D&D 5E Concepts for an arcane half-caster/gish

[77IM]

I'll add a couple to this list:

Vanguard

Luminary

Both carry a connotation of "elite", and Vanguard also essentially means "leading from the front" - something that can definitely be attributed to arcane warriors.

The problem, like with many other gish concepts and names, is that they are also lacking in real-world inspiration of any sort. Granted, so is "fighter", but it sort of has to be.

These are great names too. I especially like "Vanguard" because it has a connotation from Mass Effect -- the fighter/mage hybrid in that game was the Vanguard, and their signature ability was a sort of charge/teleport reminiscent of the swordmage's Aegis ability (from 4E). They "led from the front" in the sense that they could close to melee rapidly because of their biotics.

"Luminary" is a pretty cool word too -- I'd put it in the same category as "Magus" or "Thaumaturge" in that it sounds more magical than warriory.

I'll also join the growing chorus that Argonaut isn't a great name for a base class. I'll generalize this and say that anything which is a proper noun is probably not a great concept for a base class. It might work for a subclass, though. "Myrmidon" is also a cool word for a subclass.

Now I am thinking about some sort "Epic Hero" class with subclasses from mythology like "Argonaut," "Myrmidon," "Amazon," "Berserker," etc.

 

[77IM]

"Quaestor" has an etymology similar to "quest" and might be a good name for a base class that could include "Argonaut" as a subclass. In fact the subclasses could be based around what sort of quest you are on: Quest for Power, Quest for Vengeance, Quest for Knowledge, Quest for Love, etc.

 

[Zardnaar]

Myrmidon was a fighter kit in 2E.p

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Myrmidon was a fighter kit in 2E.p

For that matter, Hexblade was the arcane equivalent to the Paladin, back in 3E. Then the Warlock got ahold of it, for no good reason, and now the Hexblade is some kind of weird mostly-spellcasting class.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I kinda like the greco-roman myth vibe of some ideas on this thread. I think that, maybe, a Gish could be more a barbarian-sorcerer than a fighter-mage. Have them use choose a mythic origin, like sorcerer. Have them get features that allows for superhuman feats like the barbarian. Something like a class that could represent a character like Hercules, Gilgamesh, Beowulf, Jason, the Amazons; part mythical being, part human, on a quest to seek a place in the world, blending martial might and innate sorcereous powers not because they spent time learning how to balance both, but because they know how. I think its a thematic niche that could be filled by the Gish.

Maybe Seeker? Scion?

 

[aco175]

The Warcana or Warriors- Arcane

I could see a power where they give up a spell slot to gain a melee power. Something along the lines of burning off a spell slot to gain an extra attack or deal elemental damage. At low levels it could allow him to deal normal damage to creatures with resistance.

 

[Zardnaar]

I kinda like the greco-roman myth vibe of some ideas on this thread. I think that, maybe, a Gish could be more a barbarian-sorcerer than a fighter-mage. Have them use choose a mythic origin, like sorcerer. Have them get features that allows for superhuman feats like the barbarian. Something like a class that could represent a character like Hercules, Gilgamesh, Beowulf, Jason, the Amazons; part mythical being, part human, on a quest to seek a place in the world, blending martial might and innate sorcereous powers not because they spent time learning how to balance both, but because they know how. I think its a thematic niche that could be filled by the Gish.

Maybe Seeker? Scion?

Been done in 3.0 they called it the rage mage.

 

[Einlanzer0]

These are great names too. I especially like "Vanguard" because it has a connotation from Mass Effect -- the fighter/mage hybrid in that game was the Vanguard, and their signature ability was a sort of charge/teleport reminiscent of the swordmage's Aegis ability (from 4E). They "led from the front" in the sense that they could close to melee rapidly because of their biotics.

"Luminary" is a pretty cool word too -- I'd put it in the same category as "Magus" or "Thaumaturge" in that it sounds more magical than warriory.

I'll also join the growing chorus that Argonaut isn't a great name for a base class. I'll generalize this and say that anything which is a proper noun is probably not a great concept for a base class. It might work for a subclass, though. "Myrmidon" is also a cool word for a subclass.

Now I am thinking about some sort "Epic Hero" class with subclasses from mythology like "Argonaut," "Myrmidon," "Amazon," "Berserker," etc.

Argonaut is only a proper noun in the context of the Jason myth.

2. also argonaut A person who is engaged in a dangerous but rewarding quest; an adventurer.

also: see this - http://theargonauts.com/about/what-is-an-argonaut/

I'm telling you - people are dismissing this too quickly due to pre-established ideas about the word argonaut and how the fighter-mage has been previously designed. Try to dump all of that and think in a purer way about it. The term argonaut is easily applicable in a D&D world. The only question becomes, what concept do you build around it? It's basically wide open for painting. My take on it is that they are professional adventurers who have training in everything not divine in nature - meaning some proficiency with blade, bow, spell, and tools. This easily translates into an arcane half-caster warrior with different subclasses granting different types of specialization themed around their venturing background.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

The reason that Paladin has stuck around while no fighter-mage class has is entirely because the paladin is build off of a really inspired concept, while fighter/mages never have been. This is the crux of what I'm trying to discuss here, and the majority of posters in this thread are simply not getting it. They are instead understandably encountering cognitive dissonance in trying to link the term Argonaut to their established ideas of what a fighter-mage class looks like (i.e. 4e's swordmage), which is completely missing the point. Or, rather, it's demonstrating the point I'm trying to make.

I can't speak for everyone here, but I get what you're trying to do. I've even suggested a name and another place you can look for inspiration on this concept you have. I'm not telling you "argonaut" is a bad name for my idea of a fighter-mage; I'm trying to tell you it's a bad name for your idea of a fighter-mage. The name you choose is important for communicating your idea, and "argonaut" does not do that well. That is my real, honest, informed and considered constructive criticism, offered in the spirit of helping you write a better class. If your response to criticism like this is dismissal and insults, that attitude is going to be a major obstacle for your own creative process.

Like I said, I've already suggested the name "factotum". You yourself have also used a word to describe the class that would be a perfectly fine name for it: "venturer". And if you really, really want to take a name from a historical band of elite warriors in analogy to the paladin, I might recommend "companion" after the followers of Alexander -- they were professional soldiers, rather than an all-star team of heroes, and the name's got "company" right in there, with nothing about sailing or some ship called the Argo.

Or you could keep insisting that everyone who tells you the name "argonaut" doesn't make sense is just stupid and/or malicious. Up to you.

 

[Einlanzer0]

I can't speak for everyone here, but I get what you're trying to do. I've even suggested a name and another place you can look for inspiration on this concept you have. I'm not telling you "argonaut" is a bad name for my idea of a fighter-mage; I'm trying to tell you it's a bad name for your idea of a fighter-mage. The name you choose is important for communicating your idea, and "argonaut" does not do that well. That is my real, honest, informed and considered constructive criticism, offered in the spirit of helping you write a better class. If your response to criticism like this is dismissal and insults, that attitude is going to be a major obstacle for your own creative process.

Like I said, I've already suggested the name "factotum". You yourself have also used a word to describe the class that would be a perfectly fine name for it: "venturer". And if you really, really want to take a name from a historical band of elite warriors in analogy to the paladin, I might recommend "companion" after the followers of Alexander -- they were professional soldiers, rather than an all-star team of heroes, and the name's got "company" right in there, with nothing about sailing or some ship called the Argo.

Or you could keep insisting that everyone who tells you the name "argonaut" doesn't make sense is just stupid and/or malicious. Up to you.

Nothing in this post makes any sense. Please explain to me why factotum, a word that means employee makes more sense than argonaut - a word that literally means adventurer, in describing a class that is conceptualized as a professional adventurer. Or any of the other words, for that matter. That's just a silly, malformed argument all the way through.

So, yeah, I'll go on not seeing the logic in the naysaying posts and continuing to argue the same point I've made all along.