Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I gave up--Here's a Warrior-Mage base class
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 7142433" data-attributes="member: 6677017"><p>Thanks all. This is exactly the sort of feedback I need.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Opening up the weapons doesn't seem like an issue to me. You can choose to use a two-hander for more damage, but then you'll take a 2 point hit to AC, which is a pretty big deal in 5e.</p><p></p><p>The additional damage from Fighting Style is working as intended. The primary thing warrior-mage gets in exchange for everything else Bladesinger <em>is</em> better damage. It's about the only way they are superior to Bladesinger. I would include better staying power as a secondary category in which they are better, but once Bladesinger gets Song of Defense that isn't true anymore, and Bladesinger's higher AC makes is debatable whether it's true at lower levels.</p><p></p><p>The Intelligence dumping though reminds me of something I was thinking of in the design phase, but apparently forgot to put in the write up. I'm making them take Int 13 and Str or Dex of 13 (the same as a fighter/wizard standard multiclass) to qualify for the class. Yes, it totally breaks 5e convention and precedent (as does not having a subclass), which I very much dislike doing, but once I decided to try a new class, I decided I'm all in and will make such choices if needed to get a balanced solution.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm glad this is the big issue, because it isn't an essential part of the class design. I threw it in for more a fightery feel, thinking it wasn't going to have much effect on damage output (perhaps I was wrong). How does this alternative feel?</p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 15px"><span style="color: #B22222"><u>Attack Surge</u></span></span></p><p>When you reach 20th level, you can push your attack speed beyond your normal limits for a moment. When you take the Attack action on your turn you can attack three times.</p><p> Once you use this feature, you must finish a short or long rest before you can use it again.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>True, I'm making a subjective judgment on it. There are three reason it looks like a big deal to me. It is +2 to +5 depending on level, which seems like a pretty big deal in 5e. This is even more so because it is generally transitioning over that point that feels like mediocre AC (up to about 17) into what seems more like good (18-20) or great (21+) AC. Maybe I'm off on those estimates, I don't know. The final element is that it saves Bladesinger spell slots. Either class can use <em>shield</em> for an AC boost, but Bladesinger will need to use it less often.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Fair enough. The third attack isn't actually intended to improve damage any (<em>green-flame blade</em> with War Magic is almost always better or equivalent, unless using Great Weapon Master or ranged combat with Sharpshooter--and I nerf both of those feats so they aren't a problem)--or some other significant damage add), so I'm willing to just ditch and it and perhaps use that new feature I described above for flavor. I do want to keep the two attacks, because it feels more appropriate, but Fighting Style and War Magic give them the right amount of damage as I see it, so I wouldn't want to add anything else on top of those.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Improved War Magic isn't intended to increase damage, it's to keep them casting and swinging, like a Valor Bard or Eldritch Knight--and as a dedicated warrior-mage hybrid, they really ought to be able to do that as well as the other classes.</p></blockquote><p>This is just me, but I don’t know why this needs to be nerfed. Being able to reroll one failed Str or Wis save per long rest and having to take the roll does not strike me as game breaking. I’m not great at breaking the game though so maybe someone sees something I don’t. It’s already limited from the Fighter ability (Indomitable) in type (fighters can pick any save) and amount (fighters get more saves). I don’t think you need to split up Str and Wis. [/quote]</p><p></p><p>It's just sort of an intuitive feeling that Indomitable Spirit all at once might be pushing it. If others don't feel that way I would be fine with leaving it as it, but right now my thoughts are splitting it up to Wisdom only at 10th level, and expanding it to Strength at 18th level (later than I'd like, but the best available level on the chart).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I was just iffy on it not being quite strong enough. I think I'll probably say it's 1 hit point per level regardless of the spell's school. I'm kind of wanting to change Sculpt Spells too. Only 1 creature seems a huge nerf from the original (I want a significant nerf for these, but perhaps not that much). I'm not sure what to do with it though. I'm considering perhaps half level (minimum 0), but that doesn't feel exactly right. The thing is, that first creature is really the most important one, so it's worth more than the additional creatures.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It's an AC balance thing. The way I run casting with a shield (without the feat) is that you can transfer your weapon to your shield hand and back again after casting as your free item interaction. I do this because RAW you can just drop your weapon for free, and then pick it up as your free item interaction, so you gain nothing in the action economy from this minor house rule/interpretation (it could mean the difference between dropping it off the edge of a rope bridge though). That's assuming a spell component pouch. If you want to use an arcane focus with a shield, it gets a bit more complicated, since I consider that those have to be drawn/sheathed just like a weapon. You can still theoretically do most of what you could without it, but you are going to end up ending some of your turns without a weapon in your hand, and other little complications can come up. If you really want to have the greatest freedom to cast spells with somatic or material components all the time, forgoing the shield is an option worth considering to avoid such potential complications that can be an issue at times.</p><p></p><p>I do like the idea of a weapon as an arcane focus, but since neither Eldritch Knight or Wizard gets anything like that, I'm going to steer clear of it. If you look at the class features, they don't actually get anything that isn't from one of those classes (or a nerfed version of one of them), which is by design. When I get it properly balanced and write it up, the lore is going to explain how they train under three masters: a fighter, a wizard, and another warrior-mage.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I've thought of this more than once, but I can't find a way to do it that doesn't feel wrong. As an Intelligence based wizard-trained full-caster, they really should have ritual caster. A nerfed version from the wizard might be ideal. However, there are really only two versions of Ritual Caster. The wizard's version which doesn't require preparation, and can't benefit from it RAW, but does require access to the spell book. (Technically, RAW the spell just has to be in your book, it doesn't say you need to have the book with you, but my guess is that the intention is for you to actually have the book there and use it.) Switching it to the preparation version of clerics and druids won't work since that's a capability wizards don't have. They need a nerfed version of the wizard style Ritual Casting, and unless I interpret the wizard kind as actually being able to use preparation as an alternative to having their book present, I have come up blank on options for that, so I'm just going to stick with standard wizard ritual casting unless I can think of some other alternative. Of course, in reality the better version of Ritual Casting is only worth about half a feat or less--since a feat will give wizard's Ritual Casting, and will give it to someone who can't even cast spells normally.</p><p></p><p>However, I did want to nerf something. Earlier in the design I had intended to start them with less than 6 known spells. Then I realized that that number was not arbitrary. With rolled stats, a 1st level character (gnome) could have the ability to prepare 6 spells, which I assume is why they set it there, and incentive enough not to reduce it.</p><p></p><p>Instead, I came up with a small nerf that enforces the flavor of Arcane Specialization. Two of the spells in their book at 1st level have to be from the same school, and that's the school whose ability they will get with Arcane Specialization.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes it is, thanks.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>While I wouldn't want to add it into the class, something like this for elves is a decent idea. I'd probably just allow elves to use Dexterity with longswords when wielded in one hand as part of their weapon training feature. This would prevent unintended interactions with the finesse property (WoTC follows that precedent in places like the monk's martial arts), and prevent a d10 finesse weapon.</p><p></p><p>Good thoughts everyone.</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="Sword of Spirit, post: 7142433, member: 6677017"] Thanks all. This is exactly the sort of feedback I need. Opening up the weapons doesn't seem like an issue to me. You can choose to use a two-hander for more damage, but then you'll take a 2 point hit to AC, which is a pretty big deal in 5e. The additional damage from Fighting Style is working as intended. The primary thing warrior-mage gets in exchange for everything else Bladesinger [I]is[/I] better damage. It's about the only way they are superior to Bladesinger. I would include better staying power as a secondary category in which they are better, but once Bladesinger gets Song of Defense that isn't true anymore, and Bladesinger's higher AC makes is debatable whether it's true at lower levels. The Intelligence dumping though reminds me of something I was thinking of in the design phase, but apparently forgot to put in the write up. I'm making them take Int 13 and Str or Dex of 13 (the same as a fighter/wizard standard multiclass) to qualify for the class. Yes, it totally breaks 5e convention and precedent (as does not having a subclass), which I very much dislike doing, but once I decided to try a new class, I decided I'm all in and will make such choices if needed to get a balanced solution. I'm glad this is the big issue, because it isn't an essential part of the class design. I threw it in for more a fightery feel, thinking it wasn't going to have much effect on damage output (perhaps I was wrong). How does this alternative feel? [SIZE=4][COLOR="#B22222"][U]Attack Surge[/U][/COLOR][/SIZE] When you reach 20th level, you can push your attack speed beyond your normal limits for a moment. When you take the Attack action on your turn you can attack three times. Once you use this feature, you must finish a short or long rest before you can use it again. True, I'm making a subjective judgment on it. There are three reason it looks like a big deal to me. It is +2 to +5 depending on level, which seems like a pretty big deal in 5e. This is even more so because it is generally transitioning over that point that feels like mediocre AC (up to about 17) into what seems more like good (18-20) or great (21+) AC. Maybe I'm off on those estimates, I don't know. The final element is that it saves Bladesinger spell slots. Either class can use [I]shield[/I] for an AC boost, but Bladesinger will need to use it less often. Fair enough. The third attack isn't actually intended to improve damage any ([I]green-flame blade[/I] with War Magic is almost always better or equivalent, unless using Great Weapon Master or ranged combat with Sharpshooter--and I nerf both of those feats so they aren't a problem)--or some other significant damage add), so I'm willing to just ditch and it and perhaps use that new feature I described above for flavor. I do want to keep the two attacks, because it feels more appropriate, but Fighting Style and War Magic give them the right amount of damage as I see it, so I wouldn't want to add anything else on top of those. Improved War Magic isn't intended to increase damage, it's to keep them casting and swinging, like a Valor Bard or Eldritch Knight--and as a dedicated warrior-mage hybrid, they really ought to be able to do that as well as the other classes. [/quote]This is just me, but I don’t know why this needs to be nerfed. Being able to reroll one failed Str or Wis save per long rest and having to take the roll does not strike me as game breaking. I’m not great at breaking the game though so maybe someone sees something I don’t. It’s already limited from the Fighter ability (Indomitable) in type (fighters can pick any save) and amount (fighters get more saves). I don’t think you need to split up Str and Wis. [/quote] It's just sort of an intuitive feeling that Indomitable Spirit all at once might be pushing it. If others don't feel that way I would be fine with leaving it as it, but right now my thoughts are splitting it up to Wisdom only at 10th level, and expanding it to Strength at 18th level (later than I'd like, but the best available level on the chart). I was just iffy on it not being quite strong enough. I think I'll probably say it's 1 hit point per level regardless of the spell's school. I'm kind of wanting to change Sculpt Spells too. Only 1 creature seems a huge nerf from the original (I want a significant nerf for these, but perhaps not that much). I'm not sure what to do with it though. I'm considering perhaps half level (minimum 0), but that doesn't feel exactly right. The thing is, that first creature is really the most important one, so it's worth more than the additional creatures. It's an AC balance thing. The way I run casting with a shield (without the feat) is that you can transfer your weapon to your shield hand and back again after casting as your free item interaction. I do this because RAW you can just drop your weapon for free, and then pick it up as your free item interaction, so you gain nothing in the action economy from this minor house rule/interpretation (it could mean the difference between dropping it off the edge of a rope bridge though). That's assuming a spell component pouch. If you want to use an arcane focus with a shield, it gets a bit more complicated, since I consider that those have to be drawn/sheathed just like a weapon. You can still theoretically do most of what you could without it, but you are going to end up ending some of your turns without a weapon in your hand, and other little complications can come up. If you really want to have the greatest freedom to cast spells with somatic or material components all the time, forgoing the shield is an option worth considering to avoid such potential complications that can be an issue at times. I do like the idea of a weapon as an arcane focus, but since neither Eldritch Knight or Wizard gets anything like that, I'm going to steer clear of it. If you look at the class features, they don't actually get anything that isn't from one of those classes (or a nerfed version of one of them), which is by design. When I get it properly balanced and write it up, the lore is going to explain how they train under three masters: a fighter, a wizard, and another warrior-mage. I've thought of this more than once, but I can't find a way to do it that doesn't feel wrong. As an Intelligence based wizard-trained full-caster, they really should have ritual caster. A nerfed version from the wizard might be ideal. However, there are really only two versions of Ritual Caster. The wizard's version which doesn't require preparation, and can't benefit from it RAW, but does require access to the spell book. (Technically, RAW the spell just has to be in your book, it doesn't say you need to have the book with you, but my guess is that the intention is for you to actually have the book there and use it.) Switching it to the preparation version of clerics and druids won't work since that's a capability wizards don't have. They need a nerfed version of the wizard style Ritual Casting, and unless I interpret the wizard kind as actually being able to use preparation as an alternative to having their book present, I have come up blank on options for that, so I'm just going to stick with standard wizard ritual casting unless I can think of some other alternative. Of course, in reality the better version of Ritual Casting is only worth about half a feat or less--since a feat will give wizard's Ritual Casting, and will give it to someone who can't even cast spells normally. However, I did want to nerf something. Earlier in the design I had intended to start them with less than 6 known spells. Then I realized that that number was not arbitrary. With rolled stats, a 1st level character (gnome) could have the ability to prepare 6 spells, which I assume is why they set it there, and incentive enough not to reduce it. Instead, I came up with a small nerf that enforces the flavor of Arcane Specialization. Two of the spells in their book at 1st level have to be from the same school, and that's the school whose ability they will get with Arcane Specialization. Yes it is, thanks. While I wouldn't want to add it into the class, something like this for elves is a decent idea. I'd probably just allow elves to use Dexterity with longswords when wielded in one hand as part of their weapon training feature. This would prevent unintended interactions with the finesse property (WoTC follows that precedent in places like the monk's martial arts), and prevent a d10 finesse weapon. Good thoughts everyone. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I gave up--Here's a Warrior-Mage base class
Top