D&D 5E (2014) New Class Brainstorming. Magekinght.

[Ancalagon]

The system I mentioned:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_Warriors

 

[Jester David]

I am sorry but that just not always true. Some people DO in fact choose a class because it is mechanically good then come up with a story of an epic X to support it. You working on the assumption that all players are story player first, but while I see players that choose story and support with mechanics, I also see players who choose mechanics and support with story, On top of those I have also seen players pick a party job the support it with mechanics&story. None are wrong, they are just different types of play. We have 5 players in our group and all types are represented our group alone.
We have one "power gamer" who always try to be some awesome DPR build but does little to nothing out side of combat because he doesn't care, we have a player that wants a great story build but will not except anything with out some skill talent which makes them mechanically exceptional to support a "Justifiable arrogance" because he can support that arrogance in game by being actually good at something consistently, I picked a role (scout) then a less optimal class (because I like to go sub-optimal but make it still more than good because its the road less traveled and unique) the back it up with story, We have one player that's just says here is a class I have not played lets see how this goes, and we have a player that is all story based and did not care if the character worked mechanically or had a role he just wanted to be a "scoundrel rogue" and basically picked all stats and skills based on being smart and likable... more "Face" than actual rogue. The players who like combat but don't like story don't even use out of combat skill if they have them or want then, generally considering them class waste...

... And guess what... even with all these "cardinal sins" we play and have a great time with virtually no player problems. Most of the times when we have issues its between our story GM and player who actually know and care about the rules more than he does..... Still not really a big problem. Been playing for years and having fun.

So if Zardnaar want a mechanically stronger build as his priority. Their is nothing wrong with that. Its just his play style.

Does the power gamer play the same character over and over? Because there is a strongest build. If not... maybe there is other reasons they make a character.
I have a power gamer in my group as well, and they are dedicated to role-playing their character’s concept. It’s not an either-or. He still looks for the story.

There are people who do just play D&D like a board game. That’s sad because it isn’t a board game. It’s roleplaying game. They are doing it wrong.
Building a character that is only good at fighting is like building a character only based around RPing. You’re going to be bored a lot of the time, and not really contributing to the game.

Combat is just a third of the game. A new class really has to look beyond that. The entire spectrum of the game. Building a class based entirely on mechanics and no story hook is boring AF.


Plus... you still need those strong mechanics. And the BEST way to make a class’ mechanics is being inspired by a story. You think about what the archetype should do and add mechanics that do that.

I’d argue the lack of story is why design is going so slow. As a gish, the class only needs to do two things: fight and cast spells. Done. Covered. But almost a dozen other class features are needed and only one has really been brought up, and that’s stolen from another class (the eldritch knight) and probably shouldn’t be used.

 

[Blue]

The PHB doesn't really have any good gish options IMHO. ... The Eldritch Knight takes a long time to come online/isn't that good and trips over its war mage ability at level 11 ...

So stripping out all of the class exclusive bits this is the basic half caster warrior template 5E uses.

I think you may be under-appreciating the difference between 1/2 ("3/6th") and 1/3 ("2/6th") casting advancement - it's only 1 casting level every 6 class levels difference. At the levels campaigns are actually played, that's going to make little difference.

If you want to make a non-full-caster gish but find 1/3 casting too slow, I suggest you build your own advancement or put it really around features.

 

[Jester David]

Rangers , Paladins and fighters don't get too much at level 1. The combat casting thing can wait to level 2 or 3. Probably give it some cantrips lvl 1.


Basically don't want to design a dip class. As I said would rather have something functional than cute.

But they do get iconic signature abilities: favoured enemy and lay on hands.
Classes need something iconic at level one. The ranger’s level 1 abilities being exploratory and a ribbon are a big reason the class is not liked.


Even if the ability starts off weak and gets usable later (like bardic inspiration), it’s still a reason to take that class at first level.

Instead of smiting a magical aegis ability reducing damage could be a thing. The attack, hit cast spell thing might be better off on a subclass.

Instead of extra damage vs fiends and undead you get bonus reduction vs spells.

That’s a very tanky/ defensive power. Anything relegated to a role should probably be a subclass.
But regardless of role, this is a class that relies on weapons, and a little extra magical damage might be nice.

It could be a choice, like fighting style. Pick defense or offense, and later you get the other.

Alternatively, we could take a page from the swordmage and give him a form of unarmoured defence at level 1, that is basically casting a mage aroumour variant after a long rest. Equivalent of light armour.
This could be improved as the character levels. Or bumped via a tanky subclass to be closer to heavy.

 

[Jester David]

Looking at what I mused earlier and pulling from swordmage flavour, this class could be the guy in no armour or light armour that fights with a sword and magic but is protected by an inherent mage armour effect. Calling that "Aegis". That's a good solid level 1 feature as it sounds cool and invokes feelings of defence while also sounding arcane. IIRC the swordmage has a similarly named power.

Off the top of my head, I'd say that you can activate your aegis after a long rest through 1 minute of meditation, surrounding yourself with a light magical aura of protection that lasts for twelve hours. While your aegis is active, so long as you are wearing light armour or are unarmoured, you add your Proficiency bonus to your Armour Class.
And at higher levels, the Aegis could be augmented with other effects.

In addition to Aegis, the class maybe needs a small ribbon. Perhaps a couple small cantrips. Non-combat ones like prestidigitation. Make blade ward as well.

I still like the idea of the class imbuing their weapon (or shield) with magic. This might be a buff that lasts for 1 minute but recharges after a long rest. But you can burn a spell slot to activate it again, or augment the effect. Which allows it to scale nicely.
As this should balance with a 1st level spell (so a 1st level spell slot can recharge it), we can look at the wizard's Arcane Recovery as a guide for how many uses this should get. Which keeps the class in line with a multiclass fighter/wizard. Personally, I'd try and balance this class against a character using the build rotation of an eldritch knight fighter, wizard, fighter, fighter. So 1/4 wizard but 1/2 caster. That means the class might get a second free usage at level 14.

This would make the class look like:

[TABLE="width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD]Level[/TD]
[TD]PB[/TD]
[TD]Features[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]Aegis, Cantrips[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]Fighting Style, Imbue Magic (one use), Spellcasting[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]Subclass[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]ASI[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD]Extra attack[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD]ASI[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]12[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD]ASI[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]13[/TD]
[TD]+5[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]14[/TD]
[TD]+5[/TD]
[TD]Imbue Magic (two use)[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[Zardnaar]

Looking at what I mused earlier and pulling from swordmage flavour, this class could be the guy in no armour or light armour that fights with a sword and magic but is protected by an inherent mage armour effect. Calling that "Aegis". That's a good solid level 1 feature as it sounds cool and invokes feelings of defence while also sounding arcane. IIRC the swordmage has a similarly named power.

Off the top of my head, I'd say that you can activate your aegis after a long rest through 1 minute of meditation, surrounding yourself with a light magical aura of protection that lasts for twelve hours. While your aegis is active, so long as you are wearing light armour or are unarmoured, you add your Proficiency bonus to your Armour Class.
And at higher levels, the Aegis could be augmented with other effects.

In addition to Aegis, the class maybe needs a small ribbon. Perhaps a couple small cantrips. Non-combat ones like prestidigitation. Make blade ward as well.

I still like the idea of the class imbuing their weapon (or shield) with magic. This might be a buff that lasts for 1 minute but recharges after a long rest. But you can burn a spell slot to activate it again, or augment the effect. Which allows it to scale nicely.
As this should balance with a 1st level spell (so a 1st level spell slot can recharge it), we can look at the wizard's Arcane Recovery as a guide for how many uses this should get. Which keeps the class in line with a multiclass fighter/wizard. Personally, I'd try and balance this class against a character using the build rotation of an eldritch knight fighter, wizard, fighter, fighter. So 1/4 wizard but 1/2 caster. That means the class might get a second free usage at level 14.

This would make the class look like:

[TABLE="width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD]Level[/TD]
[TD]PB[/TD]
[TD]Features[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]Aegis, Cantrips[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]Fighting Style, Imbue Magic (one use), Spellcasting[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]Subclass[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]ASI[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD]Extra attack[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD]ASI[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]12[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD]ASI[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]13[/TD]
[TD]+5[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]14[/TD]
[TD]+5[/TD]
[TD]Imbue Magic (two use)[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

I am planning n an aegis type ability but there will be a sword mage subclass. Instead of hands free casting you could just give it +2 AC if it has a spare hand, the 4E +1 AC aegis part is not needed due to getting a fighting style at level 2 which can grant +1 AC.

Whats the Aergic going to do though, short rest reactive ability hat reduces damage similar to the fighters second wind ability (1d10+1/level)? The Aegis would also discourage level dipping as its tied to levels in the Mageknight. I don't want to to front load it. Imbue magic could be renamed perhaps and include the hand free casting thing and work in some sort of weapon ability even if its 1d6 force damage and your weapon is treated as magical. That might be a level 6 ability perhaps looking at other examples of weapons being treated as magical. Sacrificing spell slots to enhance the weapon while not quite a smite could be effective and looking at the Kensei for how to scale it though.

[TABLE="class: cms_table, width: 500"]
[TR]
[TD]Level[/TD]
[TD]PB[/TD]
[TD]Features[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]Aegis, Cantrips[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]Fighting Style, Imbue Magic (one use), Spellcasting[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]Subclass[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]+2[/TD]
[TD]ASI[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD]Extra attack[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD]something sexy ASI/aura equivalent)[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD]subclass[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]+3[/TD]
[TD]ASI[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]12[/TD]
[TD]+4[/TD]
[TD]ASI[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]13[/TD]
[TD]+5[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]14[/TD]
[TD]+5[/TD]
[TD]Imbue Magic (two use)[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[ClaytonCross]

Does the power gamer play the same character over and over? Because there is a strongest build. If not... maybe there is other reasons they make a character.
I have a power gamer in my group as well, and they are dedicated to role-playing their character’s concept. It’s not an either-or. He still looks for the story.

No because he is always trying to make a more powerful character. Its not really a story thinking, the GM "Makes him" add some sort of story element. Also, our Powerful story player who likes playing the knowledgeable powerful character type pretty much always plays a Wizard built optimally. That player is dedicated to character archetype the way the other is dedicated to trying to do as much DPR as he can. As such when someone else plays "wizard" and its not an optimal supper knowledgeable build played by someone who actually know D&D and playing the wizard for large impact non-DPR spell, he gets annoyed. It archetype specific power gaming in a way because he believes to be successful Wizard you need to be brilliant do things like hold person instead of firebolt spam. Generally, though the other players don't power game for damage so we don't conflict with the Power gamer and as long as we don't play a wizard we don't conflict with the "powerful story player" which is fine because most of actually prefer other casters. I for example, prefer sorcerers to wizards because I like subtle spell and quickened spell ALOT.

There are people who do just play D&D like a board game. That’s sad because it isn’t a board game. It’s roleplaying game. They are doing it wrong.
Building a character that is only good at fighting is like building a character only based around RPing. You’re going to be bored a lot of the time, and not really contributing to the game.

Combat is just a third of the game. A new class really has to look beyond that. The entire spectrum of the game. Building a class based entirely on mechanics and no story hook is boring AF.

I completely disagree. WE have fun at the table, the players treating it like a board game are happy to listen to the roleplay that drives the story, they just aren't interested in digging into that part...so they play the silent stoic characters which still have their place. As we roleplay, we still used them to intimidate, they still get mission of their own and are tied to events because the GM ties them too it. They also do get invested into it the story and character because of the tie in, they just rely on the face 99% of the time when its time to converse. We still ask them their opinions and they still make story arch choices, they just don't actively seek them. So I would see how have a full group of these would be a problem but since we only have 1-3 our of group of 3-7 players depending on who makes it, its not an issue. The 3 that roleplay the least (with 1 exception, who is actually the the powergamer) are the ones who tend to miss more sessions due to other obligations. So It could be the missing story that makes them focus on the strategic battle part of the game more. I would say that our powergamer, loves character design and finding an ounce more damage so to him D&D is has primarily two parts, designing then tweaking design for more damage and dropping bodies with them.


I do agree for me the game has 3 sides of concept building, story role play, and combat.

Plus... you still need those strong mechanics. And the BEST way to make a class’ mechanics is being inspired by a story. You think about what the archetype should do and add mechanics that do that.

I’d argue the lack of story is why design is going so slow. As a gish, the class only needs to do two things: fight and cast spells. Done. Covered. But almost a dozen other class features are needed and only one has really been brought up, and that’s stolen from another class (the eldritch knight) and probably shouldn’t be used.

I will have agree with you and have disagree with you here. I believe, what the OP is trying to achieve could be done by simply multi-classing or even playing a specific sorcerer build. So why does the OP want it to be a single class design? Well I see two possible reason.

1. They or their GM does not like or allow mulit-class characters so they would be relegated to the existing Eldritch Knight, Pact of the Blade Hexblade Warlock, Valor Bard, etc builds but consider them "wasteful" and under powered. This is actually someone who wants story concept first because they are choosing a concept then want it to be powerful. Much like the "Powerful Wizard" concept player in my group. In this case, they do have a story point of I want to you magic to do as much damage in melee combat as possible. The not excepting paladins that already do this is a confirmation in my mind that the OP is this type of player. They are avoiding the Paladin religious connotation for an arcane one which is not significant from a design prospective. But when the "you should make an arcane Paladin subclass" came up the OP was not happy with that ether ...because the character concept and recognition of that story concept is still there. Taking "smite" in another form means the player is happy with the paladin design but wants the arcane non-religions based class and intellect and the caster stat. Again, very much like my "Powerful Wizard player" how IRL is very anti religion and science aka knowledge it power... This is being transferred to character choices in the game as they still maintain IRL beliefs while playing their characters instead of a complete separation. If the GM of the player were able to put "Mage Knight" on the top of their character sheet, remove all references to the paladin story and not tell any of the other player these player might be okay with it but …. in the back of their mind or when they describe the class to outsiders as "basically an arcane paladin" its like rubbing the hair backward on a cat... drives them crazy.

2. They could be a design player, who really just wants to build and play something different. In this case, the build truly needs to be unique and based on a unique mechanic concept to be different from the other classes and a good story premise could really help guide the design. So in this case unique DESIGN is the focus and story is just aid not the building block. That's important to remember because if the build isn't working right it maybe that throwing out the story concept and changing to a completely different one is fine. Sometimes having the wrong story concept for the design you are working on will cause you to fail. Maybe keep the story for another attempt but your building a basic design and finding a story that lets you focus it not the other way around as in #1.

Nether of these is "power gaming" for DPR, they are just story or design. If a player wanted to be a spell caster that does a ton of damage in melee using arcane magic... 2 levels of fighter medium armor and a shield and action surge plus shadow Sorcerer level 3+ with quicken meta magic, shadow blade, booming blade, human variant: warcaster is going to be hard to beat. At character level 5 (2 Fighter, 3 Sorcerer) does 3d8 per hit (at advantage in dim light or darkness) +2d8 if they move, attacks twice with quicken meta magic, 3 with action surge, 4 if they move and provoke a opportunity attack spell with war caster... at level 5 that's 3d8 to 12d8 + 6d8 if the move....with AC18 (breastplate 14 + 2 dex bonus + 2 shield) and you can throw the sword 20ft cast next turn and resummons it as a bonus action. Shadow sorcerer, so you have 120ft darkvision which will prevent nullifying your advantage on attacks from dim light with shadow blade and cast darkness you can see though for advantage if you wouldn't normally have it. Strength of the grave, allows you fall to 0 hit points save and do another around of 6d8 damage.... at level 5. It is not an "Intellect based caster" though and I do see a lot of people (like my "powerful wizard player") who are always looking for intellect caster options like arcane archers or WarMagic wizards but with actual armor and the Artificer doesn't currently fill that slot.

 

[Tahliat]

After a bit of Brainstorming I came up with something along the lines you were thinking, have a look.

https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-LMx1gokFKQgHaK8SN8D

It is a bit lean on the non-combat, social side following along the lines of the parent classes, fighter and wizard.
Also it has access to the full wizard spell list compensating for any shortcoming on that front.