Spider-Man, or Batman in an episode of the X-Men.
Matthew Morris wrote:
You mean besides blasting the snot out of a pure fighter and hacking the snot out of a pure arcane caster? Then yes, it doesn't compare well against 'anything'.
Main argument I can see against this: "But the fighter can kill him before he can cast a spell!" or "What wizard would let him get close enough? Flight and invisibility will keep my wizard safe!"
I have seen these arguments before, and I do not mind them.
But saying an EK can outcast the fighter and last longer than a sorcerer/wizard in melee? Let's look at something here.
Fighter: Has no ability to cast spells. Which means a gnome commoner has a 1 up on him already. Anyone capable of casting a cantrip or orison can outcast the fighter.
Wizard: Has poor BaB and only d6 HD, but has spells like the Beast Shape, Transformation, and Shapechange. And he gets them before an EK will. Just play a Diviner and cast Dragon Shape 3 with a Quickened Transformation(if at a high enough level anyway) and rip your foe to shreds before the Ek can draw his sword!
And double weapons are all TH weapons, it does NOT say you can wield them in one hand as single weapons.===Aelryinth
Sure reads like you could have a shield and still use your two-bladed sword. Emphasis mine.
Double: You can use a double weapon to fight as if fighting with two weapons, but if you do, you incur all the normal attack penalties associated with fighting with two weapons, just as if you were using a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. A double weapon can be wielded as a one-handed weapon, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.
The last part of your post, the part about not being able to use a double-weapon as a double-weapon while using only one hand, seems like common sense to me... DnD/PF does not = Anime
Just because you can role-play it just fine doesn't mean there isn't a roll-play problem with it. Just saying.
Ah, that I can agree to. It happens sometimes, that you can't get the role-play to mix just right with the roll-play. But that's why I play free-form as well! ;P
I can roleplay Kratos all day long, but the rollplay isn't going to match up right. And when you are not accurately playing along with the stats on your sheet, you are failing to roleplay your character right. Playing a 10 Dex character as a paragon of grace is bad roleplaying.
+1 I saw this the last to Saturday RL games I've been in. 2 different characters, same player.
1)Ranger, Elf, Alignment unknown(proabably Chaotic Good). Int of 14. Remember that.
2)Chaotic Good, Half-Giant, Ranger again. Int of 10, Wis of 14. Can't figure out why his wooden club can't smash through the metal gate. Or why his arrows suck against the undead, even though they are his favored enemy. Or why he can't swim well in medium armor...
The post I replied to said, "I haven't seen the EK in action." I have seen the EK in action, and they're rocking. That is all. Take that for what it is worth, with however much salt you feel is necessary.
I too have played an EK, during the Alpha/Beta testing of Pathfinder. Here's the catch though, I had to use the 3.5 version.
Barbarian2/Undead Bloodline Sorcerer6/Eldritch Knight3~4
Again, it's a high level example. But she was fun, and filled out her character concept(and armor!) nicely. She was a pseudo-vampire, channeling vampiric touch through her bite attack(rage power).
I guess my point is give the Ek you're playing a concept, and you are probably going to have fun, which is the point of playing a game. A role-playing game at that.
A Man In Black wrote:
So you get to be even worse at spellcasting if you actually use the ability you traded two caster levels for. But the EK is fine, guys! Seriously!
Ah, correct me if I'm wrong(hopefully I am), but it looks like you want something with:d12 Hit Dice
Good saves across the board
Full Spellcasting as a Wizard/Sorcerer
Imagine that, not having to give something up for a warrior-mage concept. I mean, come on, anything less than the above list is just useless! [/sarcasm]