Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9372040" data-attributes="member: 6799660">I think people have mentioned the basics. People who want to play 'Gishes'* are not universally doing so for some kind of desire to be all-powerful -- and in many instances across the versions of the games the implementation(s) of the concept generally underperformed. Many people play them because they don't want parts of the game where they do not participate, or because they are attempting a specific theme**. *and yes this is pointless gatekeeping jargon. **including from the many inspirational fantasy instances, but also from within-D&amp;D inspiration like the Fighter-MU or Elf classes of old or the red mage of AD&amp;D-adjacent Final FantasyTwo other things I'll note that haven't seen enough mention here are these:<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Even on the purely mechanical side, there's reason to pick a gish even if you aren't looking for pure power, and that is complexity and complex gameplay. D&amp;D has (often) relegated a lot of complex play loops to spells and similar. If you like messing around with these things, even as a sword-swinger, then doing so as a magical-sword-swinger has been a consistently viable way to do so. It's noteworthy that when sword-swinging has had the same complexity as spells (such as the Book of 9 Swords classes in 3.5), those have been popular as well.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">In all honesty, everyone plays (or certainly did, in many-to-most editions) played hybrid characters. That's because, even if the character class didn't have spells, the magic items they carried generally did. Or did the same things as spells did. Barring the odd AD&amp;D barbarian or 3e Vow of Poverty monk, characters have layered spells and spell-like effects all over their martial characters. If your visions of a warrior is success without the aid of magic, D&amp;D has not been the game for you pretty much from the jump.&nbsp; </li>
</ol></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Willie the Duck, post: 9372040, member: 6799660"] I think people have mentioned the basics. People who want to play 'Gishes'* are not universally doing so for some kind of desire to be all-powerful -- and in many instances across the versions of the games the implementation(s) of the concept generally underperformed. Many people play them because they don't want parts of the game where they do not participate, or because they are attempting a specific theme**. [I][SIZE=2]*and yes this is pointless gatekeeping jargon. **including from the many inspirational fantasy instances, but also from within-D&D inspiration like the Fighter-MU or Elf classes of old or the red mage of AD&D-adjacent Final Fantasy[/SIZE][/I] Two other things I'll note that haven't seen enough mention here are these: [LIST=1] [*]Even on the purely mechanical side, there's reason to pick a gish even if you aren't looking for pure power, and that is complexity and complex gameplay. D&D has (often) relegated a lot of complex play loops to spells and similar. If you like messing around with these things, even as a sword-swinger, then doing so as a magical-sword-swinger has been a consistently viable way to do so. It's noteworthy that when sword-swinging has had the same complexity as spells (such as the Book of 9 Swords classes in 3.5), those have been popular as well. [*]In all honesty, everyone plays (or certainly did, in many-to-most editions) played hybrid characters. That's because, even if the character class didn't have spells, the magic items they carried generally did. Or did the same things as spells did. Barring the odd AD&D barbarian or 3e Vow of Poverty monk, characters have layered spells and spell-like effects all over their martial characters. If your visions of a warrior is success without the aid of magic, D&D has not been the game for you pretty much from the jump. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]

Verification