I HATE the term GISH

[Perun]

I don't know about "must". Are you suggesting that it wasn't used at all after first appearing in first edition Fiend Folio in 1981, and then skyrocketing to prominence only when 3e was released?

I doubt that theory. Unless of course the term "gish" was a prominent term used for describing ftr/wiz PCs when 3e was launched. Which I don't remember at all.

I think it's a combination of two factors:

1) Before 3e, only a small (teeny-tiny?) part of the gaming community was present on-line, meaning that most times a fighter/mage combination was mentioned it was either in person or by actually writing it on paper. When talking, saying fighter/mage isn't all that more difficult than saying gish, and when writing, I suppose most people used the ("official") F/M abbreviation

2) Earlier versions of (A)D&D had very limited multiclass combinations, and (IIRC) half-elves (only) could multiclass as ranger/mages. Other than that fighter was the only class of the warrior group allowed to multiclass, and the only "arcanists" were mages and specialist wizards (well, bard was an arcanist, too, but I can't remember them being allowed in any multiclass combinations -- but then again, it's been awhile since I really looked at my 2e stuff).

D&D 3e radically expanded the multiclass options, allowing for every possible combination. And it's likely the "community" felt the need for one word to describe all those warrior type/arcanist multiclass combinations. Unfortunately, they chose gish

I still call all those combinations fighter/mage, regardless of their actuall components.

Also, is bard a gish by default?

 

[Maggan]

D&D 3e radically expanded the multiclass options, allowing for every possible combination. And it's likely the "community" felt the need for one word to describe all those warrior type/arcanist multiclass combinations. Unfortunately, they chose gish

Sounds plausible. But then I have to ask any of those who remember better than me.

Did anyone hear this used before 3e?

M

 

[Gez]

Also, is bard a gish by default?

No, a bard is a "gimp."

I think being able to perform some real war magic (read: flashy evocations) is necessary to be a proper F/M. Bards are too subtle. In fact, they're neither fighters nor mages. I guess it could make them "tvfu" -- the rot13 of "gish", a moniker that would be even more dorky and obscure than its source.

 

[glass]

Since we are talking about Githyanki here then why "gish" instead of the more logical "gith"

Because every word in the gith language has to be derived from the name of the race? That's going to be some awfully samey vocab!

EDIT: Not to mention that 'gith' has at least three (related) meanings already -githyanki and githzerai collectively, the race that those cam from before they divided, and (with a capital letter) the hero who led them to freedom after which the races are named.


glass.

 

[glass]

This is who comes to mind for me. You know, Scully's replacement?

I recently watched the last couple of seasons of The West Wing on DVD, and I spent half the time trying to figur out wher I had seen her before. Felt like such an idiot when I realised.


glass.

 

[glass]

(well, bard was an arcanist, too, but I can't remember them being allowed in any multiclass combinations -- but then again, it's been awhile since I really looked at my 2e stuff).

The 2e version of the bard couldn't multiclass per the PHB, but the Complete Bard's Handbook intorduced multiclassing for bards ...with the allowable combinations varying by kit.

The 1e version sorta had multiclassing built in, I believe, but I'm not all that familiar with 1e so I'm not sure exactly how it works.


glass.

 

[Perun]

The 2e version of the bard couldn't multiclass per the PHB, but the Complete Bard's Handbook intorduced multiclassing for bards ...with the allowable combinations varying by kit.

Right! Thanks!

The 1e version sorta had multiclassing built in, I believe, but I'm not all that familiar with 1e so I'm not sure exactly how it works.

You had to take X (9?) levels in thief, then another Y (5?) levels in fighter, and then you'd go with druid, only at that point, you'd actually become a bard. Or something like that. It's been awhile...

Regards.

 

[Henry]

Right! Thanks!



You had to take X (9?) levels in thief, then another Y (5?) levels in fighter, and then you'd go with druid, only at that point, you'd actually become a bard. Or something like that. It's been awhile...

Regards.

5 to 7 levels in Fighter, 6 to 9 levels of Thief, then Re-start as a Druid, and BAM! You're a Bard. But no more or less than that, and it had to be in that order.

 

[ohGr]

FWIW, the prominence of use of the term gish to describe any generic fighter/mage type is very much a 3E thing. With the lack of a search option on the Wizards boards, i can't really find the thread, but several years ago a poster (i forget whom) started a thread on the Character Optimization forum in which he explained the term and its history and meaning in D&D and proposed it become the de facto term for fighter/mages. I don't recall the general discourse of the thread, but it's pretty clear what the effective outcome was.

 

[charlesatan]

Personally I think it came into prominence when 3.5 came about and Dragon/Dungeon had released their Incursion arc which had the Githyanki invading the material plane. It was in Dungeon that I first saw the term Gish and when I saw it at the boards, understood what it meant.