Considering that the common consensus is that Abjurant Champion is even more broken than the Duskblade, most of us probably thought "just another Abjurant Champion build..."
True, true. :) Hence me hoping people would "recoil in horror". :P
However, I'll see your Duskblade 1/Wizard 6/Abjurant Champion 5/Eldritch Knight 8 (which does not allow you to cast wizard spells in armor without ASF) and raise you a Duskblade 13/Spellsword 7 (BAB +20, CL 17 (20 to penetrate SR on targets you've wounded), 20d8 HD, Arcane Channeling with touch spells on a full attack, Quick Cast 2x/day, cast in medium armor and using a heavy shield without ASF, Reduce ASF from heavy armor by 25% (twilight adamantine full plate FTW!), and Channel any spell (even chain lightning, disintegrate, enervation, polar ray, shout, etc.) as a move action 4x/day).
Hmmm.... "Maze". "Timestop". Do happy dance, do something useful, like giving yourself better initiative or somesuch, maybe also cast some persisting damage spell, like Acid Fog. Wait for hapless Duskblade to reappear with a ready action. "Quickened Dimensional Anchor" / "Forcecage". Walk away to smoke a pipe.
The Duskblade may be tough cookies, but any high level wizard has access to a variety of very powerful spells which put the abilities of the Duskblade to shame. Note that the Duskblade doesn´t get Greater Dispel Magic.
Of course if you want to play up the martial side of the Duskblade, he wins with your build, hands down. But in the end, my build is more powerful. Because it uses more broken classes. ^^
|
one of the things that irked me from the get go with 3.0 and 3.5 was that one of the base classes from BD&D was turned into a PrC, and it was this class that filled the role everyone is talking about. The assassin. It is OGL and it has been in the game since forever. Now I know why they made it a PrC but I have just never saw the class so one sided until 3.0. I was very impressed with the take of the class in the IIRC 4th issue of Kobold Quarterly. and just my 2cp the bard is was and always will be a Rogue/Sorcerer. Does the game need a good Fighter/Wizard that is core , no not necessarily but it couldn't hurt and quite frankly the "official" ones we have seen so far Warmage, Duskblade, Hexblade just never fit the bill of a good Arcane Ranger type which is what most people are clamoring for. Who knows maybe Wizards full reboot will finally give 4E players a good archtype for this, and I am by no means a $4E Fanboi, but lets face it they have taken a bold step maybe just one of them will recognise the potential and see it through. and who knows we may get a new core class with 3.P at some point that fits the bill but Jason has his hands full just doing the core classes as is let alone building a new one.
Elric (from the Elric saga) was pretty much a typical fighter/wizard.
|
Elric (from the Elric saga) was pretty much a typical fighter/wizard.
Many non-Conan fantasy swordsmen had a dash of magical training as well. Most of the Melniboneans were expected to know sorcery, other Eternal Champions, like Corum, belonged to a similar culture of people who practiced swordplay and had conjuring circles in the next room over. Lieber's Grey Mouser practiced both magic and swordplay. Gandalf, considered by some to be the archetypal wizard, laid about him with Glamdring and his staff in combat, rather than casting spells. Zelazny's Amber nobles used their magical abilities to walk worlds, conjure beings, etc. while also being, in most cases, more competent swordsmen than most of the natives of the worlds they visited.
It's easier to find a warrior-mage archetype in the fiction that inspired D&D than a 'pure' fighter like Conan or a 'pure' wizard like the dudes he generally ended up impaling on his sword.
And then there's the mythic sorts like Vainomoinen or Lemminkainen, heroes of old who had magical knowledge of shapeshifting or weather control or whatever. The Argonauts were the first 'super-hero' team, comprised of heroes with super-powers, ranging from Super-Senses (Argus) to Super-Strength (Herakles) to Flight (Calais and Zetes) to Insect Control (Butes, the Bee-Keeper)! It's pretty darn easy to find pre-1st edition sources of fighting-heroes with magical powers or lore!
|
Hehe. Remember, though, Lugh of the Long Hand is a god, so he sort of gets a lot of nifty powers not typical to mortal men ;)
Also, I really did put my class forward for consideration, if anyone has anything to say about it. It's not what some were looking for, in the paladin or ranger area of spell advancement, but I rather like the feel of it and it honestly has worked well so far in my game, though there have been some revisions since my initial post.
Uh, well some people would probably like a less convoluted route that doesn't make use of stuff some of their games might not have... and yeah, it's cheesy as hell too :)
So we're all in agreement that if Paizo does a Gish class, it should be called The Cheesemeister? :D
Uh, well some people would probably like a less convoluted route that doesn't make use of stuff some of their games might not have... and yeah, it's cheesy as hell too :)So we're all in agreement that if Paizo does a Gish class, it should be called The Cheesemeister? :D
Sounds good, certainly very descriptive... of course Cheeselord, Warcheese, and Warcheesemasterlord all have a ring to them too :)
*edit* Somehow it all bring WarHamster to mind... KotDT time IIRC :)
Wow, that actually sounds very good.After the Abjurant Champion came out, I was kinda hoping to see a series of School-themed Fighter/Mages. A Shadow Champion who relied on Illusions or a 'Death Knight' who combined Necromancy with the fighting arts or a 'Pokemon Trainer' who specialized in fighting alongside a Conjured Companion.
Even a Divination-themed Fighter/Mage could be pretty scary, focusing his arcane sight on his opponent to gain Insight bonuses to Attack or AC, for instance, based on his success at 'reading' them.
That sounds very cool indeed. The way it was described it makes them sound like school specialists wizards. Would they be the studious or would they be intuitive/spontaneous casters?
|
|
Even a Divination-themed Fighter/Mage could be pretty scary, focusing his arcane sight on his opponent to gain Insight bonuses to Attack or AC, for instance, based on his success at 'reading' them.That sounds very cool indeed. The way it was described it makes them sound like school specialists wizards. Would they be the studious or would they be intuitive/spontaneous casters?
Typically, Fighter / Mage types (like Duskblades and Warmages) seem to have a small selection of spells and the ability to know them all.
I can picture them as prepared casters, studying swordplay and the arcane arts with equal dedication, and questing for new spells of their school of specialization.
I can also see them as people who are discovered to 'have a gift' for a particular school of magic, who train to use their innate skills to enhance their martial skills. "My momma had the Sight, ya see, and I'm not a spellflinger like she was, but I've learned to sort of anticipate stuff, and see things that other people can't. It helps some during a fight, to be able to look a few seconds ahead and now where I don't want to be standing, yanno?"
My preference, in all prepared vs. spontaneous cases, is to make it a choice made at 1st level in a spellcasting class. Prepared Bard? Go for it. Spontaneous Druid? Sure. Change from potentially unlimited spells to a smaller list known, and allow them to be cast more often, and chosen at the time of casting. It balances out, IMO, without any other 'balancing' needed. The Sorcerer, again, IMO, suffers from the lack of wizard bonus feats, which I feel is an unnecessary limitation (and one that encourages fleeing the class to any PrC that will take them as soon as they can!).
However, I'll see your Duskblade 1/Wizard 6/Abjurant Champion 5/Eldritch Knight 8 (which does not allow you to cast wizard spells in armor without ASF) and raise you a Duskblade 13/Spellsword 7 (BAB +20, CL 17 (20 to penetrate SR on targets you've wounded), 20d8 HD, Arcane Channeling with touch spells on a full attack, Quick Cast 2x/day, cast in medium armor and using a heavy shield without ASF, Reduce ASF from heavy armor by 25% (twilight adamantine full plate FTW!), and Channel any spell (even chain lightning, disintegrate, enervation, polar ray, shout, etc.) as a move action 4x/day).Hmmm.... "Maze". "Timestop". Do happy dance, do something useful, like giving yourself better initiative or somesuch, maybe also cast some persisting damage spell, like Acid Fog. Wait for hapless Duskblade to reappear with a ready action. "Quickened Dimensional Anchor" / "Forcecage". Walk away to smoke a pipe.
The Duskblade may be tough cookies, but any high level wizard has access to a variety of very powerful spells which put the abilities of the Duskblade to shame. Note that the Duskblade doesn´t get Greater Dispel Magic.
Of course if you want to play up the martial side of the Duskblade, he wins with your build, hands down. But in the end, my build is more powerful. Because it uses more broken classes. ^^
If you're looking at magical versatility with a bit of fighting ability, then I'd prefer an elf Wizard 6/Fighter 1/Spellsword 1/Eldritch Knight 8/Archmage 4 (BAB +15, CL 18 (or higher to penetrate SR with Spell Power), 6d4+1d10+1d8+8d6+4d4 HD, Reduce ASF from armor by 10% (a +5 mithril feycraft breastplate gives a +10 armor bonus, allows up to +5 Dex bonus, and has 10% ASF chance), and 4 High Arcana powers) and play as an archer/blaster/controller. IMO, the High Arcana is worth the +2 BAB loss, even with the loss of a fourth iterative attack, too. Plus, wearing armor instead of casting mage armor, etc. saves spell slots and can be effective in anti-magic areas (your own or others').
|
I appreciate that. It's worth noting that the Sage did not exactly nail this as a hard and fast answer but one "he expected most DMs to use" It's certainly not presented as an answer clearly invalidates my interpretation as it seems to be more on a "this is the house rule most will use and it seems okay to me." sort of deal.
There definitely was some wiggle room left, but he did indicate that this was the assumed norm in later products. I think that qualifies as a little more "official" than just a house rule you might like. Regardless, the rule is out there. Whether people use it or not is their business. What makes it useful is that it allows any mid to high level character that have special abilities tied to light/medium armor an effective armor option that will allow them to stay in the front line longer.
In many ways the mithral breastplate (4200gp) is the cherry item from this rule. Counts as light armor (so can be used by barbarian, bard, ranger & rouge), +5 AC bonus, +5 max dex, arcane spell failure is lowered to 15%, full move (30') allowed, and only a -1 armor check penalty. This is phenomenal armor for any high dex character & is reasonably priced for what it achieves. Enchantment, or course, only makes it better. Characters in my campaign have always leaned towards adding glamered so that they could disguise the armor altogether.
For those who can wear medium armor, mithral full plate is expensive at 10,500gp unenchanted, but +8AC, +3 max dex, 25% arcane spell, and a -3 armor check penalty is awesome for the price as well.
Maybe I missed someone mentioning it, but with some minor tweaking couldn't the Mage Blade from Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved pretty much fit the roll you are looking for?
|
I am not sure if this has been said before, so I will say it. What if, for a Fighter/Mage, you start with either the Ranger or the Paladin, provide the exact same spell progression, albeit with arcane spells, and swap abilities/feats/specials that the chosen class gets with abilities/feats/specials appropriate to a fighter or a mage (that is split these "specials" 50/50 in terms of applicability between fighter and mage)?
Would this satisfy the demand? If not, why not?