A Different Take on Hybrid Classes: The Fighter/Mage

[Mentat55]

Inspired by the hybrid class playtest rules just put out by WotC, I started thinking about the classic D&D hybrid: the fighter/mage.

In BECMI, we had the elf. In 1e/2e, we had elven fighter/wizards. In 3/3.5 we had hexblades, duskblades, spellswords, eldritch knights, bladesingers, and the like. In 4e, we've seen the swordmage, plus the multiclass and now the hybrid class rules. All of these have been making me think about a couple of questions:

Question 1-- What is the essence of the fighter/mage, and what aspects of it cannot be currently recreated with the 4e classes and multiclassing/hybrid class rules?
Question 2-- In 4e terms, if we were to tag the fighter/mage with just one role, what would that role be? Or would that violate the core identity of the fighter/mage?

I am interested to hear what people have to say, though I'll be posting my own skeleton for a fighter/mage class soon.

 

[Dragongrief]

Q1 - I would say the main draw of the fighter/mage was versatility, both in and out of combat. You could do almost anything given time to plan. The only thing that couldn't done was healing (unless your DM allowed everything; then there were a couple spells).

Q2 - Either a Striker with Controller secondary, or the other way around. Most Fi/Ma that I saw (or played) either focused on dropping mass distruction (fireball, cone of cold) or on single target elimination (flame arrow, physical buff spells, disintegrate).

 

[Mentat55]

I agree with the controller / striker idea. Right now, I am leaning towards controller, but using close blasts and bursts and some weapon attacks, with striker-like hp and healing surges.

Versatility is indeed the name of the game for the fighter/mage, but to what extent, and how does that interact with the 4e model of well-defined roles?

Hopefully I will post my ideas of a 4e fighter/mage soon.

 

[Garthanos]

While the swordmage covers most of my appetite for a fighter mage... there is still room for a striker version... I await with anticipation what you can come up with.

 

[Mentat55]

Here are a couple of ideas I had:

1. The fighter/mage would have two power sources, Arcane and Martial. This would have minor benefits (qualifying for feats, PPs, and EDs that require a particular power source), but mainly it would affect #2, which is...

2. The fighter/mage's striker damage bonus would come from a feature called, say, Resonating Strike, or Arcane Resonance -- basically, if you hit a creature the round before with an arcane power, and then hit it this round with a martial power, you do extra damage. Is that silly? I just don't want this to be another extra damage mechanism, so I am trying to think of ways to make it striker-ish without simply being an analog of Sneak Attack or Warlock's Curse. I was also thinking of a way that martial attacks could inflict vulnerability to your arcane powers until the end of your next turn. But maybe that would just artificially induce you to alternate arcane and martial attacks.

 

[Mentat55]

Two striker bonus damage mechanisms:

1. Arcane Resonance: When you hit a creature with an arcane attack power, that creature gains vulnerable 5 against your basic attacks and martial attack powers until the end of your next turn. This increases to vulnerable 10 at 11th level, and vulnerable 15 at 21st level.

2. Spellstrike: When the fighter/mage hits with a martial attack power, he can expend an arcane encounter or daily power to deal additional damage as a minor action. If an encounter power is expended, the fighter/mage deals an additional 1d6 damage. If a daily power is expended, the fighter/mage deals an additional 2d6 damage. The additional damage increases to 2d6 (3d6 for a daily) at 11th level, and 3d6 (4d6 for a daily) at 21st level. This additional damage is untyped unless the arcane power expended has a keyword or keywords associated with specific damage types; in this case, the additional damage is of the same type or types.

So, what we have is a slightly different take on bonus damage, making the target vulnerable to your attacks, plus something along the lines of the barbarian's rage strike. Are they too much individually? Are they too much put together?

 

[Garthanos]

So, what we have is a slightly different take on bonus damage, making the target vulnerable to your attacks, plus something along the lines of the barbarian's rage strike. Are they too much individually? Are they too much put together?

Spell Strike I like a lot.. and the analog to the Barbarian is great. The Barbarian has to be in a "special" state to use it although that isnt really a limit.. perhaps the Fighter/Mage has battle trances or is that too close an analog ;-)

The barbarians strike does not combine with other enhanced effects.. so that should I think be only with basic attacks, I think

 

[77IM]

Q1 -- I see this going two ways. There's the spellsword/bladesinger etc., who lights his sword on fire and then buffs himself. I think swordmage already has this covered nicely. Then there's the guy who fights with a sword most of the time, but when he needs to, he blows stuff up real good, with a fireball or lighting bolt. I think this can be done in 4e with a fighter/wizard, except that it sucks to have to hold a wand.

I think both archetypes were also in it for the utility spells (wizards always had the coolest utility spells) which in 4e could be done through the ritual system.

Q2 -- The first type is a classic defender defender (due to self buffs) and I think swordmage works well. The second type is harder to place but I would say controller, possibly with a lot of melee or single-target control like the druid. I say this because such a fighter-mage (in previous editions) usually had multiple tricks up his sleeve, which seems like a controllery way to fight (which matches the 4e fighter somewhat, who feels much like a melee controller at times).

Honestly, after thinking about it, I think the easiest way to get this build in 4e is probably a swordmage/wizard or fighter/wizard or anything/wizard with the special ability to treat his sword as an implement for wizard powers (maybe this could be a feat?).

-- 77IM

 

[77IM]

OK, here's a feat that might work. The idea is to allow any current class to become an MC Wizard without having to constantly switch to using a wand or orb in the middle of a fight.

SPELLBLADE
Prerequisites: Wizard, proficiency with at least one military light or heavy blade
Benefit: You can use a magic light blade or heavy blade as an implement for casting wizard spells. You don't add the weapon's proficiency bonus to your attack roll when making an implement attack.

When using a light or heavy blade as an implement for a wizard encounter or daily power that targets one or more creatures and has an attack roll, you can change the range of the power to "melee weapon" and the target to "one creature." The power's other parameters and effects remain the same, except that if the power previously targeted multiple creatures, it now deals an extra +1[W] damage on a hit (no bonus damage on a miss). If the power requires an area (for example, an effect creates a zone in the area of the attack), select a single square of the target's space that is within your melee reach to serve as the area.​

It's possible that there are some broken combos that make this radically overpowered but I can't think of any straight away.

-- 77IM

 

[Garthanos]

OK, here's a feat that might work. The idea is to allow any current class to become an MC Wizard without having to constantly switch to using a wand or orb in the middle of a fight.

SPELLBLADE
Prerequisites: Wizard, proficiency with at least one military light or heavy blade
Benefit: You can use a magic light blade or heavy blade as an implement for casting wizard spells. You don't add the weapon's proficiency bonus to your attack roll when making an implement attack.

When using a light or heavy blade as an implement for a wizard encounter or daily power that targets one or more creatures and has an attack roll, you can change the range of the power to "melee weapon" and the target to "one creature." The power's other parameters and effects remain the same, except that if the power previously targeted multiple creatures, it now deals an extra +1[W] damage on a hit (no bonus damage on a miss). If the power requires an area (for example, an effect creates a zone in the area of the attack), select a single square of the target's space that is within your melee reach to serve as the area.​

It's possible that there are some broken combos that make this radically overpowered but I can't think of any straight away.

-- 77IM

Mix with Martial Training, season lightly till well done.