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

[Yaarel]

Random idea.

Instead of using Int to make weapon attacks.

Swordmages could use Dex for their spell casting modifier.

I kinda wanna see the Swordmage lean into Strength. Officially, the 4e Swordmage is to excel at agile Athletics.

 

[Yaarel]

Part of the reason I like spellstrike as a concept is because it cuts down on the amount of new mechanics required to make a dedicated Swordmage work. Having to come up with around 30 spells isn't too hard, but it is a lot of new content you have to make for a satisfying Swordmage. When you can just channel spells through the sword, you can get away with making fewer spells for the Swordmage. But, I understand to some that a spell list carries a lot of flavor, so maybe it's best if the Swordmage goes the route of making 30+ new spells regardless.

Creating new spells is often necessary to make a class concept work.

 

[Corinnguard]

Creating new spells is often necessary to make a class concept work.

Sometimes, but not often. A class concept also requires class features that set it apart from other classes. While spells can set the class apart from other classes, it's easier to borrow what already exists.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Creating new spells is often necessary to make a class concept work.

disagree on the specific premise that the things created for classes to work need to be spells, there are already a good few abilities that were made into spells that didn't need to be them (ranger spell list i'm looking at you) but even if swordmage is a magical class concept that still doesn't require that the abilities made for them are required to take the form of spells.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I feel the swordmage would be Dex and Int (Ignoring Con as everyone wants that) as its primary attributes.

But there would be nothing preventing it going Str / Int instead if the player wanted that for their character. No features in the class which actively blocked the use of one or the other.

Unlike say monk, rogue, barbarian, and ranger, which have stuff written into their abilities which outright prevents you using either Str or Dex.

 

[Corinnguard]

I feel the swordmage would be Dex and Int (Ignoring Con as everyone wants that) as its primary attributes.

But there would be nothing preventing it going Str / Int instead if the player wanted that for their character. No features in the class which actively blocked the use of one or the other.

Exactly. Just as there are STR-based Fighters and DEX-based Fighters, you could have STR-based Swordmages and DEX-based Swordmages. I prefer DEX-based martials, so I would choose the latter.

 

[Yaarel]

A class concept also requires class features that set it apart from other classes. While spells can set the class apart from other classes, it's easier to borrow what already exists.

I look at the appeal of each class in its own right.

I view "niche protection" as problematic. If two classes partially overlap at a shared concept, both classes should use the same relevant mechanic for it.

 

[Yaarel]

I feel the swordmage would be Dex and Int (Ignoring Con as everyone wants that) as its primary attributes.

But there would be nothing preventing it going Str / Int instead if the player wanted that for their character. No features in the class which actively blocked the use of one or the other.

Unlike say monk, rogue, barbarian, and ranger, which have stuff written into their abilities which outright prevents you using either Str or Dex.

I see too much Dexterity at my tables. Heh, I am kinda sick of everything being Dexterity. It is almost as ubiquitous as hit points!

Fixing and utilizing the other abilities would be nice.

I hope the designers fix Strength and make it worthwhile for any class to choose. Same goes for any non-overpowered ability.

 

[Corinnguard]

If two classes partial overlap at a shared concept, both classes should use the same relevant mechanic.

It would depend on the concept, and even then it's more likely that one of the two classes is a subclass of the other. All Fighter subclasses, for instance, share the same features found in the 5e Fighter class (Second Wind, Action Surge, Fighting Style, and Indomitable) and roughly the same concept. The base version of a class provides the concept while the subclasses provide some additional flavor/customization.

 

[tetrasodium]

Fair point about fighting style and maneuvers. But valor bard and Bladesinger don't get them.

If they multiclass, they are behind on slots. So you'd need to compare with a higher level fireball.

Eldritch Knight won't get it till 13th level, and they have 3 attacks at-will at that point. So this just adds some movement.

Battlesmith gets it at 9. But there is also haste at level 3. Which will give them 3 attacks and extra movement.

Great Weapon Master playtest requires the Attack action and is + proficiency damage once per turn. So it won't add.

It's not "fair" because it's a blazingly obvious example that doesn't even require a thought of mix-n-match CharOp resulting from other obviously incomplete areas of the rules* being compounded by the assumption that any addition is easy if you continue relying on "but that's ok since the GM can solve it".

* areas once actually rather explicitly defined in past editions & deliberately torn asunder in both 2014's 5e and 2024's 5e like focus items and what is or can be in your hand right now.