I’m of the opinion a Spellsword type half caster has been missing for all of 5e. On another thread we have been having the debate, but it’s off topic there.
Artificer is definitely worth being part of the conversation, but I think it’s thematically distinct from both fighters and wizards in ways that rangers aren’t from fighters and druids and paladins aren’t from fighters and clerics.
That said, between artificer, bladesinger, and eldritch knight, the arcane niche is significantly more represented than primal and divine martial/magic hybrids. We definitely do not need a fourth.
5e doesn’t really need another arcane Gish, between the subclasses that exist and the variety of multiclass options you can build pretty much anything you want. Clerical could possibly se something that is more a warrior caster rather than the smiter Paladin. The 5e rangers are a pretty good primal half caster Gish. I’m waiting to see how things will look in 1D&D the ranger looks to be a very good half caster chassis if you homebrew it to allow the player to select their type of magic - EXCEPT that evocation spells are barred for some idjit reason. It will be interesting to see what the Gish subclasses in 1D&D look like eventually.
Artificer is close but the base class doesn’t help it fit well. Battle smith and Armorer subclasses almost cover the Gish, but Battle smith is a pet class, and armorer lacks weapon proficiency because it had built in weapons. The Artificer is it’s own class that doesn’t marry martial and magic the way Ranger and Paladin do.
I think the various arcane-martial subclasses (should) do a good job of covering the need for sword mages. None of them make for very good combinations of magic and swordsmanship, but I think it would be better and more practical to spruce them up than make a new class.
If you ask me, what we're really missing is an arcane-marital subclass.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
My problem is at level 8 or lower there is no way to be a half caster fighter without giving up to much and lacking any features that really make you half fighter, half mage. The best the game offers is battlesmith artificer and it doesn’t fit the flavor. In previous editions there was duskbalde, spellsword, and Swordmages. I believe Eldritch Knights were half casters as well. Bladesingers and Hexblades a cool but in reality you are better off staying back and casting spells or cantrips with them. Especially 1d6 hit die bladesingers. I’ve also attempted mutliclasses that fulfill the gish but they don’t come online properly until about level 9 or 10. You can be a holy warrior or a forest warrior from level 1, but it you want to be an arcane warrior you have to wait until much later to experience that. Most likely going Eldritch Knight then multiclassing Wizard, but that slows your spell progression.
I think the various arcane-martial subclasses (should) do a good job of covering the need for sword mages. None of them make for very good combinations of magic and swordsmanship, but I think it would be better and more practical to spruce them up than make a new class.
If you ask me, what we're really missing is an arcane-marital subclass.
What class would you make the subclass fit with. I’ve tried to homebrew a subclass with artificer, but it just didn’t feel right. I’m not a professional game designer either so that might be the problem I came across.
I think the various arcane-martial subclasses (should) do a good job of covering the need for sword mages. None of them make for very good combinations of magic and swordsmanship, but I think it would be better and more practical to spruce them up than make a new class.
If you ask me, what we're really missing is an arcane-marital subclass.
What class would you make the subclass fit with. I’ve tried to homebrew a subclass with artificer, but it just didn’t feel right. I’m not a professional game designer either so that might be the problem I came across.
College of Matrimony Bard.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I think we need a real arcane gish class. Meaning one that works like the Paladin and the (new) Ranger. A true half caster progression, extra attack at level 5, access to all of the martial equipment, fighting styles, and feats, etc. It's the last missing piece in the set.
Then most of the subclasses that tried to accomplish that could be moved under the new class. All of them suffer from the same problem. By trying to force the idea of a true gish into another class, they do either the fighting or the spellcasting too poorly. And they waste features on recreating what the Paladin and Ranger do naturally. With a new class to put them in, all of them would make more sense. It doesn't even have to be strong to make me happy. It just needs to exist so there is some logic to it all, so these poor subclasses can actually get used, and so people can better create the characters they want to.
It wouldn't be that difficult to make. And there would be at least a half dozen subclasses all ready to adapt to it. If there is ever a time to do it, it's now with the new edition on the way. The subclasses are getting reworks anyway. They could take some of the load off of the current classes by moving these subclasses to a new one.
I think we need a real arcane gish class. Meaning one that works like the Paladin and the (new) Ranger. A true half caster progression, extra attack at level 5, access to all of the martial equipment, fighting styles, and feats, etc. It's the last missing piece in the set.
Then most of the subclasses that tried to accomplish that could be moved under the new class. All of them suffer from the same problem. By trying to force the idea of a true gish into another class, they do either the fighting or the spellcasting too poorly. And they waste features on recreating what the Paladin and Ranger do naturally. With a new class to put them in, all of them would make more sense. It doesn't even have to be strong to make me happy. It just needs to exist so there is some logic to it all, so these poor subclasses can actually get used, and so people can better create the characters they want to.
It wouldn't be that difficult to make. And there would be at least a half dozen subclasses all ready to adapt to it. If there is ever a time to do it, it's now with the new edition on the way. The subclasses are getting reworks anyway. They could take some of the load off of the current classes by moving these subclasses to a new one.
I would leave Eldritch Knight as a fighter. I think every full martial class should have a subclass that gives them some casting. Arcane Archer would work well as subclass for a true half caster warrior. Bladesinger should stay a full wizard too imo, even though it historically was a half caster. I like full casters having a option to go martial. I would convert War Wizard into this half caster subclass. Literally just swapping the order of the 6th and 10th features to account for not having counterspell and dispel magic until later. Also giving those spells as always prepared as part of the feature at 10th. Hexblades I believe are gone and will be unnecessary because pact of the blade will be improved. I would make Swordmages from 4e and Duskblades from 3.5 the other 2 subclasses. I know some want this class to fulfill things like blade dancer and other magical sword styles from mythical eastern setting of 3.5 and I see room for those subclasses as well but I don’t know enough about those classes or eastern mysticism to imagine how to update them. If one subclass was to be dedicated to an eastern mysticism vibe I would drop the Swordmage as War wizard conversation already has a tanky vibe.
But reality is this is all a dream since the majority of the few people who voted think it’s an unnecessary class and artificer already has it covered as a half caster warrior. Maybe I’ll try again to homebrew a good artificer warrior hybrid subclass. Gearblade or Techknight subclass.
Bard - College of Swords Bard - College of Valor Cleric - Domains: Death, Forge, Life, War Fighter - Eldritch Knight Warlock - Hexblade Wizard - Bladesinger
These can all be useful as full or base Gish builds, depending on how you want to play it. They mix armours and weapons with magic in various ways for mid or front line combatants. These can be further built upon with racial options, feats and multiclassing.
If you want to expand more generically with "hitty and casty" then there are Monk and Rogue options, but they remain more as skirmishers than actual Gishes.
If you find these options as insufficient then I'll admit to being lost by what you actually want. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Bard - College of Swords Bard - College of Valor Cleric - Domains: Death, Forge, Life, War Fighter - Eldritch Knight Warlock - Hexblade Wizard - Bladesinger
These can all be useful as full or base Gish builds, depending on how you want to play it. They mix armours and weapons with magic in various ways for mid or front line combatants. These can be further built upon with racial options, feats and multiclassing.
If you want to expand more generically with "hitty and casty" then there are Monk and Rogue options, but they remain more as skirmishers than actual Gishes.
If you find these options as insufficient then I'll admit to being lost by what you actually want. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Paladin and Ranger are perfect but are not arcane, all the others miss the mark. Also Battle Smith and Armorer Artificer are very close. It’s very simple what people want when they say a arcane half caster warrior. They want uninterrupted half spell progression (not having to multiclass). some decent armor and martial weapons proficiency, and Extra Attack at 5th level. My main problem is I can’t play Str based warrior arcane caster without rolling great stats and multiclassing.
Battle Smith forces you into a pet class or waste multiple features. Armorer doesn’t have Martial weapon proficiency. Paladin is divine. Ranger is Primal. College of swords is close but difficult to play Str based and missing power house Arcane casting and has lower hit die than Paladin or Ranger because your a full caster. College of Valor is so trash they made College of swords to soft fix it. Clerics all divine casters, none get extra attack. Eldricth Knight spell progression is too slow. Hexblade difficult to make Str based. Will still find it’s better to eldritch blast most of the time, but good if some gets close to you. Bladesinger squishy and far better off not in the frontline. Should be casting spells but if someone gets close to you then you are still okay for a round or two. dex based attack a defense with weapons.
I’ve played a Paladin 2/Sword Bard 8. It was fun in a one shot were I could go crazy smiting because the was one big thing to kill at the end.
I’ve tried Battle smith and Armorer but the feel isn’t there.
If I get to play a Warlock it will be Genie pact for me. (I mostly DM, so when I get to play I know what I want to play)
If War clerics 6th level ability was was extra attack that would be interesting. Probably too strong with spirit guardians, and spiritual weapon at their disposal and limited bonus action attacks.
Last time I played a Fighter I was ranged. Next time I’ll be psy or rune knight if the opportunity comes.
If I play a wizard it’s going to be scribes.
I’ve been around since 3e so I’ve played a few different classes in my time with the games.
Don't really see the point of such distinction. They're gishes. And you can always just reflavour it as arcane. The terms divine and arcane at this time have no real significance beyond generic and useless description. There is mechanical difference between the two. Wizards can get cure wounds. Bards are arcane by description yet have the "divine" spells of druids and clerics. Magic is magic. The descriptions of arcane and divine do not change the magic, only the way acquired. Water from a tap at home or home filter (arcane) or water bought in bottles (divine) still just gives you the same thing: water.
If War clerics 6th level ability was was extra attack that would be interesting. Probably too strong with spirit guardians, and spiritual weapon at their disposal and limited bonus action attacks.
All Clerics have Extra Attack.
It’s very simple what people want when they say a arcane half caster warrior.
Not really. Arcane/Divine is mechanically irrelevant, half caster can mean game term for spell slot progression or general term for any "Gish" character. And "Warrior" is a vague term. A warrior doesn't even need to use a blade or bow or such weapon. A warrior just means somebody who fights and there is no restriction on what you fight with. Be it sword, bow, gun, spells or words. It also means "soldier" and again, a soldier can be anyone employed to serve in war or military and includes people who sit at desks breaking codes or managing comms etc. By origin warrior is anyone who engages in or creates war. This includes medics, strategists and more who never so much as throw a punch.
So... No. It's not as simple as you claim just with the term you use.
Both with your specific term (Artificer) or general half-casting warriors (Rangers/Paladins) or just any viable Gish options (the list I made) - what you want already exists in the game. So the question your thread title poses is answered "no" , it's not missing because D&D 5th does have it.
Now whether it exists in a manner very specific to your personal preferences that's entirely, completely and purely a "you" thing, not a general D&D thing, so talk to your DM and make it yourself or reflavour things as needed.
I do think that artificers could fill a more martial role in 1D&D. This is mostly because they're enchanters; enchanting is something I personally associate a lot with arcane warriors. I think giving more proficiencies, extra attack, and more options to enchant weapons and armor in unique ways would be a good way to make artificers a unique battlemage. Making Infusions work a bit more like Eldritch Invocations would be cool and fill a gap people seem to have.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Reminder: artificers all used to have Extra Attack and basic weapon proficiencies. Then the playerbase complained like crazy and they megagigaultranerfed the 2019 UA artificer into its current form. So it is entirely your fault that artificers are bad at being gishes.
As for the constant "just reflavor or use one of the billion arcane gishy subclasses" thing? Paladins can't be reflavored - their every single feature screams HOLY WARRIOR at the tippy-top of their lungs. Rangers? Maybe, and ranger is likely the best chance you have, but even then reflavoring the mechanics of a hardy, woods-wise survivalist into a canny, arcane-savvy swordmage is a big lift and likely to be very unsatisfying. As for the "billion arcane gishy subclasses"...has it ever occured to people that we keep getting those because Wizards keeps getting them wrong?
The Eldritch Knight is a disaster that is best played by never actually using its spellcasting, its entire "magic" half and every spell slot it has is best used as literally fuggoff nothing but "I can cast Shield to make my AC stupid". The Bladesinger is terrible the other way - it's a "martial wizard" whose martial side is absolute garbage. The Bladesinger cannot exist in the front line of a heavy melee fracas, and its features are once again best used as "I use Bladesong to make my AC stupid" prior to acting like a normal ordinary cast-from-the-back wizard. The Sword bard is a bad meme, Valor is better than people give it credit for but is still a meme, and the Hexblade is notorious for being drastically worse than just Eldritch Blasting until and unless you use it to make a Charisma paladin in medium armor. Plus, all the cool Smite-y spells that might help alleviate the problem are ******* Divine, so they're not available to all these arcane casters that have no way to turn "I swing my sword" and "I cast a spell" into the same action the way they gave the Paladin something like nine separate ways to do.
Until we have an arcane class that can turn "Attack" and "Cast" into the same action, which Wizards has thus far been categorically unwilling to do despite knowing full goddamn well that's what people want? Then we will continue seeing these threads, because that is what people want. A character that can seamlessly combine weapon attacks with arcane magic in a way that feels like a powerful fusion of abilities instead of an awkward kludge. Would a broad suite of arcane bonus-action smite spells for artificers and Eldritch Knights to use do the trick? Maybe! BUT WIZARDS WON'T LET US HAVE THOSE, so here we are stuck in Crappy Reflavor Land, or its neighbor the Land of Infinite Homebrew The DM Won't Let Us Use.
Don't really see the point of such distinction. They're gishes. And you can always just reflavour it as arcane. The terms divine and arcane at this time have no real significance beyond generic and useless description. There is mechanical difference between the two. Wizards can get cure wounds. Bards are arcane by description yet have the "divine" spells of druids and clerics. Magic is magic. The descriptions of arcane and divine do not change the magic, only the way acquired. Water from a tap at home or home filter (arcane) or water bought in bottles (divine) still just gives you the same thing: water.
If War clerics 6th level ability was was extra attack that would be interesting. Probably too strong with spirit guardians, and spiritual weapon at their disposal and limited bonus action attacks.
All Clerics have Extra Attack.
It’s very simple what people want when they say a arcane half caster warrior.
Not really. Arcane/Divine is mechanically irrelevant, half caster can mean game term for spell slot progression or general term for any "Gish" character. And "Warrior" is a vague term. A warrior doesn't even need to use a blade or bow or such weapon. A warrior just means somebody who fights and there is no restriction on what you fight with. Be it sword, bow, gun, spells or words. It also means "soldier" and again, a soldier can be anyone employed to serve in war or military and includes people who sit at desks breaking codes or managing comms etc. By origin warrior is anyone who engages in or creates war. This includes medics, strategists and more who never so much as throw a punch.
So... No. It's not as simple as you claim just with the term you use.
Both with your specific term (Artificer) or general half-casting warriors (Rangers/Paladins) or just any viable Gish options (the list I made) - what you want already exists in the game. So the question your thread title poses is answered "no" , it's not missing because D&D 5th does have it.
Now whether it exists in a manner very specific to your personal preferences that's entirely, completely and purely a "you" thing, not a general D&D thing, so talk to your DM and make it yourself or reflavour things as needed.
You said a lot of weird things. That make wonder do you play the game. Also have you read anything about the future direction of 1dnd. I’ll give you quick rundown of what’s weird.
1. If we were talking strictly 5e you would be almost correct about magic being magic. But even you noted that Bards have spells that are typically divine on their list even though they are describe as arcane casters. Two major things to note. Bards aren’t considered mages and bards have a history of not being arcane casters. Moving forward into one d&d they are using a 3 spell list system, Arcane, Divine, and Primal. So just reflavoring a Paladin doesn’t work unless the DM is going to let me pick spells from the arcane spell list in the future or the wizard or sorcerer list now. Also the divine smite only being radiant doesn’t feel very Arcane. Also if this game was all about reflavoring why do we have so many subclasses that intersect. Just because you’re happy with the options presented you assume every has to be completely satisfied with them. I’ve made this mistake about other facets of the game. So I understand, but not everything is fixable with a reskin.
2. No clerics have extra attack. That’s not a feature Clerics get.
3. What classes count as warriors is pretty well known in this game. People have used that term to identify classes that aren’t casters for years. Moving forward in 1dnd Warriors are Fighters, Barbarians and Monks. I feel like you goal is to argue semantics and word choice, but that’s silly in situation. Also note I’ve never used the term Gish. What’s funny is that term came from a literal Arcane caster fighter, but now is used heavily for any class that can cast and be proficient in martial combat.
4. What I want does not exist in the game. I’ve explained what I and apparently a small amount of others want. It does not exist in the game. If it did I wouldn’t have made this post. I even explained why those classes you named don’t fit the mold of what I want. If you have a problem with it that’s a you thing and you don’t have to say another thing to me about it. I heard your opinion and disagree with it wholly. The closest thing to what I want is sadly be relegated to a pet class. The second closest lacks martial weapon proficiency, and neither get a fighting style this is because the Articifer is skill/tool class at its core. Which is why going forward into 1dnd it is classified as an expert.
5. I’m not a game designer. I don’t have to make it myself. I can voice my opinion and if enough people agree we will eventually be heard. If not we will get out voted as we have so far on here. I’m fine either way.
The Eldritch Knight is a disaster that is best played by never actually using its spellcasting, its entire "magic" half and every spell slot it has is best used as literally fuggoff nothing but "I can cast Shield to make my AC stupid".
I do think that artificers could fill a more martial role in 1D&D. This is mostly because they're enchanters; enchanting is something I personally associate a lot with arcane warriors. I think giving more proficiencies, extra attack, and more options to enchant weapons and armor in unique ways would be a good way to make artificers a unique battlemage. Making Infusions work a bit more like Eldritch Invocations would be cool and fill a gap people seem to have.
Artificer is a weird half caster. Honestly if Battle Smith wasn’t locked with the steel defender and got a fighting style instead half of my small group who want a Spellsword type halfcaster would have gravitated toward it. I’ve tried to play one without the defender and it feels like a wasted feature. Self nerfs are okay if you don’t feel it. Since I DM and I’m a semi power gamer I feel self nerfs hard. Plus I don’t get to be a player often so when I do I like to feel competent. I also have a rule against players homebrewing their own classes or subclasses, so I would never ask a DM to let me play my own homebrew in their world. Even if it was perfectly balance, but if I made it it probably wouldn’t be lol.
I’m of the opinion a Spellsword type half caster has been missing for all of 5e. On another thread we have been having the debate, but it’s off topic there.
Are you perhaps asking about artificer?
No, they mean a true gish, like an Eldritch Knight crossed with a Paladin or something.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
Artificer is definitely worth being part of the conversation, but I think it’s thematically distinct from both fighters and wizards in ways that rangers aren’t from fighters and druids and paladins aren’t from fighters and clerics.
That said, between artificer, bladesinger, and eldritch knight, the arcane niche is significantly more represented than primal and divine martial/magic hybrids. We definitely do not need a fourth.
5e doesn’t really need another arcane Gish, between the subclasses that exist and the variety of multiclass options you can build pretty much anything you want. Clerical could possibly se something that is more a warrior caster rather than the smiter Paladin. The 5e rangers are a pretty good primal half caster Gish. I’m waiting to see how things will look in 1D&D the ranger looks to be a very good half caster chassis if you homebrew it to allow the player to select their type of magic - EXCEPT that evocation spells are barred for some idjit reason. It will be interesting to see what the Gish subclasses in 1D&D look like eventually.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Artificer is close but the base class doesn’t help it fit well. Battle smith and Armorer subclasses almost cover the Gish, but Battle smith is a pet class, and armorer lacks weapon proficiency because it had built in weapons. The Artificer is it’s own class that doesn’t marry martial and magic the way Ranger and Paladin do.
I think the various arcane-martial subclasses (should) do a good job of covering the need for sword mages. None of them make for very good combinations of magic and swordsmanship, but I think it would be better and more practical to spruce them up than make a new class.
If you ask me, what we're really missing is an arcane-marital subclass.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
My problem is at level 8 or lower there is no way to be a half caster fighter without giving up to much and lacking any features that really make you half fighter, half mage. The best the game offers is battlesmith artificer and it doesn’t fit the flavor. In previous editions there was duskbalde, spellsword, and Swordmages. I believe Eldritch Knights were half casters as well. Bladesingers and Hexblades a cool but in reality you are better off staying back and casting spells or cantrips with them. Especially 1d6 hit die bladesingers. I’ve also attempted mutliclasses that fulfill the gish but they don’t come online properly until about level 9 or 10. You can be a holy warrior or a forest warrior from level 1, but it you want to be an arcane warrior you have to wait until much later to experience that. Most likely going Eldritch Knight then multiclassing Wizard, but that slows your spell progression.
What class would you make the subclass fit with. I’ve tried to homebrew a subclass with artificer, but it just didn’t feel right. I’m not a professional game designer either so that might be the problem I came across.
College of Matrimony Bard.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I think we need a real arcane gish class. Meaning one that works like the Paladin and the (new) Ranger. A true half caster progression, extra attack at level 5, access to all of the martial equipment, fighting styles, and feats, etc. It's the last missing piece in the set.
Then most of the subclasses that tried to accomplish that could be moved under the new class. All of them suffer from the same problem. By trying to force the idea of a true gish into another class, they do either the fighting or the spellcasting too poorly. And they waste features on recreating what the Paladin and Ranger do naturally. With a new class to put them in, all of them would make more sense. It doesn't even have to be strong to make me happy. It just needs to exist so there is some logic to it all, so these poor subclasses can actually get used, and so people can better create the characters they want to.
It wouldn't be that difficult to make. And there would be at least a half dozen subclasses all ready to adapt to it. If there is ever a time to do it, it's now with the new edition on the way. The subclasses are getting reworks anyway. They could take some of the load off of the current classes by moving these subclasses to a new one.
I would leave Eldritch Knight as a fighter. I think every full martial class should have a subclass that gives them some casting. Arcane Archer would work well as subclass for a true half caster warrior. Bladesinger should stay a full wizard too imo, even though it historically was a half caster. I like full casters having a option to go martial. I would convert War Wizard into this half caster subclass. Literally just swapping the order of the 6th and 10th features to account for not having counterspell and dispel magic until later. Also giving those spells as always prepared as part of the feature at 10th. Hexblades I believe are gone and will be unnecessary because pact of the blade will be improved. I would make Swordmages from 4e and Duskblades from 3.5 the other 2 subclasses. I know some want this class to fulfill things like blade dancer and other magical sword styles from mythical eastern setting of 3.5 and I see room for those subclasses as well but I don’t know enough about those classes or eastern mysticism to imagine how to update them. If one subclass was to be dedicated to an eastern mysticism vibe I would drop the Swordmage as War wizard conversation already has a tanky vibe.
But reality is this is all a dream since the majority of the few people who voted think it’s an unnecessary class and artificer already has it covered as a half caster warrior. Maybe I’ll try again to homebrew a good artificer warrior hybrid subclass. Gearblade or Techknight subclass.
Artificer
Paladin
Ranger
Bard - College of Swords
Bard - College of Valor
Cleric - Domains: Death, Forge, Life, War
Fighter - Eldritch Knight
Warlock - Hexblade
Wizard - Bladesinger
These can all be useful as full or base Gish builds, depending on how you want to play it. They mix armours and weapons with magic in various ways for mid or front line combatants. These can be further built upon with racial options, feats and multiclassing.
If you want to expand more generically with "hitty and casty" then there are Monk and Rogue options, but they remain more as skirmishers than actual Gishes.
If you find these options as insufficient then I'll admit to being lost by what you actually want. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
Paladin and Ranger are perfect but are not arcane, all the others miss the mark. Also Battle Smith and Armorer Artificer are very close. It’s very simple what people want when they say a arcane half caster warrior. They want uninterrupted half spell progression (not having to multiclass). some decent armor and martial weapons proficiency, and Extra Attack at 5th level. My main problem is I can’t play Str based warrior arcane caster without rolling great stats and multiclassing.
Battle Smith forces you into a pet class or waste multiple features.
Armorer doesn’t have Martial weapon proficiency.
Paladin is divine.
Ranger is Primal.
College of swords is close but difficult to play Str based and missing power house Arcane casting and has lower hit die than Paladin or Ranger because your a full caster.
College of Valor is so trash they made College of swords to soft fix it.
Clerics all divine casters, none get extra attack.
Eldricth Knight spell progression is too slow.
Hexblade difficult to make Str based. Will still find it’s better to eldritch blast most of the time, but good if some gets close to you.
Bladesinger squishy and far better off not in the frontline. Should be casting spells but if someone gets close to you then you are still okay for a round or two. dex based attack a defense with weapons.
I’ve played a Paladin 2/Sword Bard 8. It was fun in a one shot were I could go crazy smiting because the was one big thing to kill at the end.
I’ve tried Battle smith and Armorer but the feel isn’t there.
If I get to play a Warlock it will be Genie pact for me. (I mostly DM, so when I get to play I know what I want to play)
If War clerics 6th level ability was was extra attack that would be interesting. Probably too strong with spirit guardians, and spiritual weapon at their disposal and limited bonus action attacks.
Last time I played a Fighter I was ranged. Next time I’ll be psy or rune knight if the opportunity comes.
If I play a wizard it’s going to be scribes.
I’ve been around since 3e so I’ve played a few different classes in my time with the games.
Paladin and Ranger are perfect but are not arcane
Don't really see the point of such distinction. They're gishes. And you can always just reflavour it as arcane. The terms divine and arcane at this time have no real significance beyond generic and useless description. There is mechanical difference between the two. Wizards can get cure wounds. Bards are arcane by description yet have the "divine" spells of druids and clerics. Magic is magic. The descriptions of arcane and divine do not change the magic, only the way acquired. Water from a tap at home or home filter (arcane) or water bought in bottles (divine) still just gives you the same thing: water.
If War clerics 6th level ability was was extra attack that would be interesting. Probably too strong with spirit guardians, and spiritual weapon at their disposal and limited bonus action attacks.
All Clerics have Extra Attack.
It’s very simple what people want when they say a arcane half caster warrior.
Not really. Arcane/Divine is mechanically irrelevant, half caster can mean game term for spell slot progression or general term for any "Gish" character. And "Warrior" is a vague term. A warrior doesn't even need to use a blade or bow or such weapon. A warrior just means somebody who fights and there is no restriction on what you fight with. Be it sword, bow, gun, spells or words. It also means "soldier" and again, a soldier can be anyone employed to serve in war or military and includes people who sit at desks breaking codes or managing comms etc. By origin warrior is anyone who engages in or creates war. This includes medics, strategists and more who never so much as throw a punch.
So... No. It's not as simple as you claim just with the term you use.
Both with your specific term (Artificer) or general half-casting warriors (Rangers/Paladins) or just any viable Gish options (the list I made) - what you want already exists in the game. So the question your thread title poses is answered "no" , it's not missing because D&D 5th does have it.
Now whether it exists in a manner very specific to your personal preferences that's entirely, completely and purely a "you" thing, not a general D&D thing, so talk to your DM and make it yourself or reflavour things as needed.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
I do think that artificers could fill a more martial role in 1D&D. This is mostly because they're enchanters; enchanting is something I personally associate a lot with arcane warriors. I think giving more proficiencies, extra attack, and more options to enchant weapons and armor in unique ways would be a good way to make artificers a unique battlemage. Making Infusions work a bit more like Eldritch Invocations would be cool and fill a gap people seem to have.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Reminder: artificers all used to have Extra Attack and basic weapon proficiencies. Then the playerbase complained like crazy and they megagigaultranerfed the 2019 UA artificer into its current form. So it is entirely your fault that artificers are bad at being gishes.
As for the constant "just reflavor or use one of the billion arcane gishy subclasses" thing? Paladins can't be reflavored - their every single feature screams HOLY WARRIOR at the tippy-top of their lungs. Rangers? Maybe, and ranger is likely the best chance you have, but even then reflavoring the mechanics of a hardy, woods-wise survivalist into a canny, arcane-savvy swordmage is a big lift and likely to be very unsatisfying. As for the "billion arcane gishy subclasses"...has it ever occured to people that we keep getting those because Wizards keeps getting them wrong?
The Eldritch Knight is a disaster that is best played by never actually using its spellcasting, its entire "magic" half and every spell slot it has is best used as literally fuggoff nothing but "I can cast Shield to make my AC stupid". The Bladesinger is terrible the other way - it's a "martial wizard" whose martial side is absolute garbage. The Bladesinger cannot exist in the front line of a heavy melee fracas, and its features are once again best used as "I use Bladesong to make my AC stupid" prior to acting like a normal ordinary cast-from-the-back wizard. The Sword bard is a bad meme, Valor is better than people give it credit for but is still a meme, and the Hexblade is notorious for being drastically worse than just Eldritch Blasting until and unless you use it to make a Charisma paladin in medium armor. Plus, all the cool Smite-y spells that might help alleviate the problem are ******* Divine, so they're not available to all these arcane casters that have no way to turn "I swing my sword" and "I cast a spell" into the same action the way they gave the Paladin something like nine separate ways to do.
Until we have an arcane class that can turn "Attack" and "Cast" into the same action, which Wizards has thus far been categorically unwilling to do despite knowing full goddamn well that's what people want? Then we will continue seeing these threads, because that is what people want. A character that can seamlessly combine weapon attacks with arcane magic in a way that feels like a powerful fusion of abilities instead of an awkward kludge. Would a broad suite of arcane bonus-action smite spells for artificers and Eldritch Knights to use do the trick? Maybe! BUT WIZARDS WON'T LET US HAVE THOSE, so here we are stuck in Crappy Reflavor Land, or its neighbor the Land of Infinite Homebrew The DM Won't Let Us Use.
Which is just ever so great a place to be.
Why you shouldn't start ANOTHER thread about DDB not giving away free redeems on your hardcopy book purchases.
Thinking of starting ANOTHER thread asking why Epic Boons haven't been implemented? Read this first to learn why you shouldn't!
You said a lot of weird things. That make wonder do you play the game. Also have you read anything about the future direction of 1dnd. I’ll give you quick rundown of what’s weird.
1. If we were talking strictly 5e you would be almost correct about magic being magic. But even you noted that Bards have spells that are typically divine on their list even though they are describe as arcane casters. Two major things to note. Bards aren’t considered mages and bards have a history of not being arcane casters. Moving forward into one d&d they are using a 3 spell list system, Arcane, Divine, and Primal. So just reflavoring a Paladin doesn’t work unless the DM is going to let me pick spells from the arcane spell list in the future or the wizard or sorcerer list now. Also the divine smite only being radiant doesn’t feel very Arcane. Also if this game was all about reflavoring why do we have so many subclasses that intersect. Just because you’re happy with the options presented you assume every has to be completely satisfied with them. I’ve made this mistake about other facets of the game. So I understand, but not everything is fixable with a reskin.
2. No clerics have extra attack. That’s not a feature Clerics get.
3. What classes count as warriors is pretty well known in this game. People have used that term to identify classes that aren’t casters for years. Moving forward in 1dnd Warriors are Fighters, Barbarians and Monks. I feel like you goal is to argue semantics and word choice, but that’s silly in situation. Also note I’ve never used the term Gish. What’s funny is that term came from a literal Arcane caster fighter, but now is used heavily for any class that can cast and be proficient in martial combat.
4. What I want does not exist in the game. I’ve explained what I and apparently a small amount of others want. It does not exist in the game. If it did I wouldn’t have made this post. I even explained why those classes you named don’t fit the mold of what I want. If you have a problem with it that’s a you thing and you don’t have to say another thing to me about it. I heard your opinion and disagree with it wholly. The closest thing to what I want is sadly be relegated to a pet class. The second closest lacks martial weapon proficiency, and neither get a fighting style this is because the Articifer is skill/tool class at its core. Which is why going forward into 1dnd it is classified as an expert.
5. I’m not a game designer. I don’t have to make it myself. I can voice my opinion and if enough people agree we will eventually be heard. If not we will get out voted as we have so far on here. I’m fine either way.
That’s part of why some others and I fixed it recently: (https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/homebrew-house-rules/157414-fify-wotc-the-eldritch-knight). But even without homebrewing, a 2 level dip into Paladin makes the Eldritch Knight a heck of a lot more viable as a gish.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
Artificer is a weird half caster. Honestly if Battle Smith wasn’t locked with the steel defender and got a fighting style instead half of my small group who want a Spellsword type halfcaster would have gravitated toward it. I’ve tried to play one without the defender and it feels like a wasted feature. Self nerfs are okay if you don’t feel it. Since I DM and I’m a semi power gamer I feel self nerfs hard. Plus I don’t get to be a player often so when I do I like to feel competent. I also have a rule against players homebrewing their own classes or subclasses, so I would never ask a DM to let me play my own homebrew in their world. Even if it was perfectly balance, but if I made it it probably wouldn’t be lol.