Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DreamChaser" data-source="post: 390019" data-attributes="member: 1190">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.)</blockquote>

Verification