Arcane Warrior Core Class

[DreamChaser]

my question is, what do they give up?

they get bonus combat feats, just like a fighter and have as many as a 10th level fighter would have. they have spells like a 12th (at least) level sorcerer, arcane spell failure reduction, the exact BAB that a 10/10 would have.

it appears to me as nothing more than the product of a desire to play a "fighter mage" without having to give up too much of either one.

That was my point.
And according to the basic ideas of the game, a 10/10 character should be around as powerful as any 20th level character, just not in single ways.

DC

 

[Jeph]

What do they give up?
Everything that's not a buff. Every single spell they get is designed to make them better at combat; they don't get a single fireball, lightning bolt, or even shout.

EDIT: oh yeah, and Weapon Specialization.

 

[Creamsteak]

What do they give up?
Everything that's not a buff. Every single spell they get is designed to make them better at combat; they don't get a single fireball, lightning bolt, or even shout.

EDIT: oh yeah, and Weapon Specialization.

Saddly, this is my last post before going to bed but:

Is its HD reduced?
Is its caster level reduced?
Is its BAB reduced?
Is its spell list reduced?
Is its spells per day reduced?

Basically, I think a d6, caster level goes up normally, 3/4 BAB, short spell list (you've got that right?), and less spells per day are all pre-requisites to doing this. Also, reducing bonus feats to something slower than the psi-war wouldn't be a bad idea.

You might think this kills the class... but:

HP for Ftr = 5
HP for Wiz = 2
HP should = 3 (always round down)

BAB Ftr = 1
BAB Wiz = 1/2
BAB should = 3/4 or 2/3

Shortened list (because its spontaneous first of all, second of all because this character is going to gain full caster level, so he should have less spells per day than a sorcerer would).

Reducing the bonus feats because 1: I think this character should have a broad selection of bonus feats that includes meta-magic, and 2: this character should have access to variants of the psionic feats that use arcane energy instead.

just my coppers.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

You're right. The proposals you're making kill the class.

A 1/1 Fighter/wizard progression would get the following

d7 effective hit dice--you give d6
3/4 BAB--you think this is generous and propose a 2/3 BAB
The full wizard spell list (including scroll and wand access)--here that's reduced mainly to buffs
9 bonus feats (6 fighter, 3 wizard)--this one gets 6 and you think that's too many.
Weapon specialization--the arcane warrior doesn't
A familiar--the arcane warrior doesn't
The option to specialize in a school of magic--the arcane warrior doesn't
Heavy Armor proficiency--the arcane warrior doesn't
The flexibility have the multiclass not be 1/1--the arcane warrior doesn't.

The fighter/wizard actually gets more spells per day because of the ability to specialize in a school--and even a specialist has a larger spell list than the Arcane Warrior.

The arcane warrior gets three things the fighter/wizard doesn't:
Spontaneous casting (with low number of spells known, this isn't too much of an advantage)
Ignore arcane spell failure--this is a big advantage but probably not worth taking the class if it's powered down any further.
Access to 6th level spells (of course the fighter/wizard gets this if he multiclasses intelligently).

The argument that a 10/10 multiclass should be as powerful as a single classed 20th level character has a certain attraction to it but any reasonable analysis of a character's capabilities will demonstrate that this is not true. A 20th level character is not necessarily equal to any other 20th level character. To demonstrate the absurdity of the principle involved, consider a cleric 2/druid 2/bard 2/rogue 2/wizard 6/sorceror 6. Is such a character the equal of a 20th level wizard? Personally, I suspect that such a character isn't even the equal of a 9th level wizard in power.

Although not as extreme, 1/1 multiclassing with wizard is a sure way for any class to neuter its usefulness. Fighter/wizard is a particularly difficult multiclass to pull off since the fighter's combat abilities depend upon hit points, attack bonus, and feats and wizard progression neuters all three of those. Fighter x/Wizard or sorceror 1 or 2 is a fairly common multiclass because it gives a little flexibility (and a toad familiar and the shield spell) to the fighter. Wizard x/Fighter 1 or 2 is also occasionally chosen since the extra feats and hit points can make a difference for a low level character or a specific concept. The 1/1 progression sacrifices much more fighting ability than the fighter x/wizard 1 or 2 but doesn't get nearly enough spellpower to match the fighter 1 or 2/wizard x multiclass.

Even more significantly, characters need to be compared in the environment they will most likely find themselves--the environment of a party. While Fighter 1 or 2/wizard x has much to commend itself as a solo class or a member of a duo, the lack of a single classed wizard's high level firepower or a single classed fighter's hitting power means that it is much less effective in a party. The 1/1 fighter/wizard progression may possibly be favorably compared to the single classed fighter for a solo or duo environment but lacks the both the spellpower and the hitting power to be effective in either a front line or a spellcasting role in a balanced party. (To make matters worse, even the few buffs the 1/1 progression fighter/wizard would get by benefit of his multiclassing are probably available to the single classed fighter anyway through the party's cleric and wizard so the only things he has over the single classed fighter are redundant).

Therefore, it's my considered opinion that any arcane warrior class needs to be better than a 1/1 fighter/wizard progression. Otherwise, it will be too weak.

Is its HD reduced?
Is its caster level reduced?
Is its BAB reduced?
Is its spell list reduced?
Is its spells per day reduced?

Basically, I think a d6, caster level goes up normally, 3/4 BAB, short spell list (you've got that right?), and less spells per day are all pre-requisites to doing this. Also, reducing bonus feats to something slower than the psi-war wouldn't be a bad idea.

You might think this kills the class... but:

HP for Ftr = 5
HP for Wiz = 2
HP should = 3 (always round down)

BAB Ftr = 1
BAB Wiz = 1/2
BAB should = 3/4 or 2/3

Shortened list (because its spontaneous first of all, second of all because this character is going to gain full caster level, so he should have less spells per day than a sorcerer would).

Reducing the bonus feats because 1: I think this character should have a broad selection of bonus feats that includes meta-magic, and 2: this character should have access to variants of the psionic feats that use arcane energy instead.

 

[DreamChaser]

I see some of your points. One thing I think you need to revamp in your argument is the comparison of this class to the wizard. This class is best compared to the sorcerer.

Which reduces the feats and changes the number of spells dynamic.

I also wonder about your logic in saying that multiclassed characters are not the equal of single class characters and then in the same breath talk about all the ways that a 10/10 fighter/wizard is more powerful than this single class. With everything that is being given up, what would be the point in taking this class? Sixth level spells can't be the whole reason (and this could be done by going 9/11 f/w or 8/12 f/s). Less armor, fewer feats, fewer options.

If I were making an "arcane warrior" type character, I would ask my DM if we could develop some feats that would build upon Combat Casting to give some arcane spell failure relief (of course I would probably use Mage Armor and bracers of armor more often) and multiclass as a Sorcerer/Fighter or even Sorcerer/Monk (since IMC there is no multiclass restriction on monks).

I guess my big frustration with this as a core class is that it is ripping off two concepts that already exist just for the sake of some perceived benefits and rule modifiations (why is it that the same arcane spell that is hampered by armor for the sorcerer is not hampered for the arcane warrior?). Maybe as a PrC it wouldn't seem like such a rip off, but as a core class I think it is unnecessary.

JMHO.
DC
(edited for those darn typos. I bet there are still tons there.)

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Actually, I think the best argument against this class is probably the sorceror/wizard thing. Why should sorcerors have an arcane warrior but not wizards? Your criticism of this concept as a core class (rather than a set of arcane spell failure reducing feats or a prestige class) may also be valid. I was addressing my comments to how to make the class balanced not whether or not it was a good idea in the first place.

As for my logic in discussing multiclassed characters vis a vis single classed ones, I was attempting to demonstrate that Creamsteak's proposal to power down the class was unnecessary and, if anything, it needs to be powered up a little bit.

I see some of your points. One thing I think you need to revamp in your argument is the comparison of this class to the wizard. This class is best compared to the sorcerer.

Which reduces the feats and changes the number of spells dynamic.

I also wonder about your logic in saying that multiclassed characters are not the equal of single class characters and then in the same breath talk about all the ways that a 10/10 fighter/wizard is more powerful than this single class. With everything that is being given up, what would be the point in taking this class? Sixth level spells can't be the whole reason (and this could be done by going 9/11 f/w or 8/12 f/s). Less armor, fewer feats, fewer options.

If I were making an "arcane warrior" type character, I would ask my DM if we could develop some feats that would build upon Combat Casting to give some arcane spell failure relief (of course I would probably use Mage Armor and bracers of armor more often) and multiclass as a Sorcerer/Fighter or even Sorcerer/Monk (since IMC there is no multiclass restriction on monks).

I guess my big frustration with this as a core class is that it is ripping off two concepts that already exist just for the sake of some perceived benefits and rule modifiations (why is it that the same arcane spell that is hampered by armor for the sorcerer is not hampered for the arcane warrior?). Maybe as a PrC it wouldn't seem like such a rip off, but as a core class I think it is unnecessary.

JMHO.
DC
(edited for those darn typos. I bet there are still tons there.)

 

[Aust Diamondew]

I concur with Dreamchaser,

This is what the folks at wotc who invented multiclassing intended it to be used for. This is just like the pychic warrior, if you want psionics and combat prowess MULTI CLASS.

In this case to be a spell caster who is good at combat be a ftr/sor, a ftr/wiz, a brb/sor etc. Then take the spell sword prc. You dont need to make an entirely new character class, it's like saying, 'I want my character to be able to rage and sneak attack so I'll make up an entirely new class in order to do that.' Just plain silly in my opinion.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

The Psi warrior is actually significantly different than a psion/fighter multiclass because of the psionic feats. A psi warrior can select psionic feats as bonus feats--the fighter/psion would get bonus feats but couldn't use them for psionic feats.

Consequently there's a qualitative difference between a psi-warrior and a fighter/psion multiclass.

In the case of this arcane warrior class, there's not much of a qualitative difference between a fighter/sorceror who chose buffing spells and the arcane warrior. There is a qualitative difference however, because the arcane warrior is a slightly better class: It gets a half hit point more per level and can get several 6th level spells while retaining a +15 BAB. The Fighter/sorceror could get 1 6th level spell by going fighter 8/sorceror 12 but would then have a +14 BAB. Given that, IMHO, a 1/1 fighter/sorceror multiclass is too weak, I think that the added strength of this core class is sufficient reason for it to exist. If you want what is almost a 1/1 fighter/sorceror progression to be viable, it's either a create new core class or a prestige class that's significantly better than the spellsword. (It's worth noting that there are almost no prestige classes which it could advantageously take without giving up spell advancement seeing as only Sacred Exorcist gives even an equivalent hit die and attack bonus with full spell progression and since Arcane Warriors don't get Dismissal on their spell lists, they can't become Sacred Exorcists).

What's unfortunate, however, is that in this case, the difference is still merely quantitative.

 

[DreamChaser]

The Psi warrior is actually significantly different than a psion/fighter multiclass because of the psionic feats. A psi warrior can select psionic feats as bonus feats--the fighter/psion would get bonus feats but couldn't use them for psionic feats.

Consequently there's a qualitative difference between a psi-warrior and a fighter/psion multiclass.

Definitely. I agree with this. But IMO there is a simpler solution than another class: rule 0 that a fighter that multiclasses with psion can add the combat related Psionic feats to his list for bonus feat options. The actual power is not increased since he gains the same number of feats as a fighter multiclassed with any other class, he just gains more options.

-DC