D&D 5E Swordmage! (+thread)

[FrogReaver]

I haven’t ever suggested anything like a full fighter + other stuff.

I’ve suggest a character using the monk and ranger as balance comparisons.

it has a limited resource system. Did you think that was gonna go on top of extra feats and multiple extra attacks and something like action surge?

No. It’s going to be like a monk without stunning strike or Unarmored movement, with magical weapon attacks that enhance the attack action, and lesser unarmored AC feature than the monk gets, and in place gets more utility because the concept is a well rounded hermetic weapon-master, which means the kind of person who writes fighting manuals that are also manuals on alchemy and mysticism.

Okay, so what are you seeing for the level 11 ability?

 

[Eltab]

Possible subclasses:
Aegis of Protection - you get in the way of attacks against an ally. This might mean disadvantage on the enemy's attack roll or it might mean the attack is rolled against your AC (instead of your ally's)
Aegis of Retribution - you expend your action doing nothing, but gain as many reactions as you would have Attack / ExtraAttack; you can use these reactions for opportunity attacks against enemies when they mess with your allies - not just normal OA trigger conditions
Aegis of Movement - off-turn, you get the equivalent of extended Reach with your weapon, fluffed as a swift but short-range teleport over and back to make an attack (think: cinematically using a Whip in an alley)
Aegis of Assault - Stack basic weapon damage, elemental damage, Hunter's Mark (spell-sourced damage) and class feature damage (like Monster Slayer Ranger's Ire feature, not Sneak Attack) into a Paladin Smite -like nova.
Aegis of Sovereign Glue - a 4e sticky Defender who keeps several enemies tied up on himself rather than pursuing allies.

Needless to say I am not tied to any of the names - but I hope they get the ideas across.

 

[Eltab]

The flavor text will reference things like sacred geometry and the use of mathematics to better understand how to fight. Your magic manifests your geometric understanding of the battlefield into your vision as a series of circles, intersecting lines, and other esoteric geometry, showing you how the many “moving parts” of the battle can and will move and strike

For no good reason that anybody can explain, Warforged Swordmages of Assault are referred to (behind their backs of course) as Terminators.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Okay, so what are you seeing for the level 11 ability?

You summon a horde of talking blue frog knights with tiny swords who swarm around you singing loudly of the glory of battle while striking at any enemies that come into their reach.

I don’t know yet. It may be that level 11 is a subclass level and your subclass determines what keeps your damage up to half-caster norms. Or it may just be a simple damage boost when dealing the damage type you’re attuned to currently. Or something that increases the utility features that promote general efficacy.

Or, like the rogues does at 5, it may have a big juicy defense feature and a light increase in damage.

it’s a half caster. It will have something that puts/keeps the class comparable to other half casters of the same level tier.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

@FrogReaver that was meant as humorous, not snide, btw. The blue frogs was a funny image I had for someone’s spirit guardians spell. I think that if I did give a class like this access to SG, it would be later than they get other spells of the same level.

 

[FrogReaver]

it’s a half caster. It will have something that puts/keeps the class comparable to other half casters of the same level tier.

Just to be clear - the following is true of your Swordmage.

1. It keeps up in AC with the fighter and paladin
2. It keeps up in damage with the fighter and paladin - as you just noted
3. It has utility/defensive magic probably better than the Paladin
4. You can cast rituals unlike the paladin and fighter
5. You have more skills than the fighter or paladin.
6. You can use smites similar to the paladin.

Do you agree?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Just to be clear - the following is true of your Swordmage.

1. It keeps up in AC with the fighter and paladin
2. It keeps up in damage with the fighter and paladin - as you just noted
3. It has utility/defensive magic probably better than the Paladin
4. You can cast rituals unlike the paladin and fighter
5. You have more skills than the fighter or paladin.
6. You can use smites similar to the paladin.

Do you agree?

We literally don’t have numbers for most of that yet, andthe AC is explicitly lower than either class until the highest levels, even using the most generous calculation that I’ve proposed, of several proposed calculations. If you’re going to hound me in my damn +thread instead of contributing usefully, at least keep with my damn updates and read what I’ve proposed for levels 1-2.

As for smite, as long as you mean the smite spells, yeah, just like the ranger it will have spells that boost an attack’s damage. Whether that will allow it to keep up with the fighter and Paladin in damage will depend on the final design numbers.

Look, I’m tired of this, and it literally serves no useful purpose in the thread. Please either let whatever this is go until there at least 80% of an actual class designed, or stop posting in this thread. You are being actively counterproductive the to point of the thread. Relentlessly. That’s threadcrapping.

 

[Umbran]

Look, I’m tired of this, and it literally serves no useful purpose in the thread.

Mod Note:
Dude, you rolled out a "+" thread before we have rules for for it worked out.

When we do have rules, you can expect that notes on power level should be considered in-bounds, as they are quite relevant to makng the thing work. Rules for these threads are highly unlikely to include, "the OP of the thread gets to boss people around with what they can post." It is known that you are often disappointed with moderation, but that doesn't mean you get to do it yourself.

Just to be clear - the following is true of your Swordmage.
...
Do you agree?

The above said - this approach is kinda passive-aggressive, and pretty much ensured to cheese people off. If you want to express that you think it is over-powered, say that, clearly, briefly and politely. They will either accept that and adjust... or not. It isn't like there's a law against creating an overpowered class for your own game.

In general, people, please try to teach each other more like you want to work together, and less like you want to prove the other guy is wrongheaded. Thanks.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Mod Note:
Dude, you rolled out a "+" thread before we have rules for for it worked out.

When we do have rules, you can expect that notes on power level should be considered in-bounds, as they are quite relevant to makng the thing work. Rules for these threads are highly unlikely to include, "the OP of the thread gets to boss people around with what they can post." It is known that you are often disappointed with moderation, but that doesn't mean you get to do it yourself.



The above said - this approach is kinda passive-aggressive, and pretty much ensured to cheese people off. If you want to express that you think it is over-powered, say that, clearly, briefly and politely. They will either accept that and adjust... or not. It isn't like there's a law against creating an overpowered class for your own game.

In general, people, please try to teach each other more like you want to work together, and less like you want to prove the other guy is wrongheaded. Thanks.

On the subject of + threads, they have already been a thing. I didn’t report frog for a reason. Since y’all are still working out what site rules will be in place, I’m not gonna try to assume what they’ll be. However, this is probably my 3rd or 4th + thread, which until you post new rules is just a social expectation, which I have been asking frog to be cool about.

And for clarity on the specific criticism of frog’s posts, so everyone can know what I will not be engaging with, going forward, it’s not that “concerns about power level” are off limits or off topic, it’s that derailing the thread with haranguing about basic concepts as if they’re finished mechanics isn’t actually helpful at all, nor is making a bunch of assumptions about what features will look like without even reading updates on the proposed mechanics.

When an actual mechanic is detailed, the power level of it and it’s relationship to the classes power level is relevant. “It should have some kind of Int based AC calculation” isn’t a mechanic, it’s a basic idea. Leaping from that and “it will use other half casters as it’s balance comparison models” to “its a fighter++” is completely counterproductive, and constitutes derailing the thread, and potentially threadcrapping.

 

[Garthanos]

We literally don’t have numbers for most of that yet, andthe AC is explicitly lower than either class until the highest levels, even using the most generous calculation that I’ve proposed, of several proposed calculations.

A protector/shielding subclass should have very nice armor class

The I am all about hurting the enemy flavored one (who probably teleports even more) not necessarily