Why is the Gish so popular with players?

[Neonchameleon]

To me there are two distinct types of Gish, which I'll call the Eldritch Knight and the Swordmage.

The Eldritch Knight covers a whole lot of "I never want to be useless". It's basically a multiclass, not as good at casting as a full wizard and not as good at armed combat as a fighter (the Bladesinger gets way too close to full wizard casting). It's a jack of all trades.

The Swordmage is trying to integrate magic and melee into something that's a coherent whole not someone with two part time jobs. They know they don't have the raw physical talent of a fighter but use equalisers; the weapon wielding artificers are obvious examples.

More interesting to me as Swordmages are the OneD&D Bladelocks (who already got mileage out of Armour of Agathys punishing people who hit them in melee and would have out of casting Jump at will if it was a better spell); the Archfey specialises in Misty Step teleportation - so you now have an incredibly mobile trickster warrior who will teleport right behind enemies before shanking them, possibly also dropping Darkness only they can see through or using at will illusions. And the Fiendlock now gains temp hp not just for killing but whenever a foe goes down to 0hp within 10' of them. So you have this horde breaking bully that tanks foes and gets stronger whenever their allies snipe someone trying to dogpile them. These are two fun and flamboyant melee playstyles that only work with a mix of sword and magic. Powerful? That's for WotC? But definitely cool, evocative, and flamboyant.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Well, in some cases its just because we find hard lines of demarcation kind of dumb. Dislike of rigid class borders was one of the things that chased me out of the D&D sphere for many years. Its not like mages-who-can-fight or fighters-with-some-magic are nonexistent in fiction, or even were decades ago.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

My artificer just hit 11th level, and I’m super excited to turn my steel panther into a full time Vortex Warper via Spell Storing Item.

 

[cbwjm]

This conversation has reminded me of the RPG kingdoms of amalur. It has a great class system that unlocks classes as you level up and put points into different skill trees: might, finesse, and sorcery. The classes that unlock are based on how many points are put into which trees and typically reward that playstyle by providing bonuses and some sort of additional skill. It's a fun system and lets you easily slip into these different classes depending on how you focus. Split your skill points amongst all three and you even have the option of becoming a universalist. Battlemage (might/sorcery), Mage (Sorcery), and Universalist (might/finesse/sorcery) are probably my favourites, but you can reset your skills for a cost and easily try out other builds.

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

Now we're getting somewhere.

 

[Minigiant]

To me there are two distinct types of Gish, which I'll call the Eldritch Knight and the Swordmage.

The Eldritch Knight covers a whole lot of "I never want to be useless". It's basically a multiclass, not as good at casting as a full wizard and not as good at armed combat as a fighter (the Bladesinger gets way too close to full wizard casting). It's a jack of all trades.

The Swordmage is trying to integrate magic and melee into something that's a coherent whole not someone with two part time jobs. They know they don't have the raw physical talent of a fighter but use equalisers; the weapon wielding artificers are obvious examples.

More interesting to me as Swordmages are the OneD&D Bladelocks (who already got mileage out of Armour of Agathys punishing people who hit them in melee and would have out of casting Jump at will if it was a better spell); the Archfey specialises in Misty Step teleportation - so you now have an incredibly mobile trickster warrior who will teleport right behind enemies before shanking them, possibly also dropping Darkness only they can see through or using at will illusions. And the Fiendlock now gains temp hp not just for killing but whenever a foe goes down to 0hp within 10' of them. So you have this horde breaking bully that tanks foes and gets stronger whenever their allies snipe someone trying to dogpile them. These are two fun and flamboyant melee playstyles that only work with a mix of sword and magic. Powerful? That's for WotC? But definitely cool, evocative, and flamboyant.

Wouldn't that be 3 types (assuming game balance).

1) The EK who can cast spells to gain usefulness at times when their combat power has no reach
2) The Bladesinger who can buff up to fight in emergencies
3) The Swordmage that mixes weapon use and magic to create a unique and exclusive method of action

 

[Neonchameleon]

Wouldn't that be 3 types (assuming game balance).

1) The EK who can cast spells to gain usefulness at times when their combat power has no reach
2) The Bladesinger who can buff up to fight in emergencies
3) The Swordmage that mixes weapon use and magic to create a unique and exclusive method of action

I don't find 1 and 2 that different - it's simply how often you take a Fighter action and how often a Magic User action in a F/Mu multiclass. There's a scale there, sure. But both are fundamentally two-mode multiclass.

Meanwhile 3 is far from just one thing. An Armourer Artificer is not a One D&D Blade Pact Fiendlock. There's IMO waaaay more potential variety under 3 even just using what WotC has put out for 5e than your 1 and 2 combined.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Wouldn't that be 3 types (assuming game balance).

1) The EK who can cast spells to gain usefulness at times when their combat power has no reach
2) The Bladesinger who can buff up to fight in emergencies
3) The Swordmage that mixes weapon use and magic to create a unique and exclusive method of action

Again, depending on edition of D&D (or other RPGs) I’ll assert there’s really more of a spectrum of warrior mages, with a variety of shticks. Some barely do magic, some barely engage in physical combat.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't find 1 and 2 that different - it's simply how often you take a Fighter action and how often a Magic User action in a F/Mu multiclass. There's a scale there, sure. But both are fundamentally two-mode multiclass.

Meanwhile 3 is far from just one thing. An Armourer Artificer is not a One D&D Blade Pact Fiendlock. There's IMO waaaay more potential variety under 3 even just using what WotC has put out for 5e than your 1 and 2 combined.

Again, depending on edition, I’ll assert there’s really more of a spectrum of warrior mages, with a variety of shticks. Some barely do magic, some barely engage in physical combat.

Sure but those are the groups.

The ones that are more Warrior
The ones that are more Magey
The ones that do Magic and Fighting at the same time.

Maybe a 4th that is is a Warrior who has always on passive magic. Like a warrior with Wings and Infravision.

The other way around The character with activatable Magic and Martial hasn't been done.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Sure but those are the groups.

Groups are arbitrary and the question is how helpful they are. As I say I see your "Fighter/mage" and "Mage/fighter" to be part of the same design ethos and general approach to play, so you label them within the same box rather than having one entire category pretty much for the Eldritch Knight on its own.

Maybe a 4th that is is a Warrior who has always on passive magic. Like a warrior with Wings and Infravision.

Now this I can see as a useful category. I'm not sure if they qualify as Gish tho rather than just non-mundane warriors.

The other way around The character with activatable Magic and Martial hasn't been done.

How do you mean? I'm thinking of both Echo Knights and Bladelocks.