Also, a Gish should not have most of the stuff fighters have. Four attacks, Action Surge, Indomitable, I don't see why it makes sense for a Gish class to have those.
Then take mostly wizard levels?
You'd still get second wind and action surge, which don't really fit for a gish, and you a spell book, not really fitting a gish.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
You'd still get second wind and action surge, which don't really fit for a gish, and you a spell book, not really fitting a gish.
Why shouldn't a fighter/wizard combination have fighter stuff? If you don't want any fighter stuff, just use a Sword/Valor bard or a spellsinger.
For the same reason that a fighter/druid doesn't get fighter stuff, and a fighter/cleric doesn't get fighter stuff. Paladins, Rangers, and a Gish class would be a combination of a fighter and their respective full spellcasting classes, but don't get much in the way of mechanics from either parent class.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Wizard/EK mc still fails to weave casting and magic together like a paladin/ranger. You can cast half as well as a wizard, or fight half as well as a fighter. A true gish weaves magic into their weapon attacks.
Paladin is the closest class mechanically, as the smite spells allow you to do exactly that and it's a half caster. However the rest of paladin spell list, lay on hands, divine sense, sacred oath, and all those things do not suit peoples idea of an arcane elemental gish at all.
So, has anyone made progress on a class or subclass, recently? I have for my two classes.
Also, I created a similar poll on a different D&D discussion website. 187 people answered, and here are the stats of who answered what:
73 of the 187 voted for more classes = 39.0% of the answers
59 of the 187 voted that the current amount is good = 31.6% of the answers
40 of the 187 voted that we have too many classes = 21.4% of the answers
15 of the 187 voted saying they had no opinion on the matter = 8.0% of the answers
Huh it's interesting how different the results are. I guess different demographics use different websites.
Though I assumed dnd beyond would be the group wanting more classes the most compared to other forums, as the digital tool makes it so easy that content bloat doesn't effect us in the same way as those working from the books.
I wonder what the dndnext reddit opinion would be.
So, has anyone made progress on a class or subclass, recently? I have for my two classes.
Also, I created a similar poll on a different D&D discussion website. 187 people answered, and here are the stats of who answered what:
73 of the 187 voted for more classes = 39.0% of the answers
59 of the 187 voted that the current amount is good = 31.6% of the answers
40 of the 187 voted that we have too many classes = 21.4% of the answers
15 of the 187 voted saying they had no opinion on the matter = 8.0% of the answers
Begs the question of your data set, what website? Your sample size of D&D players is smaller, I'd say significantly smaller, that's actually a big deal from a comparative data standpoint. I agree it is interesting that the move for expanding classes stays within 2% of what you saw in a bigger sample on this site. I'm curious whether the "too many classes" crowd were a heavy anti Artificer group or perhaps confusing the question's topic with subclasses. In the end it indicates that what players in D&D across two communities reflect on the issue of character classes is that there isn't a strong consensus to add more classes, which is odd because "we want more" is a common assumption producers make about consumers, and there is a range of opinions, as this thread has already proven.
I'm still doing a long think and broad research into what an appropriate witch or occultist class would be, including a dive into this. I was excited to see that there's even an offering that attempts to adapt the AD&D Witch Class from Dragon #114, which was a well researched attempt to capture both the folklore and contemporary practices identified as witchcraft.
I have made progress on both a Mystic revision class (way simpler, maybe too simple...) and a Messenger Class (which is pretty cool I think, as it's like a Monk, a Ranger, a Wizard and a Rogue rolled into one big awesome bundle).
Wow... those people sound even more hostile than us Beyonders! Honestly, I think less classes would be a mistake, many more and the books will burst... Let's make all the ones we want further subclasses (because they work, even if they aren't as big).
I can see not liking the implementation, but the concept is completely unique.
I personally am Artificer ambivalent/apostate. I haven't seen them in my games yet, and from what I've seen ... Anyway, I know I've seen some complaints about both the implementation and existence around the net. I wouldn't call it an organized group or anything. Just a sentiment that pops up, and was trying to speculate on the stronger "less classes" camp, usually the newest class gets the scapegoat in that sort of argument.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Thanks, 3rdS. That's interesting, and initially surprising the results came back like that. I suppose within ENWorld there may be a strong contingent who would want a pull back from variety of classes, but expect something like EN's own touted 5.5E project to allow for greater crunchy richness within a more conservative number of classes. Said like that, I don't find the position that weird now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I can see not liking the implementation, but the concept is completely unique.
Artificers are wicked. Good wicked that is. The only bad bit about them is their "tools of the trade" - they're not mechanics! They're magical inventors. "Inventing Focus" works better in my opinion.
I can see not liking the implementation, but the concept is completely unique.
Artificers are wicked. Good wicked that is. The only bad bit about them is their "tools of the trade" - they're not mechanics! They're magical inventors. "Inventing Focus" works better in my opinion.
Before I knew what the DnD artificers were, I assumed they were inventor engineers from the name, and was pretty disappointed to find out that they were this weird magic item spam generator, who cast wizard spells but you basically have to homebrew some device which they come from.
I can see not liking the implementation, but the concept is completely unique.
Artificers are wicked. Good wicked that is. The only bad bit about them is their "tools of the trade" - they're not mechanics! They're magical inventors. "Inventing Focus" works better in my opinion.
Before I knew what the DnD artificers were, I assumed they were inventor engineers from the name, and was pretty disappointed to find out that they were this weird magic item spam generator, who cast wizard spells but you basically have to homebrew some device which they come from.
I thought that bit was interesting. Maybe they're not casting spells, but rather making things that cast spells for them?
I can see not liking the implementation, but the concept is completely unique.
Artificers are wicked. Good wicked that is. The only bad bit about them is their "tools of the trade" - they're not mechanics! They're magical inventors. "Inventing Focus" works better in my opinion.
Before I knew what the DnD artificers were, I assumed they were inventor engineers from the name, and was pretty disappointed to find out that they were this weird magic item spam generator, who cast wizard spells but you basically have to homebrew some device which they come from.
I thought that bit was interesting. Maybe they're not casting spells, but rather making things that cast spells for them?
I mean I'm fine with them now. It's just jarring to have some preconceived notions about a class purely from the name, and then find out it's nothing like that at all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You'd still get second wind and action surge, which don't really fit for a gish, and you a spell book, not really fitting a gish.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
the only good multiclass gishes, are those with pally in them IMO
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Why shouldn't a fighter/wizard combination have fighter stuff? If you don't want any fighter stuff, just use a Sword/Valor bard or a spellsinger.
or.....make a new class, with elemental strikes, and magical weaponry.
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
For the same reason that a fighter/druid doesn't get fighter stuff, and a fighter/cleric doesn't get fighter stuff. Paladins, Rangers, and a Gish class would be a combination of a fighter and their respective full spellcasting classes, but don't get much in the way of mechanics from either parent class.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Wizard/EK mc still fails to weave casting and magic together like a paladin/ranger. You can cast half as well as a wizard, or fight half as well as a fighter. A true gish weaves magic into their weapon attacks.
Paladin is the closest class mechanically, as the smite spells allow you to do exactly that and it's a half caster. However the rest of paladin spell list, lay on hands, divine sense, sacred oath, and all those things do not suit peoples idea of an arcane elemental gish at all.
So, has anyone made progress on a class or subclass, recently? I have for my two classes.
Also, I created a similar poll on a different D&D discussion website. 187 people answered, and here are the stats of who answered what:
73 of the 187 voted for more classes = 39.0% of the answers
59 of the 187 voted that the current amount is good = 31.6% of the answers
40 of the 187 voted that we have too many classes = 21.4% of the answers
15 of the 187 voted saying they had no opinion on the matter = 8.0% of the answers
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
What other website was this? And interestingly, pretty close to the results we get on this forum.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
Huh it's interesting how different the results are. I guess different demographics use different websites.
Though I assumed dnd beyond would be the group wanting more classes the most compared to other forums, as the digital tool makes it so easy that content bloat doesn't effect us in the same way as those working from the books.
I wonder what the dndnext reddit opinion would be.
Begs the question of your data set, what website? Your sample size of D&D players is smaller, I'd say significantly smaller, that's actually a big deal from a comparative data standpoint. I agree it is interesting that the move for expanding classes stays within 2% of what you saw in a bigger sample on this site. I'm curious whether the "too many classes" crowd were a heavy anti Artificer group or perhaps confusing the question's topic with subclasses. In the end it indicates that what players in D&D across two communities reflect on the issue of character classes is that there isn't a strong consensus to add more classes, which is odd because "we want more" is a common assumption producers make about consumers, and there is a range of opinions, as this thread has already proven.
I'm still doing a long think and broad research into what an appropriate witch or occultist class would be, including a dive into this. I was excited to see that there's even an offering that attempts to adapt the AD&D Witch Class from Dragon #114, which was a well researched attempt to capture both the folklore and contemporary practices identified as witchcraft.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I have made progress on both a Mystic revision class (way simpler, maybe too simple...) and a Messenger Class (which is pretty cool I think, as it's like a Monk, a Ranger, a Wizard and a Rogue rolled into one big awesome bundle).
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Here's the link:
https://www.enworld.org/threads/should-5e-have-more-classes-poll-and-discussion.674727/
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Wow... those people sound even more hostile than us Beyonders! Honestly, I think less classes would be a mistake, many more and the books will burst... Let's make all the ones we want further subclasses (because they work, even if they aren't as big).
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Wait there was an anti artificer group?
I can see not liking the implementation, but the concept is completely unique.
I personally am Artificer ambivalent/apostate. I haven't seen them in my games yet, and from what I've seen ... Anyway, I know I've seen some complaints about both the implementation and existence around the net. I wouldn't call it an organized group or anything. Just a sentiment that pops up, and was trying to speculate on the stronger "less classes" camp, usually the newest class gets the scapegoat in that sort of argument.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Thanks, 3rdS. That's interesting, and initially surprising the results came back like that. I suppose within ENWorld there may be a strong contingent who would want a pull back from variety of classes, but expect something like EN's own touted 5.5E project to allow for greater crunchy richness within a more conservative number of classes. Said like that, I don't find the position that weird now.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Artificers are wicked. Good wicked that is. The only bad bit about them is their "tools of the trade" - they're not mechanics! They're magical inventors. "Inventing Focus" works better in my opinion.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Before I knew what the DnD artificers were, I assumed they were inventor engineers from the name, and was pretty disappointed to find out that they were this weird magic item spam generator, who cast wizard spells but you basically have to homebrew some device which they come from.
I thought that bit was interesting. Maybe they're not casting spells, but rather making things that cast spells for them?
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
I mean I'm fine with them now. It's just jarring to have some preconceived notions about a class purely from the name, and then find out it's nothing like that at all.