D&D 5E How would you do the sword mage in 5e?

[ECMO3]

Any kind of gish is probably going to be pretty MAD without pitfalls like the attack with cha hexadin so having their caster attrib be con rather than cha would allow for the result to be MAD in complimentary ways for the giant bag of HP even with poor armor options & clear some room for the other casters to suffer notably while armored like when ASF was a thing.

I understand this, but I do not think it is a good thing mechanically. On a Gish you do not want coomplimentary, you want things in tension to make the player decide where to go (like Intelligence, Dex and Con on a bladesinger).

IMO Charisma makes sense for sorcerers as it is intangible and possibly related to their source of power, but intelligence is second best IMO.

If you are going to make Constitution the casting stat for Sorcerers, then I think you need to make them d4 hit dice and change concentration so it is to a different saving throw (Wisdom or Strength maybe?) or alternatively change the save proficiencies they get so Sorcs get Charisma and Intelligence and have awful saves to balance the high concentration score.

 

[tetrasodium]

I understand this, but I do not think it is a good thing mechanically. On a Gish you do not want coomplimentary, you want things in tension to make the player decide where to go (like Intelligence, Dex and Con on a bladesinger).

IMO Charisma makes sense for sorcerers as it is intangible and possibly related to their source of power, but intelligence is second best IMO.

If you are going to make Constitution the casting stat for Sorcerers, then I think you need to make them d4 hit dice and change concentration so it is to a different saving throw (Wisdom or Strength maybe?) or alternatively change the save proficiencies they get so Sorcs get Charisma and Intelligence and have awful saves to balance the high concentration score.

It depends on what kind of martial abilities they get & how those abilities interact with spellcasting. Charisma is problematic because it's such a good stat in 5e & there are so many charisma based classes. a Gish sorcerer class with bard paladin & warlock all sharing the same charisma baed primary stat is a recipe for disaster because all of those already have significant gishy flavor. A con based gish would synergize with the martial classes nicely yea, but doing that cuts into the caster side of the gish base. Con need not be a problem if the resulting sack of HP is there to offset poor AC & problematic complications for doing stuff like casting while in armor rather than some kind of multiplicative synergy.

We don't currently have any martial or mage group classes to compare against & that makes things more difficult. We know weapons will be different in meaningful ways but without those it adds extra layers of difficulty in figuring where the dart should get aimed for a gish.

 

[ECMO3]

It depends on what kind of martial abilities they get & how those abilities interact with spellcasting. Charisma is problematic because it's such a good stat in 5e & there are so many charisma based classes. a Gish sorcerer class with bard paladin & warlock all sharing the same charisma baed primary stat is a recipe for disaster because all of those already have significant gishy flavor. A con based gish would synergize with the martial classes nicely yea, but doing that cuts into the caster side of the gish base. Con need not be a problem if the resulting sack of HP is there to offset poor AC & problematic complications for doing stuff like casting while in armor rather than some kind of multiplicative synergy.

I think Constitution is more problematic than Charisma. AC is solvable with armor and that is available through every class and if you are talking about a GISH it is available through several subclasses too. Complications while doing something in armor sounds like it is going backwards to 3E and would overly restrict builds, unless I am misunderstanding you. Being able to get your character casting in Plate without problems is thematically one of the best parts of 5E.

The problem with a Con-based sorcerer is this multiclasses well (too well) with Fighter which gets action surge that is a huge boost for a caster.


I have not had any problems with Sorcerer Multiclasses and to be honest I have only seen one sorc multiclass Gish (a triple class Fighter-Arcane Archer/Rogue-Arcane Trickster/Shadow Sorcerer) and Shadow Sorcerer was only a 1-level dip. I've seen some Warlock-Sorc mutliclass builds but they have all been pure casters.

We don't currently have any martial or mage group classes to compare against & that makes things more difficult. We know weapons will be different in meaningful ways but without those it adds extra layers of difficulty in figuring where the dart should get aimed for a gish.

We have so many Gish options available in 5E (Paladin, Ranger, Fighter, Wizard, Bard, Warlock all as single class builds, plus numerous more when you consider multiclassing).

It is hard for me to understand what part of the dartboard you are trying to hit with your constitution Sorc gish. It seems the board is covered by darts already.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

The problem with a Con-based sorcerer is this multiclasses well (too well) with Fighter which gets action surge that is a huge boost for a caster.

honestly fighter 2 is kind of an insane multiclass regardless. i don't think making the sorcerer con-based is gonna change anything about that in any meaningful way. i guess it might make it more appealing to multiclass out of fighter into sorc but i...don't see the problem in that.

 

[tetrasodium]

I think Constitution is more problematic than Charisma. AC is solvable with armor and that is available through every class and if you are talking about a GISH it is available through several subclasses too. Complications while doing something in armor sounds like it is going backwards to 3E and would overly restrict builds, unless I am misunderstanding you. Being able to get your character casting in Plate without problems is thematically one of the best parts of 5E.

The problem with a Con-based sorcerer is this multiclasses well (too well) with Fighter which gets action surge that is a huge boost for a caster.


I have not had any problems with Sorcerer Multiclasses and to be honest I have only seen one sorc multiclass Gish (a triple class Fighter-Arcane Archer/Rogue-Arcane Trickster/Shadow Sorcerer) and Shadow Sorcerer was only a 1-level dip. I've seen some Warlock-Sorc mutliclass builds but they have all been pure casters.



We have so many Gish options available in 5E (Paladin, Ranger, Fighter, Wizard, Bard, Warlock all as single class builds, plus numerous more when you consider multiclassing).

It is hard for me to understand what part of the dartboard you are trying to hit with your constitution Sorc gish. It seems the board is covered by darts already.

I'd like to see all casters go back to being squishies that need protection from martials again as a starting point... Picking up armor proficiency from a MC or starting feat like you suggest only helps a gish with low AC if you can effectively cast in it. A half caster would gain spell levels like artificer & paladin though. Picking up 3rd 4th & 5th level slots at 9/13/17 as a half caster is not so concerning on a gish platform even if they have more of those low level slots than a full caster of those levels of slot & are picking up things like second & third attack at 8 & 15 or 12 & 20 like 3.x average/poor BaB progression classes* did. Spell lists could gravitate towards target:self & subtype specific filters on the arcane list maybe



* 3.5phb pg22 table 3-1

 

[jgsugden]

...Overall I would say Blur is one of the top 10 spells cast period along with shield, Hex, magic missile and healing word. Among 2nd level spells the only spell I can think of that are cast more often is shatter and misty step, and misty step only because it comes on an awesome feat making it available to everyone.

This is ... very different ... than my experience at a wide number of game tables. It also does not match what we saw from the D&DBeyond metrics previously released. Spells I see cast at 2nd level FAR more often than Blur? Misty Step, Mirror Image, Invisibility, Suggestion, Mind Whip, Phantasmal Force, Scorching Ray, Pass without Trace, Spiritual Weapon, Aid, Enlarge, Darkness, Vortex Warp (as of recent), Lesser Restoration ... and those are just the ones cast FAR more often. Blur, being a defensive spell consuming concentration, really does not see much play - and if you seek out the guides that are out there such as Treatmonk's, you'll see there are a lot that share the opinion that this is a mediocre spell, at best, in 5E.

Yes all the time - Protection from Good and Evil, Blur, Spirit Guardians, Greater Invisibility

I think those are the most commonly cast concentration spells of 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th level. Can you name any concentration spells of equal level that are cast more often than these? All of them can target only the caster if you play with your changes.

Under the actual rules I use at my home table, the self with a radius for Spirit Guardians removes it from contention.

However, your opinions are out of whack with a lot of folks. Protection from Good and Evil and Blur are low rated spells by many of the guides, and by myself. For 2nd level, I see Phantasmal Force, Darkness, Enlarge, and Suggestion cast 10 times (each) for every cast of Blur. For 1st level spells, I don't really see a lot of conentration spells cast outside of Hex, Hunter's Mark and Silent Image. Sometimes Fog Cloud and Hideous Laughter. By mid levels, those first level slots are often relegated to Healing, Shield, Absorb Elements, Mage Armor, and Silvery Barbs 90% of the time.

I think you have to go all the way to 5th level and Animate Objects to find a concentration spell that does not target the caster and is cast more often.

I can name 40 spells from levels 1 to 4 that are typically cast one someone outside the caster and use concentration that are cast more often than blur and protection G/E.

Greater invisibility makes you immune to the vast majority of enemy spells that enemies could target you with. It is extremely powerful against any enemy caster that does not have blindsight. You are also taking away one of the main counters to it - throw an AOE and try to break concentration.

Yes - and I'm cutting the duration and requring a higher level slot.

This is aside from a new tactic of spamming regular 2nd level invisibility as a bonus action while you use your action for something else (or just stay invisible while you maintain concentration-free spirit guardians).

3rd level - remember that bump up in spell level. Also, you're forgetting the opportunity cost. There is a reason why you do not see sorcerers spamming invisibility with quickened spell.

You're speculating. I'm speaking from experience with these for several years. And, a lot of the judgments you're using to support your opinion are contrary to the popular opinions expressed by the people that wrote the guides for wizards in 5E, and contradict what I see at the tables, and contradict what we have seen from data from D&D Beyond about what spells are actually being used.

Good luck to you, but we're going around in circles here and your suppositions just do not match with my experiences have actually had these at my table extensively, and my experience when I've been allowed to use them at other tables.

 

[Flamestrike]

"Gish" is not identical to "swordmage."

Yeah it is.

You can literally build a sword mage using the rules as written.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Yeah it is.

You can literally build a sword mage using the rules as written.

Except that it isn't: "gish" is a generic category that covers a wide variety of things, and "swordmage" is not 1:1 synonymous with that category, for the same reason that "holy person" covers both Cleric and Paladin, but neither Cleric nor Paladin is identical to "swordmage."

Yes, you can build a mage who uses a sword using the rules as written.

You cannot build anything even remotely like a 4e Swordmage using the rules as written.

The two are not the same.

 

[ECMO3]

You're speculating. I'm speaking from experience with these for several years.

I am speaking from experience too and that experience includes numerous tables as both a DM and a player over the last 7 years and it includes playing.

And, a lot of the judgments you're using to support your opinion are contrary to the popular opinions expressed by the people that wrote the guides for wizards in 5E,

The position of those that wrote 5E is not contrary to my judgement about removing concentration, which is what this is really about! This is actually covered by the writers on page 263 of the DMG:

"Be aware of adding anything to your game that allows a character to concentrate on more than one affect at a time, use more than one reaction or bonus action per round, or attune to more than 3 magic items at a time. Rules or game elements that override the rules for concentration, reactions, bonus actions and magic item attunement can seriously overcomplicate or unbalance your game"

I am arguing that your suggested rule does exactly that.

Finally, we are talking about a Gish build, which when it comes to Wizard is only the Bladesinger, a Dwarf/Gith Abjurer or a multiclass. So it is not going to be captured in most Wizard optimization builds online unless it is specific to Bladesinger. Those that do cover a Bladesinger specifically usually recommend playing them as more of a wizard with better defenses than a Gish, which is fine as a playstyle and is arguably more effective, but makes it not really a Gish build.

Based on extensive playtesting at tables I have been on: Blur or Protection From Evil and Good (if the enemy is covered by PEG) are the best low level concentration spells to run on a hard melee High AC Gish build like Bladesinger or Battle Smith Artificer. The second tier concentration spells for supporting melee on such a Gish are control spells like Darkness, Fog Cloud, Silence, Cause Fear etc, which are situationally useful in melee. As far as supporting melee goes, those are generally more effective than other offensive concentration options like Hex or Shadowblade.

 

[jgsugden]

I am speaking from experience too and that experience includes numerous tables as both a DM and a player over the last 7 years and it includes playing.

But not with using the rules that you are criticizing.

The position of those that wrote 5E is not contrary to my judgement about removing concentration, which is what this is really about! This is actually covered by the writers on page 263 of the DMG:

"Be aware of adding anything to your game that allows a character to concentrate on more than one affect at a time, use more than one reaction or bonus action per round, or attune to more than 3 magic items at a time. Rules or game elements that override the rules for concentration, reactions, bonus actions and magic item attunement can seriously overcomplicate or unbalance your game"

I am arguing that your suggested rule does exactly that.

I understand. I looked at that advice and challenged whether we needed to be that restrictive. I found a less restrictive path that created a better situation at my game table, tested it out, and find a better option.[quoite]Finally, we are talking about a Gish build, which when it comes to Wizard is only the Bladesinger, a Dwarf/Gith Abjurer or a multiclass. So it is not going to be captured in most Wizard optimization builds online unless it is specific to Bladesinger.[/quote]There are a lot of multiclass options, right? And I did not introduce the limitation to Gish builds and have tested this with far broader applications - for years - and found no problems.

Those that do cover a Bladesinger specifically usually recommend playing them as more of a wizard with better defenses than a Gish, which is fine as a playstyle and is arguably more effective, but makes it not really a Gish build.

Because the Bladesigner, as a melee class, comes off as underpowered when the focus is on the melee capability - primarily because it is hard to elevate damage and maintain defenses due to all of the restrictions on concentration.

Based on extensive playtesting at tables I have been on: Blur or Protection From Evil and Good (if the enemy is covered by PEG) are the best low level concentration spells to run on a hard melee High AC Gish build like Bladesinger or Battle Smith Artificer.

As noted, you're in a super minority when you think those are really good options as written.

The second tier concentration spells for supporting melee on such a Gish are control spells like Darkness, Fog Cloud, Silence, Cause Fear etc, which are situationally useful in melee. As far as supporting melee goes, those are generally more effective than other offensive concentration options like Hex or Shadowblade.

Blur reduces the damage you take. That reduction only matters in D&D if you would have gone down in combat without it. Otherwise, it is not relevant to whether you'd win or lose the battle. Spells that augment damage wrap the battle up faster, which usually means the opponents taking less attacks, which means an alternative path to less damage taken. In 5E we have proven over and over that a focus on fast damage outpaces defensive options that prevent the use of actions for offense and/or tie up your concentration.

We're going in circles here - no need to repeat ourselves any further.