Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mirrorrorrim" data-source="post: 9264561" data-attributes="member: 7040132">I've always love the Swordmage concept. The mystical aspects of the Book of Nine Swords were fun too. But neither were Arcane Spellcasting Warriors. They were Mystical Warriors like a monk with maneuvers.A Mystical Warrior does not need half or full spellcasting progression, if they had a robust maneuver system, a la Bo9S (or the 4E Power system). However, an Arcane Spellcasting Warrior (gish) needs some spell progression, because that is where the power is.Also, what roles do people want out of the Swordmage? A traditional &quot;tank/defender&quot; from 4e? A weapon-using &quot;dpr/striker&quot; with special mystical effects, like the Monk? Those themes need different abilities to pull off those different roles. If the design needs to be able to fulfill multiple roles, that is better suited to a Base Class. If you need only a tank, or only a striker, that can live in subclasses.To be honest, a Blade Pact Warlock could be designed to fulfill that fantasy, especially the Archfey teleporter. As long as the majority of the mystical weapon-attacks are scalable at-wills like cantrips, their spellcasting can be regulated to whatever spells help them do the job they choose at short rest pace.I am open to all kinds of designs. There is more than one way to portray a non-magical warrior (Fighter, Barb, Rogue), so there can be more than one way to play a magical warrior, whether Bard, Eldritch Knight, Arcane Archer, Hexblade/Blade Pact, Bladesinger, etc.One slight annoyance on my side, is that if the class/subclass can use any weapon, I don't like using &quot;Sword&quot; or &quot;Blade&quot; in the class name. But it's not a biggy. I just rename them in my home games.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mirrorrorrim, post: 9264561, member: 7040132"] I've always love the Swordmage concept. The mystical aspects of the Book of Nine Swords were fun too. But neither were Arcane Spellcasting Warriors. They were Mystical Warriors like a monk with maneuvers. A Mystical Warrior does not need half or full spellcasting progression, [I]if[/I] they had a robust maneuver system, a la Bo9S (or the 4E Power system). However, an Arcane Spellcasting Warrior (gish) needs some spell progression, because that is where the power is. Also, what roles do people want out of the Swordmage? A traditional "tank/defender" from 4e? A weapon-using "dpr/striker" with special mystical effects, like the Monk? Those themes need different abilities to pull off those different roles. If the design needs to be able to fulfill multiple roles, that is better suited to a Base Class. If you need only a tank, or only a striker, that can live in subclasses. To be honest, a Blade Pact Warlock could be designed to fulfill that fantasy, especially the Archfey teleporter. As long as the majority of the mystical weapon-attacks are scalable at-wills like cantrips, their spellcasting can be regulated to whatever spells help them do the job they choose at short rest pace. I am open to all kinds of designs. There is more than one way to portray a non-magical warrior (Fighter, Barb, Rogue), so there can be more than one way to play a magical warrior, whether Bard, Eldritch Knight, Arcane Archer, Hexblade/Blade Pact, Bladesinger, etc. One slight annoyance on my side, is that if the class/subclass can use any weapon, I don't like using "Sword" or "Blade" in the class name. But it's not a biggy. I just rename them in my home games. [/QUOTE]

Verification