D&D 5E Starting to Hate Hexblades

[Frozen_Heart]

it is one of those things they can get working mechanically but has fewer thematics than fighter which I did not even think was possible and the names always suck.
but we do need one.

Yeah I think that the lack of a class 'story' is the reason it's never stayed consistent or stuck between editions. The mechanics have always been great, but there has rarely been anything beyond 'mage who uses weapon' as a background. Even the class name hasn't been able to stick. Duskblade in 3e, Magus in Pathfinder, Swordmage in 4e.

 

[Don Durito]

Yeah I think that the lack of a class 'story' is the reason it's never stayed consistent or stuck between editions. The mechanics have always been great, but there has rarely been anything beyond 'mage who uses weapon' as a background. Even the class name hasn't been able to stick. Duskblade in 3e, Magus in Pathfinder, Swordmage in 4e.

Really? What about Elf or Elf Fighter/Magic User in OD&D, 1e and 2e? (The Bladesinger comes from 2e.)

The arcane/Fighter mix is actually one of the oldest aspects of the game.

It has always had the problem (in the Vancian systems) thought that the two halves of the class have kind of sat beside each other rather than interacted too closely, although why that hasn't been resolved through new and better spells in a system that allows such things easily is a bit of a mystery.

Perhaps it's because such spells would be new and therefore not iconic? (After all the Planescape Torment game written under 2e pretty much invented all new spells for it's spellcasters, including a whole bunch for it's Fighter-Mage Githzerai gish character Dakkon* - but that was back when D&D had the confidence to be new and wasn't so scared that playing D&D wouldn't remind people of playing D&D)

*Is this character the origin of the term "Gish"?

Edit: Corrected Dakkon's race - he's Githzerai, not Githyanki.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Just realised that Kaladin Stormblessed from the Stormlight series could be a good example of an actual hexadin from fiction.

He swears a series of oaths to gain his powers. But also bonded to a sentient creature/blade from the equivalent of the shadow realm in that setting (which he can make appear in his hand at will). As he swears each part of his oath they both grow in power.

 

[Mannahnin]

Yeah the next time someone wants to play a single classes hexblade it will be the first.

I kind of look at the hexblade as a band aid to the failed gish concepts in the PHB.

I'm doing it right now with my new replacement character for my single-classed Diviner Wizard who died in RotFM recently.

Yeah, when Hexblade originally came out as a class in 3.5 it was explicitly a gish class. Always liked the concept.

 

[Mannahnin]

If I don't want something in my game, I say, "No [whatever] in my game."

It's the simplest and most reliable way of accomplishing the goal. Never understood the need to complicate it.

Yup. If you don't like the class, don't allow it. Trying to "balance" it by making it less fun or have obnoxious roleplay consequences, while exactly the sort of thing Gary tried in the 70s and 80s, turned out to be a bad approach. Not fun OR balanced.

I definitely DO like the idea of making the Warlock patron an important part of the character and plot, as with other characters who have such built-in flavor. It does seem like a misuse of and wasted potential with classes like the Warlock and Paladin when a DM skips utilizing those inherent plot threads.

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm doing it right now with my new replacement character for my single-classed Diviner Wizard who died in RotFM recently.

Yeah, when Hexblade originally came out as a class in 3.5 it was explicitly a gish class. Always liked the concept.

I own The Complete arcane.

I'm fine with the concept.

 

[Mannahnin]

Really? What about Elf or Elf Fighter/Magic User in OD&D, 1e and 2e? (The Bladesinger comes from 2e.)

The arcane/Fighter mix is actually one of the oldest aspects of the game.

It has always had the problem (in the Vancian systems) thought that the two halves of the class have kind of sat beside each other rather than interacted too closely, although why that hasn't been resolved through new and better spells in a system that allows such things easily is a bit of a mystery.

Yeah, in the past year of online old school play I've quite enjoyed one of my characters being an original 1974-style elf (Fighter / M-U), and another being an Old School Essentials advanced class Half-Elf (basically a weaker B/X Elf with faster advancement). Just casting good spells while wearing armor is pretty darn fun and strong. I agree with you that having spells that reinforce/work well with a character who's also a fighter-type is one of the simplest solutions. And TBF 0E & AD&D had some of these. Vampiric Touch, for example, or Fire Shield, were great on a fighter/mage, and not so hot for a single-classed wizard.

Perhaps it's because suc spells would be new and therefore not iconic? (After all the Planescape Torment game written under 2e pretty much invented all new spells for it's spellcasters, including a whole bunch for it's Fighter-Mage Githyanki gish character Dakkon* - but that was back when D&D had the confidence to be new and wasn't so scared that playing D&D wouldn't remind people of playing D&D)

*Is this character the origin of the term "Gish"?

If not that specific character, than definitely that word for Githyanki fighter/casters, yes. That's exactly where the term is taken from.

This is my first time hearing that Planscape: Torment had a bunch of new spells. I'd be very interested to see the details and write-ups for their use in tabletop!

 

[Don Durito]

This is my first time hearing that Planscape: Torment had a bunch of new spells. I'd be very interested to see the details and write-ups for their use in tabletop!

Here's the basic details of each spell.

I'm sure somewhere on the net there must be a full write-up of them, but it didn't come up with a cursory search.

 

[Moorcrys]

I much prefer 1e/2e’s multi-classing to the 3e/5e multi class pick as you go rules but they both address different stories - the former involves someone who starts their career as two or more archetypes and the latter someone who finds a new calling as they go through their adventuring life. Both are legit but particularly the 3e+ version is a harder thing to balance, especially as more options become available.

I don’t think 5e hit quite hit the spot but I don’t blame them for it. But yeah, a lot of ‘sorcadins’ and ‘pal-locks’ with pretzel-envy storylines to make sense of it for my taste. I thought Ford’s take on it in critical role was a case where it actually made some kind of story sense. But at my table… not so much thought has gone into it… ‘Patron? Ohh uhhh… like you know…’

 

[Mind of tempest]

I thought "swordmage" was a reasonable thing. Maybe not flashy, but "barbarian" and "fighter" aren't flashy either. You're a mage, who uses a sword. 4e even made sure you did use sword-like weapons, requiring you to use heavy blades (think greatswords and longswords) or light blades (think rapiers and daggers) to take advantage of your features.

swordmage is just two words merged together and it sounds like a description of a thing, not a name of a concept

Really? What about Elf or Elf Fighter/Magic User in OD&D, 1e and 2e? (The Bladesinger comes from 2e.)

The arcane/Fighter mix is actually one of the oldest aspects of the game.

It has always had the problem (in the Vancian systems) thought that the two halves of the class have kind of sat beside each other rather than interacted too closely, although why that hasn't been resolved through new and better spells in a system that allows such things easily is a bit of a mystery.

Perhaps it's because such spells would be new and therefore not iconic? (After all the Planescape Torment game written under 2e pretty much invented all new spells for it's spellcasters, including a whole bunch for it's Fighter-Mage Githzerai gish character Dakkon* - but that was back when D&D had the confidence to be new and wasn't so scared that playing D&D wouldn't remind people of playing D&D)

*Is this character the origin of the term "Gish"?

Edit: Corrected Dakkon's race - he's Githzerai, not Githyanki.

gish is older I think but it was likely many introductions to it.