Probably not the best, but not bad all the same: I think Clerics come closest to this, although their attacks aren't quite as important as their physical presence or casting, which disqualifies them for me. A perfect solution would also mean that I wasn't inherently weaker just for making it happen (so taking Fighter levels to make a Bladesinger a better weapon user will help less than just playing as a generic full-casting Wizard). Personally, my ideal Gish is one where I had options other than attacking with my attacks being as viable as my magic, making no "obvious" choice in which action to take. I'm thinking they didn't take multiclassing seriously (it's a variant rule, after all) and originally planned everything around everyone being a single class (so it didn't matter if a Martial couldn't use Flame Blade). Shadow Blade? My guess is that Shadow Blade is different so to not repeat their original mistake in making a Concentration-based melee-attack spell. I get the feeling that spells were designed more around converting them from previous editions, rather than comparing them to the mechanics of the current one.įor example, what's the reasoning for the mechanical differences of Flame Blade vs. Most of the power from Martials comes from Attacking, but you generally can't get your Attack investments and Cast a Spell investments in the same turn, so why spend resources in doing both? Not to mention that HP soaking is a big deal in 5e, but almost all spells you'd be able to cast that don't interfere with your primary martial mechanic (the Attack Action) use Concentration, which loses value the more you expect to take damage. Storm Herald Barbarians, Swords Bards, Clerics, etc.įor the spell-and-spell-slot specific type of Gish, it could have been a lot better if a lot of the melee powers in the game could be utilized with the Attack action (such as Flame Sword, Vampiric Touch, etc.), or if they synergized with existing defensive abilities (Barkskin, Mirror Image on the Drunken Master). That being said, there are limitless opportunities for characters that use magic and attacking without the need to combine the two. If you want something more magical than just the base Paladin, your options are kinda limited. The only examples I can think of that scale well enough to be worth mention are Sorcerer/Paladin hybrids, and that's just because you have ways of spending spell slots without interfering with your martial playstyle (through Divine Smite, Shield, etc.). With ranged attacks being available, and melee cantrips being rare, there aren't many reasons for someone to multiclass between martial/caster outside of a few defensive spells. Martials don't have a lot of synergies with caster levels outside of spells like Shield, Misty Step or Mirror Image (which are generally too expensive to be worth it on their own). Overall, I think that the more your definition relies on caster levels, the more difficult it will be. Can I be a tanky spellcaster that never attacks, or do I need to be a magical warrior?įor example, does just using Divine Smite make you a Gish? What about using Smite spells? What about Arcane Archer which casts no spells, but uses magic and spell-like abilities? Or is it tied to caster level? Does a Moon Druid count, or a Storm Herald? What about a Four Elements Monk? using spells, while also requiring one of those to be used generally for melee combat or strictly on your attacks. Where do yall think we are now? What are the best gishes? How easy is it to gish?Well, for starters, it's important for each person to identify what "Gish" means to them. Throughout 5e there have been a lot of diffrent opinions on how to build a magic/martial character, sometimes called a gish.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |