Drawbacks for a Fighter/Mage Kit

[Shingen]

Check out the "ELF" class in B/X or BECMI. Fighter Abilities, casts M-U spells.

I know BECMI. The Elf is not a Fighter/Mage. He is an Elf. It has a single experience table, does not split hit points, etc. The only thing alike is that he casts spells. They are different classes. The Elf isn't anymore a Fighter/Mage than the Halfling in BECMI is a Fighter/Thief. They are not multi-classed.

 

[Remathilis]

I know BECMI. The Elf is not a Fighter/Mage. He is an Elf. It has a single experience table, does not split hit points, etc. The only thing alike is that he casts spells. They are different classes. The Elf isn't anymore a Fighter/Mage than the Halfling in BECMI is a Fighter/Thief. They are not multi-classed.

FUNCTIONALLY, an elf was a fighter/mage and able to act as both. However, since you chose to be pedestrian, a halfling is nothing like a fighter/thief. It has fighter abilities, but the only thief-like ability is a static chance to hide in woodlands. No locks, traps, moving silently, or climbing walls. More akin to a 2e ranger than anything else.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I know BECMI. The Elf is not a Fighter/Mage. He is an Elf.

True, but irrelevant -- the point being that casting spells as a magic-user with weapons and armor as a fighter predates 2E's fighter-without-armor-mage in at least two earlier D&D variants. Doesn't matter what you call the class(es); it's the combination of these abilities that is important to the original question.

In B/X, this was balanced by slower experience progression plus a level cap. In 1E it was balanced by similar mechanics with the same effect.

 

[Shingen]

FUNCTIONALLY, an elf was a fighter/mage and able to act as both. However, since you chose to be pedestrian, a halfling is nothing like a fighter/thief. It has fighter abilities, but the only thief-like ability is a static chance to hide in woodlands. No locks, traps, moving silently, or climbing walls. More akin to a 2e ranger than anything else.

I disagree. The archetype of the Elf is the reason for its magic use while fighting, not some sort of use of both classes. You can call me "pedestrian," which I presume is some kind of insult, but it is not a fighter/mage. The fighter/mage as a multi-class comes from 1e. just because someone can fight and use magic =/= fighter/mage. Even if we accept that a halfling is like a ranger, that doesn't make him a ranger, right?

True, but irrelevant -- the point being that casting spells as a magic-user with weapons and armor as a fighter predates 2E's fighter-without-armor-mage in at least two earlier D&D variants. Doesn't matter what you call the class(es); it's the combination of these abilities that is important to the original question.

In B/X, this was balanced by slower experience progression plus a level cap. In 1E it was balanced by similar mechanics with the same effect.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I think the class being an Elf as opposed to a multi-class option makes it different.

 

[Remathilis]

The fighter/mage as a multi-class comes from 1e. just because someone can fight and use magic =/= fighter/mage.

Lets call them both "gishes" and call it a day.

 

[Shingen]

Lets call them both "gishes" and call it a day.

Deal.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Lets call them both "gishes" and call it a day.

Gah! Only if they're githyanki!

 

[Remathilis]

Gah! Only if they're githyanki!

I quit.

"Hey, I'm going to roll up a that-character-which-wears-armor-casts-spells-uses-swords-has-moderate-hp-and-has-high-XP-requirements. Or would you rather me roll up a Rogue?"