D&D 4E Homebrew Simple Spell-less Spellcaster: the Elementalist (4e)

[TwoSix]

This is a class with little resource depth, based on doing one large attack and with little inherent toughness. The damage progression you would want to follow is the rogue.

I like the idea of using 1d12s as the damage dice (I think they're more random and a little more intimidating, which fits the feel of the class well). So I'd probably want to see 1d12+Int at 1st level, and then bump it by 1d12 every 4 levels after 1st (so 5th, 9th, 13th, 17th). That parallels the growth of rogue damage, although rogue is slightly ahead, which fits since the rogue has (slight) restrictions on the use of sneak attack and is usually melee.

Then, I like the idea of a two-pronged subclass like Warlock, with the element being one prong and something else as the other. I'd make some utility talents as the elemental contribution, like gaining a fly speed for air, or make walls of stone for earth.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I added the progession of d12s proposed above.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Is there a reason for INT rather than CHA primary?

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Is there a reason for INT rather than CHA primary?

I know that in 4e it was a sorcerer variant, but since there's soooo manu Cha-casting classes in 5e, I wanted to play a little more the ''savant of destruction'' angle rather than the ''wielder of raw power''.

I thought for a second of making'em Con-casters, but I'm still iff-y about it.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Oh, it might also be cool if elemental bolt could be ranged or melee. Like, you can create a sword or whip of flame or a bludgeon of stone or ice or whatever, when in melee.

I thought for a second of making'em Con-casters, but I'm still iff-y about it.

Well, other all-at-will DPR classes tend to have decent hps, so primary CON on top of d6 might not be too out of line.
And it does fit. The elements are primordial and demanding.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Oh, it might also be cool if elemental bolt could be ranged or melee. Like, you can create a sword or whip of flame or a bludgeon of stone or ice or whatever, when in melee.

I gave this feature to the Earth student, but I agree that it should be available to all archetype.
I'll modify it.

 

[NotAYakk]

Subclass 1: the elemental type.

Subclass 2: Your "superhero" origin story:

Mage: You studied elemental magic. (Blaster)
Heir: You carry elemental blood in your lineage. (Transforms into the elemental)
Bargainer: You traded for elemental power. (Summoner)
Vessel: You absorbed elemental power. (Creates a Focus Weapon)

They'd all be "blasters"; but the Mage would be the "pure"er one.

Or maybe ... the Mage gets group buffs? Oh that could work; the "extra feature" requires concentration (transform, summon, create weapon, and buff allies).

 

[Garthanos]

I know that in 4e it was a sorcerer variant, but since there's soooo manu Cha-casting classes in 5e, I wanted to play a little more the ''savant of destruction'' angle rather than the ''wielder of raw power''.

I thought for a second of making'em Con-casters, but I'm still iff-y about it.

I like Con Casters myself more than a couple ways of perceiving ... The channeling of the magic through your body is painful and the techniques require you resist that distracting pain in some fashion as you do it. (or the opposite its incredibly pleasurable). Or CON could represent using your life force itself. Or it's a measure in the strength of your blood which hey maybe you use to seal the bonds or bribe sources .... shrug.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I like Con Casters myself more than a couple ways of perceiving ... The channeling of the magic through your body is painful and the techniques require you resist that distracting pain in some fashion as you do it. (or the opposite its incredibly pleasurable). Or CON could represent using your life force itself. Or it's a measure in the strength of your blood which hey maybe you use to seal the bonds or bribe sources .... shrug.

Yeah, I think i'll keep them as Int-caster with Con a a secondary, just because I think that if we were to have Con-casters, Sorcerers should be the ones to have it first, and I'm not ready yet to make that jump.

 

[Garthanos]

Yeah, I think i'll keep them as Int-caster with Con a a secondary, just because I think that if we were to have Con-casters, Sorcerers should be the ones to have it first, and I'm not ready yet to make that jump.

Call them an Elemental Bloodline Sorceror? Shrug what is in a name... ;p Actually two of those descriptions I presented as from the Wheel of Time Ashaman and Aes Sedai they might also be called channelers. One is a Warlock Style and or 2 might be Sorceror flavor. the difference between Int/Con and Con is well how whole hog you want the description to be apply.