D&D (2024) How should the Swordmage be implemented in 1DnD?

[mellored]

It looks like the Warlock chassis might also be the best chassis for a 5e Swordmage class.

Which is basically what I was suggesting.
Except start Mystic Arcanum at level 1.

Level 1
Cantrips -> At-will -> Cantrips.
Pact Magic -> Encounter -> Sword Art (scales)
Mystic Arcanum -> Daily -> Arcane Casting.

Level 2
Invocation -> Utility.

Level 3
Aegis as a subclass.

Yeah. I wish the 4e Swordmage did unarmed strike augments as well. Hopefully, the 5e Swordmage will.

Unarmed was a weapon in 4e. So Swordmage could use it. It just wasn't very good, even with feats.

5e's Tavern Brawler is a bit better, and can be used with Booming Blade.

The spells can make the "Defender Wizard" a tank. The hit points come from healing and regeneration, and damage resistance. The AC comes from scaling force armor, or mage armor, or turning into air or stone, or so on.
The tank Mage uses magic to function effectively in melee.

"Magic" and "spells" are not directly linked.

A wild magic sorcerer turning into a potted plant is very much magic, but not a spell.

And "spells" tend not to stack, with concentration. You don't want to be able to have scaling force armor and mage armor and turning into air all at the same time.

It is possible to use a spell slot for an "always on" effect

There are a few, like mage armor and foresight. But seems far simpler to just do it directly.

I.e
Armor of Shadows -> Mage Armor -> 13+Dex AC
Vs
Armor of Shadows -> 13+ Dex AC.

The first is both more convoluted and leads to an Abjuration exploit.

 

[tetrasodium]

For the last couple of months, I have been playing a Ranger, my first attempt at playing a Half-caster. It's been something of an interesting challenge.

Id say that part of the 5e ranger problems stem from efforts to eliminate rule subsystems ranger excels in topped with ranger itself having class abilities that literally just delete any chance of them showing in play. Being a half caster is very much secondary to being a class still specialized in crafting & using buggy whips with exceptional skill in an edition that tries to remove both crafting and the buggy whip"s function. It certainly doesn't help that ranger is still trying to channel legolas through the entire base class rather than a more generic base that allows legolas to share subclass space with all of the other ranger inspiration sources likewise enjoying their own appropriate subclasses without needing to carry legolas. Wotc choosing to break barkskin certainly doesn't help either.

IoW: A badly constructed class is badly constructed first before any of it'abilities drawn from better designed classes can be blamed

 

[Frozen_Heart]

4e Swordmage was pretty good IMO. So copying that would be easy.

That's the issue. 4e was set up in such a different way to other editions, that copying anything across is the opposite of easy. This applies to both the warlord and the swordmage.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Ngl I do find it odd how so many people seem to dislike the idea of half casters. There are endless people wanting ranger to be a pure martial, while I also see people saying artificer should be full martial inventor, or full caster, on a regular basis. Less common, but I've seen it a few times is people wanting pure martial paladin.

And in swordmage threads, wanting it to be a full caster seems to be pretty common too.

Half casters are my favorite class types, so it's always seemed odd to me how people seem to dislike the concept.

 

[Corinnguard]

I do find it odd how so many people seem to dislike the idea of half casters.

There should be a forum thread on why this is so. I am also curious about why there is a dislike for half casters.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Ngl I do find it odd how so many people seem to dislike the idea of half casters. There are endless people wanting ranger to be a pure martial, while I also see people saying artificer should be full martial inventor, or full caster, on a regular basis. Less common, but I've seen it a few times is people wanting pure martial paladin.

And in swordmage threads, wanting it to be a full caster seems to be pretty common too.

Half casters are my favorite class types, so it's always seemed odd to me how people seem to dislike the concept.

oh halfcasters are probably my preferred class structure too, but i don't think the halfcaster distaste is so much anything to do with halfcasters themselves so much as just the classes they're trying to apply the structure to, people love the paladin and have no issues with it as a halfcaster because it fits the theme pretty well, (well there are some who disagree but most people are fine with it)

but the iconic rangers in media and previous editions are primarily a martial concept and the 5e ranger has a bunch of spells designed to replicate things that by all rights had no need to be magic: snare, alarm, goodberry, zephyr strike/steel wind strike, flame arrows, swift quiver, conjour volley/barrage, and more i'm probably forgetting, so it ends up feeling like the ranger was shoehorned into being a halfcaster when it really wasn't nessacary to be one, it's a similar situation to the artificer, sure 'it's magic' but alot of artificer is conceptually more passive magics, crafting and imbued enchantments, harnessed through the things they build, and using the spell slot casting goes against that aesthetic.

wanting artificer or swordmage to be fullcasters seems to be more a thing about the insane amounts of power and versatility being a fullcaster can bring, 'if this class is meant to use magic i want to go the whole hog' kind of approach.

 

[Corinnguard]

but the iconic rangers in media and previous editions are primarily a martial concept and the 5e ranger has a bunch of spells designed to replicate things that by all rights had no need to be magic: snare, alarm, goodberry, zephyr strike/steel wind strike, flame arrows, swift quiver, conjour volley/barrage, and more i'm probably forgetting, so it ends up feeling like the ranger was shoehorned into being a halfcaster when it really wasn't nessacary to be one,

Level Up's version of the Ranger class is something of a return to the class being more of a martial concept than a half-caster. They are more of a wilderness and exploration expert who has honed their skills of survival and combat in that RPG. https://a5e.tools/rules/ranger There is only one Ranger archetype in Level Up that still is a Half-Caster, the Wildborn Ranger.

In Pathfinder 1st edition, there is the Skirmisher archetype for the Ranger class, which replaced their spellcasting ability with Hunter's Tricks. https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/ranger/archetypes/paizo-ranger-archetypes/skirmisher

If the Ranger had to be something of a spellcaster, it should be one where their magic is so subtle that most people don't think they are spellcasters. There was a YouTube clip where the author mentioned that Aragorn, believe it or not, was a spellcaster. His spells were so subtle that they were overlooked by everyone else. His spells appeared to others as a form of expertise.

wanting artificer or swordmage to be fullcasters seems to be more a thing about the insane amounts of power and versatility being a fullcaster can bring, 'if this class is meant to use magic i want to go the whole hog' kind of approach.

The problem here is that they want to have their cake and eat it too. Sure, a swordmage could be a fullcaster, but how do you keep their martial abilities relevant when they gain access to spells that can outdo what a martial can do?

 

[Frozen_Heart]

In a game with more classes, I feel some of the concepts could get split up more. Like a pure martial ranger and a half caster warden being their own classes. Or a martial inventor type class alongside a more magical artificer class.

 

[Corinnguard]

half caster warden

You mean something like 4e's Warden class?

 

[mellored]

That's the issue. 4e was set up in such a different way to other editions, that copying anything across is the opposite of easy. This applies to both the warlord and the swordmage.

Disagree.

It was formatted differently. And the numbers where inflated. But it's not exactly hard to translate.


4e
Flame Cyclone
Swordmage Attack 1
Arcane power swirls around your blade and outward toward your enemies, engulfing them in an inferno.
Encounter ✦ arcane, fire, implement
Standard Action
Close blast 3
Target: Each creature in blast
Attack: Intelligence vs. Reflex
Hit: 1d8 + Intelligence modifier + Strength modifier fire damage.

5e
Flame Cyclone
As an action, Arcane power swirls around your blade and outward toward your enemies, engulfing them in an inferno. Each creature, excluding you, with in 15' must make a Reflex saving throw.
If they fail they take fire damage equal to 3d8+ your Swordmage level, or half as much on a successful save.
Once you use this ability you can not use it again until you take a short or long rest.