Catharsis,, fighter will not work. His framework does not have a spell progression and adding one is outside the scope of even a sub class. For an archetype/subclass to work the base class must be a caster. For full BAB that leaves you two and of those two ranger works best.
|
Catharsis,, fighter will not work. His framework does not have a spell progression and adding one is outside the scope of even a sub class.
That's exactly what I said in my last post. That's why my Arcane Guard does not gain spells, but just a bunch of arcane-flavored abilities that closely mirror the intention and power level of the corresponding Fighter features. Nevertheless, he will "feel arcane" and get access to spells by the same way that a regular Fighter can: By Use Magic Device. It will just be a bit easier for him to do so.
This is IMHO the farthest we can expect to go with an archetype.
For an archetype/subclass to work the base class must be a caster. For full BAB that leaves you two and of those two ranger works best.
As I said, replacing an entire spell list is far beyond what an archetype or even a subclass can do (it works for the Paladin and Antipaladin because their spells are picked from the same "master list" of divine spells). If we want 4th level arcane spellcasting (and I think this is the main point of this thread), we need a new base class.
As I said, replacing an entire spell list is far beyond what an archetype or even a subclass can do (it works for the Paladin and Antipaladin because their spells are picked from the same "master list" of divine spells). If we want 4th level arcane spellcasting (and I think this is the main point of this thread), we need a new base class.
I disagree, if an archetype can replace a whole spell list with something else {the spell less ranger} then switching lists is not beyond the reach of an archetype. A new spell list is an easy change really.
I strongly disagree for a need for a new base class. People asked for a base fighter/mage class and now they have just that. If you want something more like a ranger/paladin then a ranger archetype would fill that role with ease.
|
|
Alignment: Any non-chaotic. A magistrate that becomes chaotic retains all abilities, but can not advance further prior to atonement.
'Atonement' should be re-worded, since it implies a divine patron (or always has done in the past). If I were a player skimming this class, I would assume this was a divine caster, and move on.
How about 're-education'? 'Correction'? 'Double-plus-right-think'? (Sorry, slipped into Orwell-speak, there).
EWHM, not bad. I would never allow the spell progression you gave it as it's no longer a true half caster. It should not gain cantrips. I would replace it as its spell progression should match the ranger.
Also I would not have favored enemy fixed as just human but maybe one of the major races? Elf,dwarf,gnome, halfling or human? seems like humans would not be the only one to use such classes.
I would give them an intimidate bounes of 1/2 their class level min of 1 to replace wild empathy and add that skill to the skill list.
So stop me if I'm wrong but Your looking for a full BAB arcane caster, something like a Paliden or Ranger.
Well then how about Mageknight, and have a unique spell list that imbunes his weapons and armor with special qualities. Severly limit ranged touch attack and Ranged AOE spells and foucus on buffs, and melee attack spells. Let wizards and other casters keep utility spells.
But that is my 2 cents take it or leave it.
P.S. At the same time threads like this just make me think that you are looking at 4th edition for insperation.
see there is where ya hit the wall for alot of people. Full BAB with anything more then a half caster is just to good. You simply should not have full BAB and arcane spells at level 1. I think if ya get them at level 4 thats being awful kind, and the list best be small and limited.
|
|
@ EWHM: You manage to establish a nice sense of thematic consistency, but overall it feels like you're building a character rather than a class, your choices being so hard-coded at many levels.
I wouldn't expect anything more than 2 Skill Points for such a class. The 6 SP of the Ranger are a sizeable portion of its overall appeal, its combat abilities otherwise being noticeably less powerful that the Paladin's. With arcane spells, you will always have to take care not to overpower the character, unless you give him almost no spells that go beyond utility and flavor. Which brings us to the next problem: Full access to the arcane spell list is way too much. Remember the Paladin and Ranger, and how they all lack most of the power spells from the Cleric and Druid list...?
Overall, I'd say the greatest flaw of your design is the fact that it emulates the Urban Ranger almost exactly in flavor and mechanics, down to where the spells are the only difference. At this point, does it really matter if the spells are arcane or divine, assuming a balanced spell list?
IMHO, a class or archetype has to come up with abilities that feel inherently arcane. A Paladin cannot do a Ranger's job, even if he had his spell list, and vice versa. Ideally, neither a Paladin nor a Ranger should be able to do an Arcknight's job, and vice versa.
EWHM, not bad. I would never allow the spell progression you gave it as it's no longer a true half caster. It should not gain cantrips. I would replace it as its spell progression should match the ranger.
You would not allow an Arcknight to wield the awe-inspiring power of cantrips? ;) Cantrips are not even part of the spell progression. They're a (Sp) ability that casters often gain apart from their spell progression. They changed that from 3.5 to Pathfinder. The character would still not gain a caster level until level 4th, where it would be class level - 3.
You simply should not have full BAB and arcane spells at level 1. I think if ya get them at level 4 thats being awful kind, and the list best be small and limited.
+1. That should go without saying. Caster level = character level - 3 is the best we can reasonably expect.
Catharsis wrote:
This thread is not intended as a platform for homebrew gish base classes...
Errrr, ....isn't it exactly the thread for that?
It sure seemed to have turned into that! ;o) The original intention was to have less "I have a different mental image of an Arcknight than you have" and more "let's demonstrate community interest and discuss options with the developers". Shall we try to return to that topic? Though I admit it's hard to discuss the scope of archetypes and subclasses without giving examples.
I put the sentence in the OP mainly to discourage people from posting links to their awesome complete homebrew gish class and duking it out here.
I like the name Preatorian. I also like the idea of trying to accomplish this as a fighter archetype. I think you could find a niche class this way through some of the following ideas.
Make it similar to the Paladin/Ranger in tit's spell progression, however, develop their abilities along the lines of the sorcerer bloodlines. The character was perhaps born with some sort of heritage, or dropped into a magical potion as a baby, or underwent magical experimentation, and so while he is martially focused, The magical abilities that envelop him display in various manners. Most Obviously this would be in the 4 levels of spellcasting progression that emerge, but some other abilities could include:
- Imbuing your weapon with elemental dmg on a scaling lvl somewhat like sneak attack, but only a certain number of times per day
- A scaling bonus on saves vs Spells and Spell like abilities only
- Having the magical powers produce various changes in you as you level like the bloodline powers do
- Gaining weapon specialization as a bonus feat, and being able to summon a force version of that weapon to use for 3+ relevant modifier rounds per day
There are lots of ways it could be done. that's just a smattering of thoughts to get the ball rolling at Paizo, but I would definetly like to see a true BAB arcanist emerge!
Didn't want to clog this thread down with a mountain of home-brew, since it's somewhat directed to Paizo.
I tried constructing an archetype for fighter to be more arcane, and this is the result.
IMHO, a class or archetype has to come up with abilities that feel inherently arcane. A Paladin cannot do a Ranger's job, even if he had his spell list, and vice versa. Ideally, neither a Paladin nor a Ranger should be able to do an Arcknight's job, and vice versa.
What do both the Ranger and the Paladin do in combat? Both are geared toward targeting a single foe had thrashing the snot out of it. Same goes for many Fighter and Barbarian builds, and is typical for the frontline "Fighting-Man" (if I may go old school). Find the strongest foe on the field and beat it to death as fast as possible. The major difference is how they go about it.
My contention is that a Ranger core line-up can be reconfigured with a sub-class to be Arcane in both feel and flavor. A good chunk of what the ranger does is mundane or extraordinary based. Take track, something quintessential of the Ranger in its role as a hunter. Instead of mundane foot following replace that with Divination effects, which contextually change how an Arcane Ranger would go about hunting. Although I would actually prefer to have the tracker bit dropped form the sub-class and replaced with something else. It doesn't really need to hunt over distance by flavor.
Likewise inherited from the Ranger should be mobility, but mobility inside or to bypass magical terrain. Same with the 'favored' environment, which should be reconfigured toward working inside battle field control magic, if not actually subverting it for the Arcane Rangers use. This is the physical martial end of magic, taking the impact magic has on the world and dealing with.
|
|
I like the name Preatorian. I also like the idea of trying to accomplish this as a fighter archetype.
Finally, a kindred spirit...
- Imbuing your weapon with elemental dmg on a scaling lvl somewhat like sneak attack, but only a certain number of times per day
- A scaling bonus on saves vs Spells and Spell like abilities only
Just what I was thinking. This could replace Weapon Training and Armor Training. You're suggesting that the spellcasting replace the bonus feats? That might work, though it would be stretching the concept of an archetype... basically like the Spell-Less Ranger in reverse. You'd have to replace the first two bonus feat differently (e.g. by handing out Iron Will and Disruptive or Improved Iron Will at 1st and 2nd), since spells only start at 4th.
- Having the magical powers produce various changes in you as you level like the bloodline powers do
Sounds like fun, but might be hard to fit into the concept balance-wise. The other abilities sound quite good already.
- Gaining weapon specialization as a bonus feat, and being able to summon a force version of that weapon to use for 3+ relevant modifier rounds per day
If the spells are going to replace the Fighter's feats, I'd be wary to keep Weapon Spec. Maybe Arcknight levels should count as half Fighter levels for the purpose of qualifying for feats. As for the force weapon, you could easily fix that by putting a Ghosttouch spell on the Fighter's spell list.
|
|
What do both the Ranger and the Paladin do in combat? Both are geared toward targeting a single foe had thrashing the snot out of it. Same goes for many Fighter and Barbarian builds, and is typical for the frontline "Fighting-Man" (if I may go old school). Find the strongest foe on the field and beat it to death as fast as possible. The major difference is how they go about it.
Exactly. We all agree that the Arcknight (I guess Praetorian would be a much better working title; is it too late to switch...?) should be a frontliner and thus do exactly what you say. That also means that the "how they go about it" is all the more important in distinguishing the classes. In order to be viable, such a class needs a new modus operandi different from the others.
My contention is that a Ranger core line-up can be reconfigured with a sub-class to be Arcane in both feel and flavor. A good chunk of what the ranger does is mundane or extraordinary based. Take track, something quintessential of the Ranger in its role as a hunter. Instead of mundane foot following replace that with Divination effects, which contextually change how an Arcane Ranger would go about hunting.
See, now you're just painting the Ranger's modus operandi in another color. As long as he's still a hunter, tracker and mobility expert, he is a Ranger. We have to come up with something that is a Praetorian, not a Ranger (not even a glowing pink Power Ranger). This means a departure far enough from the Ranger that it no longer works as an archetype.
The Fighter's flavor, on the other hand, is really, really knowing how to fight. That fits as the chassis for a Praetorian, and is flavor-neutral enough to be modeled into something new. Given that the Fighter's features are so straightforward (mostly just fixed bonuses to what he does), they are also comparatively easy to replace with abilities of similar power level.
Likewise inherited from the Ranger should be mobility, but mobility inside or to bypass magical terrain. Same with the 'favored' environment, which should be reconfigured toward working inside battle field control magic, if not actually subverting it for the Arcane Rangers use. This is the physical martial end of magic, taking the impact magic has on the world and dealing with.
I see you're really talking about a Ranger-like Ranger archetype. I don't have any objections to that, but I don't think it fills the void we're talking about. What you describe is more of an anti-magic Ranger, like the 3.5 Occult Slayer. He could well keep his spell list divine and still fulfill that role in both flavor and mechanics.
We're talking about a class that lives battle magic rather than alongside it or against it.
I like the name Preatorian. I also like the idea of trying to accomplish this as a fighter archetype.Finally, a kindred spirit...
- Imbuing your weapon with elemental dmg on a scaling lvl somewhat like sneak attack, but only a certain number of times per day
- A scaling bonus on saves vs Spells and Spell like abilities only
Just what I was thinking. This could replace Weapon Training and Armor Training. You're suggesting that the spellcasting replace the bonus feats? That might work, though it would be stretching the concept of an archetype... basically like the Spell-Less Ranger in reverse. You'd have to replace the first two bonus feat differently (e.g. by handing out Iron Will and Disruptive or Improved Iron Will at 1st and 2nd), since spells only start at 4th.
- Having the magical powers produce various changes in you as you level like the bloodline powers doSounds like fun, but might be hard to fit into the concept balance-wise. The other abilities sound quite good already.
- Gaining weapon specialization as a bonus feat, and being able to summon a force version of that weapon to use for 3+ relevant modifier rounds per dayIf the spells are going to replace the Fighter's feats, I'd be wary to keep Weapon Spec. Maybe Arcknight levels should count as half Fighter levels for the purpose of qualifying for feats. As for the force weapon, you could easily fix that by putting a Ghosttouch spell on the Fighter's spell list.
Well, those ideas were honestly more aimed at a 20 lvl base class, though some of them could be converted to an archetype concept, replacing the armor/weapon training abilities.
The Fighter's flavor, on the other hand, is really, really knowing how to fight. That fits as the chassis for a Praetorian, and is flavor-neutral enough to be modeled into something new. Given that the Fighter's features are so straightforward (mostly just fixed bonuses to what he does), they are also comparatively easy to replace with abilities of similar power level.
I think we disagree on how an Arcane Warrior should be fighting. Straight forward is not Arcane, well only one part of it if you count blasting. By Praetorian its sounds like you want an Arcane Guard. What does the Fighter chaise bring to an Arcane warrior in terms of options that would be "magical?" Certainly not movement unless you want to open up feat selection like Up the Wall from the 3.5 Expanded Psionics Handbook.
I see you're really talking about a Ranger-like Ranger archetype. I don't have any objections to that, but I don't think it fills the void we're talking about. What you describe is more of an anti-magic Ranger, like the 3.5 Occult Slayer. He could well keep his spell list divine and still fulfill that role in both flavor and mechanics.
Certainly creating an anti-caster is and should be one way a player could take the sub-class. However it shouldn't be limited to just the Occult Slayer. There is a difference. The Occult Slayer worked by countering, stoping, or ignoring magical effects as a hard counter to casters. What I'm trying to describe is class who is at its peak of power while being surrounded by magical effects (friend, foe, or self generated), and that includes not being hindered while moving toward its target (martial or caster). I am not suggesting the sub-class be given direct turning/counter-spelling or even any kind of dispel ability.
As I said, personally, I'd chuck Tracking off the sub-type right away. It has no place in what an Arcane Warrior should be doing and should be replaced with something more appropriate. That leaves Hunting and Mobility. Hunting is something all Warrior types do, pick a target and go kill it. Mobility is something people will expect from an Arcane Warrior, ways and means of getting to foes who are in odd places. This includes spell options like Spider Climb, Dimensional Door, or Fly, but should also include thinks akin to Freedom of Movement.
In order to give those kinds of options to a Fighter as a sub-class you have chuck a great deal of that class out and really build a new class from scratch. I looked at your Arcane Guard, and it really doesn't do anything magical. It does what a magical fighter should, replace base abilities with various magically flavored mechanically equivalent effects, but it's still fuschia colored Fighter. It only guards slightly less good then fighter with the right feats.
We have to come up with something that is a Praetorian, not a Ranger (not even a glowing pink Power Ranger).
Weapon and Sword style from the APG forms the corner stone of that combat style. Spells such as Coordinated Effort (again APG) could be included on the rebuilt spell list offering options a Fighter based class can't offer, and provide even better Guarding.
I still don't understand why Full BAB is considered so powerful. Can someone explain it to me?
take your average full BAB melee class.
Impose -5 TH to all attacks.
Recompute your dmg over time, CMD, and so forth.
That's what it's worth.
At 20th level, even if you get 4 attacks, that's -100% average dmg (-25% x 4 attacks). It's exactly like not taking your main swing on a normal action.
For standard actions, it's -25% dmg/swing, whatever your swing dmg is. That can add up very quickly.
At lower levels, it's the difference between being able to kill a creature solo and RELYING on flanks to get the job done.
At higher levels, it's REQUIRING buffs to do your job.
FULL BAB is a melee's full spellcasting. The fact you and others keep complaining about not having it should confirm to you just how important it is...you want it, and you can't have it. If it wasn't valuable, you wouldn't care!
==Aelryinth
I'm mulling over your points as well as others, but I must point out the false dichotomy there.If it wasn't valuable, you wouldn't care!
==Aelryinth
What's false? I keep hearing people complain about not having full BAB. It's obviously important, and valuable, because people want it. Giving it away devalues it...that's what was done with 3.5, and Paizo is staying away from it (Abj Champion, anyone?)
===Aelryinth
|
|
I think we disagree on how an Arcane Warrior should be fighting.
Not as much, really. Both you and me agree that an Arcane Warrior should have a unique, magical and clever fighting style -- which is why we want the new base class. My Fighter and your Ranger archetypes are stuck to their base classes in the way they behave, since the archetypes cannot fall far from their tree. Forced to choose, you'd prefer an arcane Ranger and I an arcane Fighter. Given the choice, though, we'd both jump at a dedicated Arcane Warrior class, though.
This conclusion just reinforces the message of this thread: A dedicated Arcane Warrior base class is by far the most desirable solution.
I looked at your Arcane Guard, and it really doesn't do anything magical. It does what a magical fighter should, replace base abilities with various magically flavored mechanically equivalent effects, but it's still fuschia colored Fighter.
Yep. Fuchsia Fighter, Pink Paladin and Ruby Ranger... better to have these options than not, but no replacement for the Arcknight. *fanfare*
|
|
I don't wanna play Aragorn with a new trick or two - I went to play an Elven noble, a Mage's champion, or a sorceror's brother.
+1. Now we're talking! :)
Yea, what of the Elves who supposedly cultivate swordplay to perfection? Are they, pray tell, expected to take mundane Fighter levels like some soggy-bearded dwarf? By the Ancients, how unseemly!
Spells at first level is completely possible with full base attack bonus. So I can't sign this if you want ranger/paladin spell progression.
P.S.
This sounds more like a Witch Guard class, a pathfinder hexblade replacement class, which I am okay with.
|
|
I tried constructing an archetype for fighter to be more arcane, and this is the result.
I was expecting THIS.
Solving problems with the magic of violence!
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I think we disagree on how an Arcane Warrior should be fighting.Not as much, really. Both you and me agree that an Arcane Warrior should have a unique, magical and clever fighting style -- which is why we want the new base class. My Fighter and your Ranger archetypes are stuck to their base classes in the way they behave, since the archetypes cannot fall far from their tree. Forced to choose, you'd prefer an arcane Ranger and I an arcane Fighter. Given the choice, though, we'd both jump at a dedicated Arcane Warrior class, though.
This conclusion just reinforces the message of this thread: A dedicated Arcane Warrior base class is by far the most desirable solution.
I looked at your Arcane Guard, and it really doesn't do anything magical. It does what a magical fighter should, replace base abilities with various magically flavored mechanically equivalent effects, but it's still fuschia colored Fighter.Yep. Fuchsia Fighter, Pink Paladin and Ruby Ranger... better to have these options than not, but no replacement for the Arcknight. *fanfare*
Agreed on all counts. With the preamble that, after a closer look, the magus is a neat class and in my playtest worked well, here is what is being asked:
1. I'd really like to see an arcane full-BAB/4-caster class using the paladin/ranger class architecture, but with its own unique slate of abilities and arcane casting.
2. If #2 is just not possible, then I'd be happy with an anti-paladin-style subclass, probably using the ranger as the base class (some others argue start with fighter and just add spells), though I really don't have any interest in ANY of either classes' base abilities (aside from maybe the "combat style/light armor" concept and evasion/improved evasion from the ranger side).
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I believe this is a portmanteau of of "arcane" and "knight". Anyway, it fails the requirements for an official Paizo base class name in several ways, so it's really just a convenient shorthand for now.Shouldn't it be "archknight?"
I see "arc" knight and start thinking about geometry :P
That was the genesis of the name. Amusingly, BTW, at one point the PrC that became the "Battle Herald" in the APG was called the Praetor or Praetorian as its placeholder name.
I believe this is a portmanteau of of "arcane" and "knight". Anyway, it fails the requirements for an official Paizo base class name in several ways, so it's really just a convenient shorthand for now.
Hmm. Just found this post. I didn't realize Paizo had official requirements for their class names!
Assuming one of those rules is "one word only," then I guess that "Warrior Mage" is out?
Because "Warrior Mage" is generic enough to encompass most "arcane fighter" archetypes, and is very straight to the point.
Looking through this thread, found exactly what my group and I were looking for, thought id share some ideas.
start with 1d10 Hd, full BaB, 2+int skill, 4th level maximum arcane spells.Martial weapon prof,light armor prof, and shield prof Ignore 15% arcane spell failure
Based on the pathfinder paladin model and 3.5 hex blade we came up with the idea of bonded weapons that act almost like the wizards bonded item, but have the extra effect of a cleric domain or witch's patron. That is; each weapon type heavy blade, axe, pole arm, flail...ext, give you access to a selective group of spells in addition to your normal ones. Fluff wise this is a living magical weapon who a character finds and bonds with, thus granting them some semi spontaneous casting power, and letting them keep their martial prowess. For ability's we had the hex blades arcane resistance, and Martialurge( could call it Arcknight techs). Martialurge is exactly like a rogue talents and barbarians rage powers except you only get to pick one every 4 levels. some of these included increased ignore arcane spell failure along with medium or later heavy armor prof. Arcane armor; acts like spell storing in armor, that has a contingency in place. well just some thoughts, i like were this thread is going.
Some very clever concepts, Siren's Mask. I find that having magic based upon the weapon group that the bonded weapon belongs to is an especially unique concept. Kudos!
Perhaps as a magus arcana they can acquire a version of Hand of the Apprentice (hits harder, only usable with the bonded weapon, compatible with some/most of the melee combat feats, increased range at higher levels) or as a series of magus arcana ?
The biggest problems I see with your ideas, Siren, is what happens if the weapon is destroyed? If it is supposed to be the source of the power, does the class suddenly lose it's powers? What if the character is disarmed?
I think too, that the magus arcana will fairly well fill the niche of the Martialurge as you present them, which is why I'd still rather see something like the sorcerer bloodlines. Maybe he's an elementalist, and so can deal bonus elemental damage, or can raise resistances. Maybe he's a necromancer and can channel energy, but only through a channeled smite with the feat as a bonus feat. Maybe he's learned his magic from the fey creatures, and so can create mirror images o haste himself, or other things like that. His spell list could then be limited quite heavily, with his "bloodline" adding flare and variety. Some of the core mechanics too, like a spell combat or spell strike, could remain constant as the class skeleton.
Full BAB, 2+ int skills, good fort and will saves, keeps weapon training mechanic from fighter and replaces armor training with a no spell failure in x armor progression, and same spell progression as a paladin, but limit it to self buffs/utility with a few ranged combat spells here n there, arcane bond (weapon) like a wizard, bloodline like a sorc, CHA caster (spontaneous). Is this what people want?
|
I have to ask, why stagger the lack of ASF? Is it really that bad to allow no ASF in heavy armor at 1st level? The character will not be able to afford full plate for at least a level or two. As long as it only works for spells from the Magus class progression, no Wizard will bother dipping for it since it won't help their spells.
|
I have to ask, why stagger the lack of ASF? Is it really that bad to allow no ASF in heavy armor at 1st level? The character will not be able to afford full plate for at least a level or two. As long as it only works for spells from the Magus class progression, no Wizard will bother dipping for it since it won't help their spells.
Even within the limitations of "Full BaB, Paladin/Ranger style arcane casting" there's a lot of possible variety. I prefer a lightly armored character with access to mirror image, shield and displacement (mostly I don't like the limitations of heavy armor on movement) for my arcane warrior.
It might be instructive to have a good list of Martial Arcana powers, and these powers become the building blocks that allow you to build the type of arcane warrior you're looking for.
Some of the typical requests I see (or personally have!):
- Cast arcane spells in armor
- Combine casting actions and attacks during full attack actions
- Somatic Weapon
- Concentrate magical ability on dealing damage through a combination of weapon damage / evocation spells
- Channel arcane spells through weapon attacks
- Concentrate magical ability on buffing martial ability (attack bonus, defenses, or movement)
- Gain buffing ability during combat by allowing swift action casting
- Use arcane knowledge to improve ability to stop enemy mages from casting (access to fighter only feats like Disruptive and Spellbreaker can accomplish this)
- Improved Weapon abilties (weapon bond, spell storing, weapon calling)
- Ability to use metamagic feats more easily (given poor spell progression)
While I don't see any that are mutually exclusive, some of them are sort of working at cross purposes. The biggest split I see is between those that want the Duskblade - lots of spells to deal damage through weapon strikes - and those that want the spells to enhance the martial ability of the character, rather than the damage. These are the two camps I see as the hardest to mutually satisfy.
I want a character that doesn't even have evocation spells. Maybe the ability to add an elemental damage type to their weapons, but essentially they're a fighter - like the paladin doesn't deal damage with his spells - he deals damage with a class ability, his smite...which enhances his ability to hit, defend from damage, deal damage, and ignore enemy defenses.
if we came up with a class ability that was similar to smite, would that be enough for the evocation warrior mage crowd? Or would that not suit the flavor you're looking for? Or would we just assume you'd be happy with the magus, who seems to be going that sort of route anyway?