The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
swordmage to me has always been the witcher-esc supernatural/monster hunter role, they combine martial and arcane powers together seamlessly to produce something that neither is separately.
I know people will say that monster hunter is the ranger's concept but i disagree, well maybe it was at some point, maybe it wasn't, but right now i see the ranger as a survivalist and an explorer, i think there's a little bit of swordmage bleeding into the current ranger but it's not what it is as a core concept.
Also, why isn't being a fighter-mage enough of a core concept niche for a class by itself?
I agree that the closest thing to a narrative identity for the warrior / arcane magician in pop culture right now is the Witcher. That is a class identity with a story... one that is one par with the rugged outdoorsman survivalist of the Ranger that protects the wilderness, and the knight in shining armor of the Paladin that swears powerful oaths to protect and defend certain things. But for WotC to make an arcane warrior half-caster like those two... I feel they won't do it until they have an identity and story for it like a Witcher. If, and only if they had that story for the class like that would they ever actually make it.
It is my belief that they will never make a fighter/mage or arcane half-caster class whose only reason for existence is mechanical. Because that serves no purpose within the game world that isn't served already by just doing Fighter/Wizard multiclasses or Eldritch Knights. Yes, there might be game mechanics that people feel are missing for certain types of fighter/mages that you would only be able to get by creating new class features for this supposed class... but WotC does not create classes just to present game mechanics-- at least not beyond the two "generic" base classes they have in the Fighter and Rogue.
Add a story and a place in the world for the 4E Swordmage, and maybe they'd add it to the game. Are Swordmages urban nobleman court mages that are sworn to protect kings and dukes? Are they monster hunters that destroy abominations and anything from the unnatural world using the magic they have stolen from those creatures? Are they bodyguards of Artificers, using the magic weaponry their patrons infuse to promote the use of magic and defend the arcane world? Any story like that would be a good first step to making the class narratively specific and thus feel like it has a place in the game. But if there's no story difference for the Swordmage than the Eldritch Knight... then why would WotC add it?
I get where this comes from, but to me, most classes at least tell the same story as their 4e counterpart, and no current 5e "gish" tells the same story as the 4e Swordmage. None feel like an arcane warrior who was trained up in a longstanding tradition of arcane martial practice.
The Hexblade comes perhaps the closest since it has access to both cantrip and leveled spells that deliver arcane effects with a weapon attack, and stuff like armor of agythis, various teleports, etc, help, which essentially means that rather than a class with multiple subclasses, you've got 1 subclass, and a half dozen or so subs for other classes that play in the same space, just like all the divine subclasses for non-divine classes.
Well, a true gish isn't even a fighter/mage, it's a class built from the ground up to be an arcane warrior. That is a conceptual and archetypal niche.
Beyond that, there are several options, but my preferred option is a semi-scholarly character who is a member of an esoteric order of highly specialized mystic warriors.
A half-caster with ritual casting and extra attack, is what that translates most naturally into mechanically, with different Esoteric Orders for subclasses at level 3, and at least 3 different Aegis options at level 1 (in the OneDnD model. In the 2014 model you'd flip those), basically mixing the chassis of the Warlock and Monk. Spellcasting at level 2, I guess, to reduce MC cheese. I'd rather have level 1 be spellcasting with ritual casting, mark, and aegis.
You also gain a mark at level 1, and the aegis you choose gives a special benefit to using that mark, with an upgrade aroung level 6-7, and again around level 11.
Aegis format: You gain a special AC calculation. I'd settle for unarmored defense, Int. This is regardless of your Aegis choice. Then, you choose between, let's say:
Aegis of Protection - Your mark causes marked enemies to treat spaces within 10ft of you as difficult terrain, and anytime an enemy within 20 feet of you that is marked by you deals damage to an ally of yours, but not to you, they take damage equal to your intelligence mod. This damage scales up with levels, and you gain a PB/LR teleport and attack reaction at level 7.
Aegis of Pursuit - Your speed increases by 5ft, you can dash as a bonus action, and creatures marked by you have to make a saving throw in order to move away from you? something like that, basically more like the 4e avenger than the 4e swordmage.
Aegis of The Elements - This is a more control focused aegis, that lets you deal elemental damage easily, and you pick an element with a long rest, and your mark gains a secondary effect based on it, and later you get a defensive effect based on the chosen element.
Aegis of The Challenge - maybe an aegis based on forcing enemies individually to focus only on you, with very duelist-focused benefits?
Esoteric Orders:
Order of The Goetic Circle - These swordmages lean more into ritual magic and calling powers to them. That might mean they get a few summon spells, or more spells that fill their body with power like spirity shroud, or it might just mean that they use rituals during rest to put self-buffs in place. Either way they get Magic Circle and Banishing Smite.
Order of The Radiant Dawn - Divine stuff, bursts of radiant damaged, etc
Order of The White Lotus - Focus on swordfighting, bonus spells are all weapon smites and personal buffs, and compelled duel.
Order of The Temple Guardian - draw inspiration from warrior-monks
In general, non-full casters get about 2-3 really meaningful abilities from level 1 and 2. Often only 2 of the abilities are really good.
Fighter - 2nd Wind, Fighting Style, Action Surge
Rogue - Expertise, Sneak Attack, Cunning Action
Monk - Unarmored Defense, Martial Arts, Ki (including abilities to spend it on).
Barbarian - Rage, Reckless Attack
Paladin - Lay on Hands, Fighting Style, Spell Casting / Divine Smite (combined here since it uses the exact same resource pool as spells)
Your Swordmage above would get the following meaningful abilities - mark, aegis, unarmored defense, spell casting, ritual casting. That's 5.
IMO, that's too much to early. Which illustrates part of the problem of converting 4e classes to 5e. 4e classes were much more front loaded and so it will take 3 levels or so for a 5e character to really start showing the same capabilties as a similar 4e character. That makes it virtually impossible to design a balanced enough 5e class that feels like a 4e class out of the gate.
level 1-2 isn't a comparison, level 3 is. So lets actually compare. (also, I didn't put anything at level 3 except the subclass, because it's an off the cuff concept draft, so one or even two of those could be level 3)
Same number as the Monk, one more than Artificer (but arti gets early half-casting and strong subclasses), 1 less than Paladin, and the Ranger was meant to have 5 and only doesn't have 5 because they messed up on both level 1 abilities.
If we are combining Spellcasting and Divine Smite (we aren't, because that's nonsense), then we can also combine the Mark and Aegis because they work directly together.
No, it doesn't. Your post illustrates part of the problem of trying to have discussions about it on these forums. People absurdly insist on taking off the cuff ideas for a class, act like it's a final draft, and then pretend that whatever problems they find with it in that context have absolutely anything to do with the discussion in general.
4e classes were much more front loaded and so it will take 3 levels or so for a 5e character to really start showing the same capabilties as a similar 4e character. That makes it virtually impossible to design a balanced enough 5e class that feels like a 4e class out of the gate.
I think that can be a perfectly fine gish model. Being a Fighter Mage who uses fighter stuff for melee fighting with a little magic and magic mostly for utility and ranged attacks is fine and a model I have used when doing a 3e/Pathfinder eldritch knight.
It is fine for the fighter/mage concept: someone who fights and then casts spells. It is not fine for the swordmage concept, which is someone who integrates martial and magical abilities.
Other than greenflame blade, booming blade, sword burst cantrips, plus eldritch smite and thirsting blade on their melee attacks with their magical greatsword, or via War magic every turn with their teleporting magical sword, or via substituting an attack each turn for one of those cantrips?
Yes, other than those guys. That's a fine start, but I want 20 levels of that stuff. I don't want to castlightning bolt, I want to turn into a lightning bolt, streaking down the battlefield and zapping everyone in my way until I reach my true target, at which time I turn back and strike them with my weapon and delivering an unhealthy dose of lightning damage at the same time.
I agree that the closest thing to a narrative identity for the warrior / arcane magician in pop culture right now is the Witcher. That is a class identity with a story... one that is one par with the rugged outdoorsman survivalist of the Ranger that protects the wilderness, and the knight in shining armor of the Paladin that swears powerful oaths to protect and defend certain things. But for WotC to make an arcane warrior half-caster like those two... I feel they won't do it until they have an identity and story for it like a Witcher. If, and only if they had that story for the class like that would they ever actually make it.
It is my belief that they will never make a fighter/mage or arcane half-caster class whose only reason for existence is mechanical. Because that serves no purpose within the game world that isn't served already by just doing Fighter/Wizard multiclasses or Eldritch Knights. Yes, there might be game mechanics that people feel are missing for certain types of fighter/mages that you would only be able to get by creating new class features for this supposed class... but WotC does not create classes just to present game mechanics-- at least not beyond the two "generic" base classes they have in the Fighter and Rogue.
Add a story and a place in the world for the 4E Swordmage, and maybe they'd add it to the game. Are Swordmages urban nobleman court mages that are sworn to protect kings and dukes? Are they monster hunters that destroy abominations and anything from the unnatural world using the magic they have stolen from those creatures? Are they bodyguards of Artificers, using the magic weaponry their patrons infuse to promote the use of magic and defend the arcane world? Any story like that would be a good first step to making the class narratively specific and thus feel like it has a place in the game. But if there's no story difference for the Swordmage than the Eldritch Knight... then why would WotC add it?
I do like the idea of swordmages either being specialist hunters of monsters and other beings which are too powerful for the average town guards to fight. Though acting as Guards of sacred and magical places works too, though doesn't come with quite as much adventuring encouragement out of the box. Or maybe going out and retrieving knowledge and items they deem too dangerous to be left available.
If you want to go full blood hunter, could even work in the 'augmented warrior' aspect of the story too.
as someone who never played 4E i'm not especially married to the ageis concept like some others who did play it are, but tell me in 5E they wouldn't be turned into 'exclusive' spells for the swordmage, that trigger on reaction, and as much as it was part of 4E marking isn't really a thing in 5E either.
as someone who never played 4E i'm not especially married to the ageis concept like some others who did play it are, but tell me in 5E they wouldn't be turned into 'exclusive' spells for the swordmage, that trigger on reaction, and as much as it was part of 4E marking isn't really a thing in 5E either.
A reaction cantrip could replicate an aegis feature well. Making it trigger on an action in a range (attacking someone other than the swordmage) instead of an individual marking mechanic would make it more like a 4e essentials aura and similar to the intercept fighting style.
I would love to have that in 5e, whether for a dedicated swordmage class or as an option for other existing warrior mage concepts.
as someone who never played 4E i'm not especially married to the ageis concept like some others who did play it are, but tell me in 5E they wouldn't be turned into 'exclusive' spells for the swordmage, that trigger on reaction, and as much as it was part of 4E marking isn't really a thing in 5E either.
