D&D General Actual Gish Fighting Styles

[Corinnguard]

Why would a fighting style do the entire job of making you a gish??

It wouldn't. It's just one choice among many for anyone wanting to be a Gish.

The point of a fighting style is to set you up from early on to fight in a given style, not to be the entirety of your build.

If they were, we probably would have something like PF1's Two-Weapon Warrior archetype for the Fighter in 5e.

Two-Weapon Warrior – d20PFSRD

www.d20pfsrd.com

Several of the PF1 Fighter archetypes are like this.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It wouldn't. It's just one choice among many for anyone wanting to be a Gish.

Okay.






so....what is the relevance to this thread of the "criticism" that a fighting style cant do everything needed to make a gish?

If they were, we probably would have something like PF1's Two-Weapon Warrior archetype for the Fighter in 5e.

Two-Weapon Warrior – d20PFSRD

www.d20pfsrd.com

Several of the PF1 Fighter archetypes are like this.

With respect, I don't play or otherwise use pathfinder. I dislike it as a system, and i find nothing useful from it that wasnt already a thing in 3 5 dnd. (Not that i think it is a good system either)

 

[CreamCloud0]

2) Improvement of your Weapon Attacks with Spells using Magic Resources

does this mean consumable resources? because if so i don't think that's a fully necessary aspect, at least, if the game included appropriate cantrips you could make a proper gish without running on limited magic resources for boosting your weapon attacks.

not to say a gish shouldn't have magic consumable resources but i think that they should have a touch of that 'i can do this all day' power martials run on as much as the 'okay and now i'm going to drop all my resources and go big power here'

 

[Minigiant]

does this mean consumable resources? because if so i don't think that's a fully necessary aspect, at least, if the game included appropriate cantrips you could make a proper gish without running on limited magic resources for boosting your weapon attacks.

not to say a gish shouldn't have magic consumable resources but i think that they should have a touch of that 'i can do this all day' power martials run on as much as the 'okay and now i'm going to drop all my resources and go big power here'

Not neccessarily consumable.
And they not required.

To me a Gish has 2 of the 3.

1) Attacking with Int and pumping your attacks with spells.
2) Attacking with Int and those attacks have spell-like rider effects
OR
3) Pumping your attacks with spells and those attacks have spell-like rider effects

 

[Minigiant]

Doing 2 is not part of the same layer of the rules. Doing 3 could be done as long as they are cantrip level effects. Like i suggest upthread.

But...why does it matter? Why would a fighting style do the entire job of making you a gish?? Why would that ever be part of the discussion?

The point of a fighting style is to set you up from early on to fight in a given style, not to be the entirety of your build.

Because ultimately. I think if 3 is choosable then it offers the chance of having 1, 2, and 3.

And I dont think having a class with 1, 2, and 3 as avaible but 3 is optional is healthy for D&D due to multiclassing.

See: Hexblade.

 

[Weiley31]

5E has some good ideas for the Gish concept already. The Tasha Blade Singer Extra attack, the 2014 Hexblade Hex Warrior feature,and the 2024 Eldritch Knight's ability to sacrifice two of their Extra Attacks to caster (the UA version though).

The major problem is that such features are all spread out to those three classes. When Exploring Eberron came out, a lot of people on here were saying that the Forge Adept Artificer subclass was actually a pretty good looking 5E Gish.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

5E has some good ideas for the Gish concept already. The Tasha Blade Singer Extra attack, the 2014 Hexblade Hex Warrior feature,and the 2024 Eldritch Knight's ability to sacrifice two of their Extra Attacks to caster (the UA version though).

The major problem is that such features are all spread out to those three classes. When Exploring Eberron came out, a lot of people on here were saying that the Forge Adept Artificer subclass was actually a pretty good looking 5E Gish.

Again, the thread isn't about how to build a gish character. Im not out here wishing i could play a gish, it is a build i play often.

It is about a fighting style to allow the fighter to have magical attacking and feel like a basic apprentice gish even at level 1.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Because ultimately. I think if 3 is choosable then it offers the chance of having 1, 2, and 3.

And I dont think having a class with 1, 2, and 3 as avaible but 3 is optional is healthy for D&D due to multiclassing.

See: Hexblade.

The thread isnt about building a class. It is exclusively and entirely about building a fighting style that gives the fighter level one magical attacks and/or synergizes with gish builds by letting you use casting stat for weapon attacks.

 

[CreamCloud0]

What about:

When you first take the attack action on your turn with a weapon you may use your reaction to pick one cantrip that you know to take and substitute the damage type of the cantrip for the weapon as well as include any additional saves or effects the cantrip would deal on hit until the start of your next turn,
You learn one offensive cantrip from wizard, cleric or druid.

 

[Corinnguard]

If a player chose a number of combat maneuvers (either by being a Battle Master Fighter, a member of a subclass that grants access to and use of combat maneuvers or by the Martial Adept feat), could those maneuvers be considered to be a part of that player's fighting style?