D&D 5E Giving the arcane gish an identity.

[Parmandur]

Man, this is the witch thread all over again.

Real talk, the Artificer works pretty well for a Witch, too.

 

[Parmandur]

Ooh, now I really gotta think of how exactly to describe a gish because just saying "It's not a gadgeteer" isn't a fair argument (though it is part of the argument). This is a good thing.

So mechanically in tune with the Paladin and Ranger in that it is:
A variably armored warrior with a d10 hit-die, fighting style, spellcasting up to level 5 that includes specialty spells, and class abilities that reinforce it's central theme.

Mechanically central theme of:
Channeling magic through your weapon, spells to buff or maneuver yourself around the battlefield.
Likely has weapon use as an arcane focus, extra attack at 5th level, an ability to sacrifice a spell slot to activate a central theme (I'm thinking turning on the arcane strike but that's a bit specific for this post), an 11th level that is akin to but not quite an extra attack.

Tentatively I think calling it Battlemage or Spellsword or something more in the line of generic would get the point across about what it is and what it does and then have the subclass determine it's 'Theme' like the Fighter, Rogue, Ranger, or Sorcerer. There seem to be enough variations that there is a thematic need for a gish but the variations don't have a throughline that lends the class as a whole a theme.

So, unhelpfully, I must say what it is clearly not trying for is a gadgeteer.

Sounds like that's just a Paladin...? Some of this seems to be investing in a "Arcane"/"Divine" dichotomy that doesn't have much of a basis in the ga.e, other than some fluff. I just don't see the mechanical design space nor the conceptual trope space, with all of the various Gish solutions already on offer.

 

[cbwjm]

It has the hit dice, the Weapon and armor Proficiencies...the 5E Artificer is a warrior either magic, a Gish.

I think this is one of those things where we'll have to agree to disagree. I for one will never consider the artificer as a sufficient replacement for a warrior/mage type character.

 

[Xeviat]

It's why I like the 'guardian' idea of an arcane half caster type class. While the wizard is looking to gather and benefit from the arcane knowledge and artifacts, the gish is looking to safeguard it and stop it being abused (usually by wizards).

Guardians could work, but why do guardians need to know magic as well (not poo-pooing your suggestion, I'm nudging it so we can mold it). Your idea is making me think of the archetype of a monster hunter, or even a mage hunter, because you need magic in order to hunt those with magic or magical beasts.

I could also see the gish as the scholar warrior, someone who is martially adept because of social status or family history but a genuine scholar of the arcane when they can find the time.

A martial artist you might say? An Adept? A Savant? If only "Kensei" translated to English in one word, but that's the weeb in me thinking of mystical sword techniques.

We're not going to saddle this thing with 'mandatory' lore that will hamper its utility as a piece of the character building toolbox like people like to turn the warlock into are we? I keep seeing people talk about the 'story' of the class and I'm getting nervous.

Eh ... the warlock has a story. They made a pact with an otherworldly being for magical power, like stories of witches selling their soul to the devil to learn magic.

So no magic-users or fighting-men? Got it.

Correct, those names were clunky. Fighter and Wizard are better.

 

[Xeviat]

I think this is one of those things where we'll have to agree to disagree. I for one will never consider the artificer as a sufficient replacement for a warrior/mage type character.

I feel like it's a rogue/wizard myself. It gets expertise (tools only), it doesn't have a d10 HD, it doesn't natively have extra attack. Heck, early drafts had sneak attack scaling on their base attack (I liked that version with the gun or alchemical satchel). Subclasses can be used to gear them toward combat, but you can do that with the rogue and bard too.

 

[Undrave]

But, the Artificer is a Martial, warrior Class, in all Subclasses. I see nothing to deny the Vishiness if the Artificer, except special pleading. Unlike a "Swordmage" or "Battlemage," at least the Artificer has a proper fictional identity.

Arcane Gish has an identity. It's called Artificer.

See, this would make sense if all people were asking for was a INT half-caster class, but that’s not it.

The Artificer doesn’t fulfill the Stabnerd fiction, not in the proper way. The Artificer fiction is about making STUFF, blending the physical world of metal and wood with the ethereal world of Magic, but what people want is someone who weaves magic with sword play into one. There is no element of permanance to it like with an Artificer.

They don’t want a guy who casts a spell and then goes in to stab a dude. They want a guy who, in the process of stabbing, casts their spell.

I think the ‘visual’ fiction of the Stabnerd is really clear, and the mechanics are just a matter of creating enough custom spells for five levels and figuring out the best armor type. This thread isn’t really about that, it’s about creating a solid backstory for that particular image so it can BE something in the fictional world. Something that can handle multiple variations.

 

[bedir than]

Most of the suggestions on how to build the class tell me that the desire for a gish is a desire to dominate a table, not play a story. All of those suggestions are basically "everything the Wizard does with a more fighting and armor"

That's just a desire to be better than your fellow players, not the desire for a class.

 

[cbwjm]

I think if I was building one, I'd use the ranger as the basis. D10 hit dice; extra attack; light, medium armour and shields; a half-caster spell progression. I think I might use the artificer spell progression though. I'd also start the archetype at level 1 to better define how the class approaches mixing combat and spells. Could probably create a subclass for each school of magic if you wanted. Abjurant champion focuses on abjuration magic creating shields of force for protection, Death Knight focuses on necromancy and summons up an undead minion to aid them. Maybe evocation is the war mage, calling up destructive energies to decimate their foes with sword and spell.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

The concept that has no name?

No, the concept that has too many possible names at the moment. We have the options, we just need to narrow it down. Also, having a name chosen yet is not a valid argument against creating a new class.

The Artificer doesn't work for many reasons. Firstly, because it isn't a martial half-caster. Sure, it's a half-caster, but instead of having a d10 hit dice, all armor proficiencies, simple/martial weapon proficiency, extra attack, and weapon-focused abilities, it has a d8 hit die, cantrips, magic-item buffing features, and Infusions. That's not at all the idea of a gish that we're all thinking about. That's like claiming that the Paladin is unnecessary because Clerics have armor and weapon proficiencies.

 

[Parmandur]

No, the concept that has too many possible names at the moment. We have the options, we just need to narrow it down. Also, having a name chosen yet is not a valid argument against creating a new class.

The Artificer doesn't work for many reasons. Firstly, because it isn't a martial half-caster. Sure, it's a half-caster, but instead of having a d10 hit dice, all armor proficiencies, simple/martial weapon proficiency, extra attack, and weapon-focused abilities, it has a d8 hit die, cantrips, magic-item buffing features, and Infusions. That's not at all the idea of a gish that we're all thinking about. That's like claiming that the Paladin is unnecessary because Clerics have armor and weapon proficiencies.

I mean, the Paladin is somewhat unnecessary, but it has Tradition and literary tropes on it's side. The Gish? Not so much, it's more of a mechanical slot.to be filled of we consider "Power Source" as a concept that matters (which 5E does not). What is the literary or cinematic antecedent to the Gish...?