Let's talk gish

>>48419125
In Fate I played a political officer type character with minor magical powers. Most of his skills went into martial prowess and utility support (High Will and Notice, decent fight, shoot, physique and agility, low magic) while magic was used as a utility skill, pushing opponents around or settting zones on fire so that they are no longer safe to inhabit.

File: 88c5de86beb560a66a85bb7d12ba5204.jpg (2MB, 1200x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1200x1500px

Mechanics-wise, there are only two practical methods of enabling "gish"-type characters that have meaningful diversity in build options.

A. Designing spells expressly for such characters, such as spells that upgrade weapon attacks. Entire gish classes with spell selections tailored to such a playstyle also work. D&D examples of this include virtually all of 4e's non-martial weapon-users (e.g. artificer, avenger, paladin, swordmage, warden) and 5e's paladin.

B. Having the price to improve martial prowess and spellcasting abilities simultaneously be reasonably low, under the logic that such a character has split their focus and can do neither as well as a specialist. D&D examples of this include the 2e fighter/mage, the 3.X abjurant champion, and the 3.X and 5e bard.

Pathfinder's inquisitor, which is extremely well-designed, has shades of both A and B.

Any "gish"-type that satisfies neither A nor B inevitably does not work as advertised and forces one down extremely specific builds, and veering away from those builds results in a mediocre character. Prime examples of this include Pathfinder's magus (which has a shockingly, no pun intended, low number of optimal builds) and 5e's eldritch knight (keep to abjurations and do not even think about casting a damage-dealing evocation).

>>48419399
You're forgetting spells that aren't designed for gishes but benefit them anyway, such as buffs for martial types that can be also cast on ones self, and control effects that change the local battlefield whether from far away or with you in the thick of it.

File: 9abedf18a4819a85447caaec20c81694.jpg (273KB, 1262x924px)

273KB, 1262x924px

>>48419807

>You're forgetting spells that aren't designed for gishes but benefit them anyway, such as buffs for martial types that can be also cast on ones self

I cannot think of much precedent for this in any D&D edition. Even in 3.X, abjurant champion gishes were mostly reliant on personal-range spells such as Wraithstrike, Greater Luminous Armor, and Bite of the ___________, with their other spells mostly for noncombat utility. The only "This was not meant for yourself, but as a gish, you can now make good use of it" spell for that type of 3.X gish that comes to mind off-hand is Haste.

>control effects that change the local battlefield whether from far away or with you in the thick of it

This is exactly the kind of spell that does *not* work too well for a gish unless condition B from >>48419399 is in effect. A gish has to invest enough in their weapon attacks that using their turn to do something *other* than attack with their weapon had best come at a low opportunity cost.

>>48419125
Thanks, I just realized the purpose of the Elf class in my Human-only LotFP setting. Red Mage.

File: 1676481-gish.png (196KB, 640x640px)

196KB, 640x640px

>>48419125

>>48419951
Enlarge is another fair example of a useful self buff. As for control, you're right about d&d but even as already stated here >>48419275 there's examples outside of it.

>>48419951
>>48420057
Actually on second thought that last bit might fall under your cheap magic clause, I don't know FATE in detail.

File: 2951ef92fe5712ccd58ee28b362e7a46.jpg (917KB, 744x1052px)

917KB, 744x1052px

>>48420057

I do not think Enlarge Person is actually all that useful for a 3.X or Pathfinder gishes. It more or less requires you to use it before the battle given its one-round casting time, its offensive benefits are not that astounding (+4.5 average damage assuming you have a greatsword), you still have only one attack of opportunity each round unless you took Combat Reflexes, and you suffer from -2 AC.

It is not terrible, of course, but it is not quite the best use of that 1st-level slot. Consider a Nerveskitter as a 3.X abjurant champion, or saving that slot for yet another Shocking Grasp as a Pathfinder magus.

>>48419275
>>48420057
>>48420104

Fate is a poor example to use here, since its method of handling combat actions is so nebulous that a generic "magic" skill is not much different from any other skill.

I will agree that clause A should include the likes of "this buff was not meant for you specifically, but you can now make good use of it yourself" spells, yes.

>>48420185
>Fate is a poor example to use here, since its method of handling combat actions is so nebulous that a generic "magic" skill is not much different from any other skill.
For purposes of this conversation, generic systems that provide access to martial and magical skills with equal ease are fair to bring up. Being loosely defined in its effects is a fair criticism, however.

>>48420263
Any examples of a generic system featuring hybrids that isn't wishy-washy on the details?

>>48422066
GURPS is worth looking at.

File: 1316801321599.jpg (76KB, 620x800px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 620x800px

>>48422351
How would you make a good gish in GURPS?

I haven't really looked at it extensively, but I don't think the basic magic books have very many martial friendly spells.

>>48422490
Basic Magic isn't too powerful, but if I wanted a character with a very specific themed magic (say, Divine for a Paladin), I would use GURPS: Powers and pick/make a Divine power. It can technically be things other than magic, but it's good enough and it's fairly cheap too (like, ten points a level cheap with a shitload of effects for you to play with).

If I wanted a character which was more just "Wizard with armor and a sword", I'd use Sorcery and perhaps limit my schools in order to save on Character Point costs. It's kind of clunky, but the way it works is you get levels of Sorcerous Empowerment to set the max power level for your spells and you can either improvise safely (meaning you only get extremely small effects along the lines of what a Perk would give you), improvise dangerously (a spell that mimicks the power level of an advantage equal to or less than the number of points you've spent on Empowerment), or just outright learn a new spell (which are statted like Advantages and limited by how many points you've pumped into your Empowerment).

Sorcery is very expensive, though, so unless you're in a campaign where you have access to lots and lots of character points (I'd say 200+ is a good measure), it's going to be underwhelming (although arguably better than nothing).

I consider it a Gish. And don't know if others do, but I love the Pathfinder Investigator. You can brew potions ahead of time to hand out at the beginning of the day. Give the fighter bulls strength, it's on them to make it, alchemical allocations and multiple potions that can be redrank. Build able into decent glass cannons. Mine in our group hits harder than anyone else with two hand power attack studied combat shenanigans.

I like bowquisitors a lot as well, good at range with free bane, interesting spell list with good buffs and utilities. Also easy to make into twohand glass cannons as well.

File: 762e8cb06fdc363c87bb496300e1cade.png (1MB, 868x1227px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 868x1227px

>>48422066

Savage Worlds may have what you are looking for, but I am not familiar enough with it to recommend it in good faith.

Mutants & Masterminds and Strike! both allow a character's powers to be flavored as just about anything, and that includes "gishery," but that may be considered "wishy-washy on the details."

>>48423096

Bear in mind that you need the Alchemist Discovery (Infusion) investigator talent to hand out your extracts to other party members.

I am a fan of nearly all of Pathfinder's 6th-level spellcasters. With the exception of the summoner, they are remarkably well-designed tier 3 classes.

If your GM happens to allow Path of War material, you should look into the alchemist (polymath), investigator (polymath), inquisitor (warpath follower), and warpriest (warpath follower), all of which are both 6th-level spellcasters and 6th-level initiators. They are arguably strict upgrades to their base classes, if only due to how powerful initiators can be in combat.

File: tumblr_o8e7c2z7c41qdyuyno1_1280.jpg (128KB, 1280x758px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1280x758px

>>48419125
PF Bard into Dragon Disciple. Started out with high defenses by nabbing a shield, kept it up with crafting until DD started kicking in for more resilience. Fightan with sword and board until natural weapons came up in the same vein. Healed with Cure spells after the fight and used offensive fire spells and enchantments to draw attention off of vulnerable allies or make enemies attack each other.

Red mage is the generalist who does a bit of everything right? Sword&Board&Spells&Buffs&Heals&Skills sounds about right.

File: 1450302743722.jpg (1MB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1600px

>>48423538
Warlock//Swordsage in a gestalt game made for an awesome switch-hitter. Roll to hit at range, ride the blast in, hit with a martial maneuver and then shadow-stride out when things get dangerous.

File: b2d7d9f7672f6915426cca276997e4e6.jpg (74KB, 600x752px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 600x752px

>>48423538

>PF Bard into Dragon Disciple. Started out with high defenses by nabbing a shield, kept it up with crafting until DD started kicking in for more resilience.

I cannot see how this would be an efficacious build in any way, shape, or form. It might *look* reasonably powerful, but it is a horrifically disjointed build that would be better off as a single-classed bard.

Sword-and-board characters in Pathfinder are generally quite poor, and offensive fire spells are likewise shabby unless you are optimizing a Draconic/Orc bloodline sorcerer or using Dazing Spell.

File: 1454699928353.jpg (325KB, 1280x1078px)

325KB, 1280x1078px

>>48423646
Wasn't a high-op game so I was doing pretty well, and the DM was kind enough to allow Dragonfire Inspiration at d4s instead of d6's. Mix that with natural attack combos from Dragon Form lategame and a rapid-shooting gunslinger on the team and those few d4's of energy damage added up fast.

File: 1393348663531.jpg (211KB, 605x630px)

211KB, 605x630px

>>48419125
What Gish would be good for a Half-Orc? I was thinking fluff-wise more than crunch-wise. basically something that you won't see everyday but something that still kinda fits.

I was thinking Rage Mage or some sort of Warrior/Druid Multiclass.

At what point did people start using the term Gish. When did this become a thing. I thought we were going to take about the game.

File: 1439538667604.jpg (145KB, 628x1273px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 628x1273px

>>48423896
>Rage Mage
The 3.5 PrC for it isn't all that great, but it might work if you're not too worried about getting a high power result. There's PF's Bloodrager which is a sort of sorcerous barbarian, D10, full BAB, and rage powers along with casting some spells and getting supernatural abilities kind of like an arcane Paladin. Results vary depending on what kind of Bloodline you pick (Dragon/elemental get you some blasting, but Fey/Undead lines might get you debuffing powers).

Also PF-wise, there's the Rage Prophet prestige class if you can deal with the Oracle (Divine spontaneous caster)/Barbarian mix.

>Warrior/Druid.
Druid into Warshaper, shape-shifting focused combatant of nature who brings the animal kingdom's claws, teeth and stingers to bare against their foes.

Daggerspell Shaper might come up too but I don't remember what it does right now and I'm skyping into my game and getting killed by a Marileth.

There's also always just plain Multi-Classing; Druid/Warblade (Tiger Claw Discipline), though technically you could combo those into Ruby Knight Vindicator (Divine/Martial dual progression) if you're willing to burn a feat to get Turn Plants so that you qualify.

>>48423992
Gish is the old term for Githyanki or Githzerai warrior-wizards in D&D that has long been forgotten in its old use in favor of any martial magician.

File: Dakkon_concept_art.jpg (31KB, 474x600px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 474x600px

>>48424212
Well now that's even more confusing, because that doesn't explain the overabundance of weeb images.

>>48419125
My all-time favorite would have to be 4e's Swordmage, though some might disagree as to whether that counts.

>>48419125
Much as I have grown to dislike 3.PF, the Magus is a cool class. It's one of but a few examples of what Paizo can do when they aren't busy jamming their head into their own colon.

The swordmage in 4e is a cool class, too.

Pretty much everyone in Anima is a gish of some variety, and I like Anima despite it being an incomprehensible clusterfuck.

The various FF TTRPGs I've played have all included the Red Mage, and a few of them have included the FFT style gish classes as well like Fencer and Elementalist. They're a little more hit and miss in that they either do fucking nothing (default Fencer) or break the game over their knee (Blood Price Doublecast Red Mage)

>>48424352
You can blame the Final Fantasy series for that, as it took a lot of inspiration early on from 2e d&d. It popularized and codified the "spellcasting swordsman" archetype in its genre, and when that genre itself became popular here in the west, the eastern imagery and western terminology just sort of stuck.

>>48424352
>overabundance of weeb images
you mean touhoufag?
yeah, he does that

File: good-heavens-indeed.jpg (37KB, 418x455px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 418x455px

>>48424478
>Blood Price Doublecast Red Mage
That knows attack summons and wears armor to absorb the element of those summons?

>>48424825
That and casting from the hp so restored

>>48424856
Yeah, that was what I was trying to imply.

>>48424886
I know you knew, but I felt the need for conpletion

File: Player's_Handbook_(2nd_edition).jpg (324KB, 1243x1652px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 1243x1652px

One interesting form of the gish is the 2e Paladin, since it shows us so much about the game design of the time and how it differs from modern game design.

It's essentially a superpowered version of another class. Mechanically speaking, there is no reason for you to play a Fighter over a Paladin -- the only thing Fighters get that Paladins don't is the option for weapon specialization, and that perk is miniscule compared to all the shiny toys Paladins get. Paladins weren't meant to be balanced against Fighters, at least not mechanically.

The incredibly strict code the Paladins had to adhere to was the price for their power. They aren't allowed to keep their cut of the money they get from adventuring with the party. They can't own more than ten magic items. And, of course, they have to be utter paragons of Law and Good if they want to keep any of what makes their class special.

You would never see a class like that in modern games. People are too afraid to give any player such a distinct mechanical advantage over any other. Gygax had no such qualms.

File: b4bc056f211b5e136dd0ab0ebea41399.png (3MB, 2700x2150px)

3MB, 2700x2150px

>>48424399

The swordmage's playstyle is truly very unique and entertaining. It is a shame, however, that the Aegis of Assault swordmage is only worthwhile as a hybrid, and there is virtually no reason at all to ever bother with the Aegis of Ensnarement.

>>48424478

>Much as I have grown to dislike 3.PF, the Magus is a cool class.

The playstyle of the magus is certainly very entertaining if built optimally, especially as a hexcrafter. Unfortunately, there are minimal ways to build such an optimal magus, and many of them invariably involve a scimitar, Shocking Grasp, and/or Dervish Dance.

>>48425620

And the paladin, in turn, is obsoleted by Legends and Lore's priests of Horus (super-paladins with less restrictions due to being Chaotic Good) and priests of Hachiman and Aegir.

>Priests of Hachiman are professional soldiers. They must always be prepared to fight for their lord, can never shirk from battle, and must be in the first rank when battle is joined.
>Requirements: AB same as for a warrior; AL any; WP swords, bows and arrows, dagger, polearm; AR a; SP all, combat, divination, healing, weather; PW 1) use THAC0 and saving throw tables of warrior; 10) favorite sword is given a kami, making it a +3 weapon; TU nil.

>To be a priest of Aegir, a man must be a ship captain. Such men are fighters who worship Aegir and have been granted a few clerical powers on the side. (They are not considered dual- or multi-class; they are simply fighters with extraordinary powers.)
>Requirements: AB fighter; AL any; WP any; AR b; SP all, weather, divination, guardian; PW 1) use spells as a priest; 10) breathe water; TU nil.

That said, weapon specialization on a fighter is still quite useful given some darts.

File: urist.jpg (6KB, 192x207px)

6KB, 192x207px

>>48425677
>And the paladin, in turn, is obsoleted by Legends and Lore's priests of Horus (super-paladins with less restrictions due to being Chaotic Good) and priests of Hachiman and Aegir.
Bloat leads to creep, and creep leads to imbalance. It was inevitable.

>>48425620

D&D classes were never balanced. In earlier editions mages trumped everything, but of course they were super squishy with their low HP and inability to wear armor. As long as you could get a few experience levels in, you'd eventually gain access to spells that could curbstomp any random encounter scaled to your party's challenge level.

Demihumans in the original D&D were treated as their own classes, and had very strict maximum levels in contrast to human characters. Although these characters shined early in the game, they were most certainly started to lag behind when they could no longer gain levels, while their human allies continued to accumulate new feats and more HP.

The ranger is perhaps even more broken than the paladin. Rangers are very difficult to surprise, are masters at tracking, are almost on par with fighters, and have access to some druid and wizard spells. (although, I think rangers have to experience to a higher level than paladins before they start learning spells)

>>48425836
>new feats
Feats weren't a thing pre-3e

>>48425870
I think he meant the term in the general sense, not as the familiar named mechanic.

>>48425870

By feats, I mean the different skills characters acquired at experience milestones, like the fighter gaining additional attacks per round. I'm not sure what these abilities were actually referred to in the manuals.

I think a number of classes were considered "fighting men," or offshoots of the fighter class. So they received some of the same abilities, but usually got them at a slower rate.

>>48422490
Actually made a Red Mage character in Anima. Warlock is a perfect fit for it.
>But hybrids have terrible secondaries, anon.
Not if you invest points wisely and don't attempt to min/max. Also, taking Natural Power, so that my spell levels keyed off of POW instead of INT was a good idea, as well as taking Magic Projection as Attack/Defense, so my Attack and Dodge were my casting skills.
Besides, a RDM only needs to cherry pick a few spells: Induce State covers most status effects, Petrify is obvious, Create Energy can be a bare-bones single target Fire/Blizzard/Thudner, Soul Poison is Bio, one of the three healing spells works as a Cure, etc.

File: viktor7.jpg (109KB, 500x650px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 500x650px

>>48419125
>What kinds of gish play would you really like to see?
I'd like to see a gish that doesn't regularly use their magic in combat. In combat, they use their weapons. Out of combat, they perform magic ritual and cast utility spells. Maybe at high levels they get spells that can be used in combat, but they're more like powerful panic buttons than weapons.

I think it'd be a cool way to play an adventurer-researcher sort of character.

>>48425620
It's worth mentioning that going by straight 3d6, you have about a .13% chance to qualify to be a paladin. That's 1 chance in 769.* So it's not like most people have the opportunity to weigh the options of being a fighter and being a paladin.

Personally, I hated this sort of thing about old school D&D. "Hey! You rolled super high and are already getting sizable bonuses from your attributes? Well, since your character is already so much better than everybody else's, you qualify for extra bonuses to make your character even more betterer! You get a bonus to earned experience, so you level quicker! You class caps are higher, so you advance to a higher level! You get percentile strength to boost your bonuses to damage and to-hit through the roof! Oh, and you have access to more and perhaps better classes!" What kind of shit is that?

*See https://muleabides.wordpress.com/2012/02/11/you-must-be-this-lucky-to-play/

>>48426864
Play the psychic spellcaster Investigator, if you're in Pathfinder. B

>>48419125
Played a synthesist summoner that wore an earth elemental to mine in, but the game collapsed. Then I played a bard with only perform (weapon drill) flavored as being supernally aware and active of what allies were doing and how to help them (so basically a warlord with some magic to back it up) that shot silver light everywhere. That one collapsed too, but both were quite fun.
I'd like to see a game like that, probably steal some inspiration from Fairy Tail. Everyone has magic pools, everyone has physical moves, then you buy ways to modulate either of those. The core cast includes an obnoxiously tanky guy who learned dragon magic by living with one for years (and is obnoxiously tanky because the dragon didn't feel like moving out of the volcano, and wasn't careful enough to not occasionally step on him), an accomplished magician that mostly just uses a spell to swap out her armor and weapons from her warehouses of awesome magic gear, and an elementalist that turns into most of a river to attack.
I think it would be an interesting change; instead of everyone specialising in different areas, make magic strictured enough that everyone can specialise in a different area of magic and not step on each others' toes.

>>48427142
The sort of shit where you were supposed to take the outcome of the dice for what you were playing?
I mean, it's harsh, but there wasn't a lot of "Well, I figured I'd bring a this character with this build to help support the team", it was "Roll the dice, hope you win big, play it out as long as it goes, hope the DM strikes you with lightning if you roll Gully Dwarf."
Much more a roguelike where you make do with what you're given than an RPG where you start out with guaranteed competence and achieve awesomeness by your actions.

>>48427323
Sometimes, the party *IS* Raistlin, Alucard, Scooby, and Shaggy, and it's not immediately a worse story for being so.

>>48427323
>Much more a roguelike where you make do with what you're given
Only new players do that and bored pros. People who really play roguelikes and finish them when allowed to roll stats will roll until they get the stats they need. If they don't they'll play suicidally and see if they can dive too deep to get somethign that's overpowered for their level and come back up.They'll also restart if they don't get their prefered item progression in X levels of a dungeon. It's basicaly be playing with a guy who rolls his character then in 5 seconds of playing goes "My character calls out in anguish at the misdeeds he does and slits his own throat" and proceed to roll up another character while the group gets suicidal fucks that die for a couple of days.

File: 1283306616184.jpg (23KB, 265x301px)

23KB, 265x301px

>>48427464
I'm sorry, I didn't realise I was speaking to the Ultimate Arbiter Of Human Thought And Opinions And Taste, my apologies your majestiousness.

>>48419125
>Gish
This word has more connotations than a fighter-mage.

Are you a Githyanki?

As for a game where everyone is some kind of fighter mage, rune quest

>>48419125
I played a swordmage in 4e once, which was quite fun. At the basic end you have sword swings enhanced with elements, magical barriers to help your allies, area spells to help clear out enemies, and later on teleportation to help with positioning.

It really captured a lot of what I want from a Gish. Rather than simply using magic to buff oneself and fight things normally, it blended the swordplay with more raw elemental blasting in an interesting way.

>>48424478
>(Blood Price Doublecast Red Mage)
Backed up by a Critical: Quicken Time Mage inside the effect radius who absorbs only the second element used, of course.
After all, why should the enemy get a turn at all?

>>48424825
Best part about that game.

>>48428284
>not Magik Frenzy Duel-Wield Illusionists

>>48424478
Geomancy Parivir was also a cool example of a Gish rapetrain from FFT. Not as bad as the BP Doublecaster, but more than capable of clearing endgame maps by itself all the same.

>>48419125
Meme concept.

>>48428518
All communicated concepts are made of memes, what's your point?

There's a D&D feat from the 3.0 Splatbook bastards and bloodlines called ancient tradition, it lets you use any stat to use for casting rather than the normal stat for one class, it must be taken at level one though.

>>48428518
Retard poster.

>>48428618
That's how you Muscle Wizard,not how you Gish.

>>48428651
I mean, it would let you streamline your martial and magical skills into one stat which is great for later multiclassing or simplifying the skills you use if your class starts out as a cross between magical and martial.

>>48428651
>>48429007
Basically, Martial Skill =/= Strength. It does help make for a nice synergy though.

>>48425677
>That said, weapon specialization on a fighter is still quite useful given some darts.
Man I miss darts being awesome. How do we bring that back a little?

Is the term "The Gish" really that common? I understand the concept and met with it several times, but it's the first time hearing that name for it - I call it Spellsword or Red Mage most of the time.

>>48430759
It is here and on the 3.PF optimization boards, at least.

>>48430759

It's very common with anyone with a D&D history.

Red Mage has the issue that it's very conflicted in what it is. Red Mage is a 'Jack of all sorts of magic' while Gishes don't tend towards the healing sort.

>>48431055
Yeah the red mage is technically a gish but represents a bit more than that. It's probably fine though.

>>48430037
By makin poison and alchemy viable as well a getting some support for throwing weapons in general similar to the UA weapon feats.

>>48423646
>Sword-and-board characters in Pathfinder are generally quite poor
Sword and board scales pretty well thanks to the relative cheapness of armor/shield enchants. If you can meme Shield Mastery onto your feat list via Ranger combat style (preferably without actually being a Ranger), you turn into a monster.

Sanctified Slayer Inquisitor for instance can pick up heavy armor proficiency, craft magic weapon/armor, and extra slayer talent as feats. By level 9, you've crafted yourself +5 full plate and a +5 shield (which also functions as a +5 weapon) for only 25k gold. Inquisitors are already disgusting stat sticks by that level, and that just turns it up to 11.

>>48419125
I want to fuck that gish

>>48419125
The best kind of Gishes, which I never see enough of, are the ones that combine magic and sword (like just as a shitty example off the top of my head, lighting their sword on fire and making an attack that leaps from enemy to enemy after you hit the first one).

Almost every gish type class I see is "Skyrim with a spell in one hand and a sword in the other." Sometimes there will be one that goes a bit better and let's you smack the spell onto your sword so they both hit at once, but I've not yet seen one that has its own unique "spell list", besides the Swordsage and the other ToB classes.

Are clerics gish? I've done cleric a bunch.

The only arcane gish I ever tried was a Paladin Sorcerer in 3.5.

>>48432008

4e Swordmage was entirely about melding magic and swordplay together.

One of it's basic spells was lashing out with your blade and having phantasmal copies of yourself attack in every direction (To give you a Close Burst 1 attack)

>>48432029
>>48432029
Technically yes.

Gish comes from AD&D, where the Githyanki has fighter/magic-user dual class characters which were called gish. Githzerai had rogue/magic-user dual class characters called zerths that never got the same attention because no one used githzerai.

File: 420f2b9c0593520c29b1aba3675fca7b.png (470KB, 800x960px)

470KB, 800x960px

>>48431480

AC is a middling defense by 9th-level. There are so many other ways to shut down your character (combat maneuvers, touch attacks, save-or-lose effects), and all of your AC investments will be meaningless if you are targeted by one of those. Even if there is an enemy who primarily targets non-touch AC, you must expend other character resources to force the enemy to attack you and not one of your allies.

Pathfinder is very much rocket tag at *every* level, and the best defense is *always* an overwhelming, alpha striking offense. Every turn you spend attacking while you have a shield in hand is a turn not spent attacking with a two-handed weapon, such as a greatsword or a longbow. Correct me if I am wrong here, but you cannot even cast somatic-component spells if you have a shield in one hand and a weapon in the other, can you?

That 9th-level inquisitor could have been a Dexterity/Wisdom race archer with Noble Scion (Narikopolus), Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, and Manyshot, for feats, laying into enemies with Judgments and four effective attacks each round.

In the event that Path of War initiators are allowed, shield-wielders are *still* worthless because the one and only type of initiator that tries to make shields worthwhile is the warder, and that class has a shieldless archetype (zweihander sentinel) that is plainly better than the base class.

4e made heavy shields ideal for nearly every character who could use them due to adding +2 AC and +2 Reflex in a game wherein two-handed weapons only deal marginally more damage.

The value of shields in 5e is dependent on build. Clerics and College of Valor bards should certainly use them since they cast as often as they attack. Barbarians must avoid them due to having resistance against physical damage anyway. For fighters, paladins, and rangers, it depends on their Fighting Style and whether they are aiming for a Strength build (Shield Master) or a Dexterity build (use a shield with Dueling).

>>48431972
Thematics are important, yo. Not just pure mechanical effaciousness.

Please ensure you keep any such suggested builds to gishes at the same time.

>>48427840
>RuneQuest
Is it any good? Saw it in my FLGS, leafed through a couple pages. Looks like it's mechanically similar to Only War.

File: 69218a60e78be6750dcaa7f704698d35.jpg (870KB, 707x1000px) Image search: [Google]

870KB, 707x1000px

>>48432008

You should search more assiduously for "gish"-type classes, then.

D&D 4e offers literally *two dozen* that match your description:
• Ardent
• Artificer
• Assassin (Dragon Magazine version)
• Avenger
• Barbarian, because this is a primal magic-using class
• Barbarian (berserker)
• Bard
• Bard (skald)
• Cleric (templar)
• Cleric (warpriest)
• Druid (sentinel)
• Monk, which is a weapon-using psionic class for all intents and purposes
• Paladin
• Paladin (blackguard)
• Paladin (cavalier)
• Ranger (hunter)
• Ranger (scout)
• Runepriest
• Seeker
• Swordmage
• Warden
• Warlock
• Warlock (hexblade)
• Wizard (bladesinger)

"Gishes" are, in fact, the most common type of class in 4e, and every single one of them has magical powers that accompany weapon attacks.

D&D 5e only really succeeds at the "gish" archetype through the paladin class, which has "smite" spells that work through weapon attacks. The fighter (eldritch knight) has to be an abjuration specialist spamming Shield and Counterspell in practice, the rogue (arcane trickster) does nothing but spam Green-flame Blade while their familiar uses Help actions, and the wizard (bladesinger) truly has no business being in melee.

>>48432079

Your statement is wholly irrelevant to my own.

I was not speaking of the thread's main topic of "gishes." I was contesting >>48431480's ignorant claim that shields have actual value in Pathfinder, which was a subject entirely separate to that of "gishes."

Besides, in Pathfinder, inquisitors are very much "gishes" regardless of their choice of weapon.

>>48432079
>>48432079
I don't talk about gish when Touhoufag is around specifically because the only thing he can think about is optimization. Thematics and actual gameplay are irrelevant and he can't shut up long enough for you to discuss anything except builds.

>>48432135

Eh, I'd not call the Ranger a Gish. It's sitting firmly in Martial.

File: b26645bcd29c285c9f8d221351453c20.jpg (513KB, 796x750px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 796x750px

>>48432142

There are, in fact, many optimal "gish" builds for most editions of D&D.

>>48432149

The ranger (hunter) and ranger (scout) are reliant on primal magic "aspect" stances which augment their weapon attacks. They are, in fact, "gishes."

>>48432256
Missing the point entirely, as always.

>>48432270
I mean, they are probably not what you think of Gish when you say it (because of the originals they have heavy Arcane leanings), but it's true, they are warriors who combine (primal) magic with skill with arms.

>>48432076
>due to adding +2 AC and +2 Reflex
That's something I was missing in 5e. A shield reflex bonus makes so much sense.

>>48432632
>shields help you matrix dodge

>>48432635
>shields don't help you block a dragons breath weapon

>>48432632
>>48432661
Sorry man, you've got to be a Shield Master in order to figure that shit out.

>>48432661
Nah, you need a third party feat with prerequisite feat to do that, and it only works with a limited number of large shields.

File: The discussion is about 5e you chump.jpg (37KB, 346x266px)

37KB, 346x266px

>>48432688
>Filename related

>>48432725
Yeah yeah I know, but the middle effect should be the default and it should grant some other benefit instead.

>>48432770
That would make shields hella overpowered in 5e.

>>48432135
>>48432040
I never really got into 4e, so I was not aware. From what I've heard though, it's basically "every class has a unique list of combat powers that work vaguely like spells", which does seem like it would work well for what I have in mind. I'd love to try the system at some point, but it's so rare to find a game.

But outside of 4e, still seems very rare. 2e, 3.x, and 5e don't really have anything for that (beyond paladin kind of, with smite spells). I guess Anima kind of has it with martial techniques? But beyond that nothing comes to mind, and I've played a lot of systems. Even FantasyCraft, which I've generally found very flexible, doesn't really have anything for it. I suppose you could use GURPS powers for it, but GURPS is just cheating, because you can roughly aproximate damn near anything.

>>48432812
For who? A dex based shieldbarer proficient in dex saves? How often does that happen? It's basically just Rangers.

File: 7-art-revolutionary-league-beringe.jpg (126KB, 603x755px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 603x755px

I'm not a big fan of 3.PF but it does have a few tier6 gish options that are decent.

Despite what people who have never tried it say, the bard is actually really good. If you focus his feats in combat he can support the party in most roles. Using a decent skill selection between fights, using fascinate to avoid fights or buy to position. At the start of combat he lay down some solid control control spells or buffs and then wade into the fray without too much trouble. Now he probably won't be pulling off any crazy one-shot attacks or game-breaking spells but he will be providing a steady stream of utility in any scenario.


The Occultist from pathfinder is also sort of along that line. He might be a bit more powerful in general but it's a really fun class to play. It all boils down to being a tough swiss army knife that runs on item charge. It's the same playstyle as the bard but more flashy, with meaner, more flexible spells and better self buffs for combat. The cost being a less kick-ass skill list and reliance on the ability charges you get for each class of ability. So the Occultist is more resource management for a bit more bang.


Effectively both play a role similar to the one wizards are supposed to, utility and control but do it thru multiple means instead of just spell use. I find it makes for more interesting play since your various means come to to more than just expending a spell. Do you risk your HP for a direct approach? Puzzle your way out with the aid of skill rolls? Or do you use a spell and if so how do you use it.

>>48419125
I fucking love gish, but sadly the only thing that people will play around me is 5e, so those types are limited and not that powerful as full specialization one way or the other.

I like the Eldritch Fighter archetype, but it's pretty pointless seeing has how just hitting them with a full round of attacks outdamages their Spell + 1 Attack combo. Plus it only gets a few spell slots and it's restricted to two schools. It's still the most viable gish, though.

Warlock with Pact of the Blade is kind of a step in the right direction but really, you don't need to do much more than hang back and cast Eldritch Blast over and over while your pact wep can only make two attacks. Free limitless use of Mage Armor and whatnot are nice though.

I suppose a Fighter+Sorcerer/Wizard multiclass would work, but if you split it 50/50 then you'd miss out on an assload of cool shit. like two extra attacks for Fighters and fucking wings for a Sorcerer.

Perhaps a full Wizzy/Sorc with a few feats like Weapon Master, Tough, and the armor feats would be adequate, but magic will still be your go-to offense since magic still outdamages melee by a hilarious margin.

Maybe I should just forego any notion of optimization and just have fun.

File: 0b31ad342be5eee1f0ec5e696d272c41.jpg (801KB, 700x924px) Image search: [Google]

801KB, 700x924px

>>48433154

The only truly effective and optimal "gishes" in 5e are clerics with Shillelagh, bards (college of valor) who might just pick up Shillelagh anyway, single-classed paladins, and rogues (arcane tricksters) with Green-flame Blade and Find Familiar.

People speak of paladin/warlock "gishes" as if they were worthwhile, but I hardly see the point. The warlock's spell slots return after only an *hour-long* short rest, and the single-classed paladin has many strong class features to offer.

The sorcerer (favored soul) still has very little reason to physically attack.

File: o1ts96zMHV1uv19j1o1_128.png (700KB, 904x1244px)

700KB, 904x1244px

>>48419125
Is this a gish?

L5R is good for making gishes.

>>48433922
Those are geishas.

>>48433592
Who is that and what does he do

>>48433592
Depends, is that ass as magical as it looks?

>>48433295
One gish idea I like is (undying light) tomelock with shillelagh and green flame blade.

You only need about 3 levels, then go into Dragon Sorcerer for quicken MM and stuff like that. Then either continue down sorcerer or switch to Paladin for channel divinity stuff.

But yeah, otherwise it's pretty barren.

>>48424352
you're on fucking 4chan of course there will be weeb images

>>48433295
You don't have to put gishes in quotes, we all know it's a contrived term. Every gish is a so-called gish due to how poorly defined it's use is.

>>48434352
Unless you're playing a literal Githyanki Fighter/Wizard

>>48428641
Thanks for identifying yourself.

>>48425620
>>48425677
>weapon specialization

Combat & Tactics was the single most beneficial Option books. The ability of a straight Fighter AND ONLY A STRAIGHT FIGHTER to go up the Weapon Mastery WP chain gave a solid reason to continue to play the vanilla beatstick. While others got utility toys that look more like 3.x Monk's situational usefulness, you became Ded 'Ard & Stompy, and with a small army at your back. Even dual-class Fighter/Mages tended to only switch after Mastery / High Mastery.

>>48432370

If it's a character where you could imagine fancy special effects being used on weapon attacks in a movie based on their story, they are a gish.

Real talk though, has anyone here actually played a proper Gith Fighter/Wizard? Like, memory crystal, silver sword, the whole 9 yards?

>>48432107
Yeah it's good.

Only war is based on dark heresy is based on warhammer fantasy roleplay is based on an old version of Runequest combined with warhammer fantasy battles and a few random changes.

>>48428191
Make sure the Time Mage is a Nu Mou and give him Halve MP, so that you can cast quicken every turn you get!

>>48434030
Yes, it puts men in trance.

>>48436953
I played a dude who was Githaboo once. Forged his own knockoff silver sword that wasn't half as good as the real thing. Fighter/Wizard who prestiged into Eldritch Knight

>>48438549
You win my respect, random internet stranger.

>>48433968
Wanders around and gets fucked by men and other creatures who think he is a girl.

File: 1438379039647.jpg (248KB, 955x2560px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 955x2560px

>>48422490

>How would you make a good gish in GURPS

That depends on a lot of things, but mostly power sources, point budget and tl.

The important bit is that in GURPS, you get diminishing returns for your points from boosting the same thing over and over (going from 14 skill to 15 is significantly more valuable than 22 to 23 for instance). This means that branching out with your points is often pretty economical.

You also got very flexible advantages that you can tailor yourself for your ideal gish (wanna play some sort of sword mage that fights melee but got a bit of ranged prowess as well? Why not give him or her warp and melee innate attack with an alternate ranged attack?)

>>48434744
Well that's not the only type that works but it's a good one. The utility caster and the support caster work well.

...Hmm makes me wonder, are there any effective summoner gishes? Calling on your own flanker seems useful.

File: 03fd84f6de3dbeb83b532508f608f465.jpg (121KB, 774x817px)

121KB, 774x817px

>>48441259

D&D 3.5's druid was very much a "summoner gish" at times. Wild Shape and an animal companion plus the likes of Ashbound, Greenbound Summoning, and/or Rashemi Elemental Summoning resulted in a one-druid army.

3.5 and Pathfinder's ranger both attempted to present a nature-themed "gish" with an animal companion, but neither was particularly spectacular.

5e's ranger (beastmaster) is an ill-written abortion that does not understand how action economy is supposed to work. It is quite weak.

Pathfinder's hunter is the single best implementation of a "spell-empowered warrior + spell-empowered animal companion" duo I have ever seen. It is a magnificently well-designed class that can handle a wide variety of tasks in and out of combat, and can support melee builds and archer builds alike. The way it encourages teamwork between the hunter and their animal companion is astounding.

Pathfinder Path of War: Expanded's ranger (ambush hunter) initiating archetype is similar to the hunter in spirit, but it goes about teamwork in a very different way by having both the ranger and their beastly pet gang up on a single enemy and cut loose with maneuver after maneuver for tremendous damage. This also suffices, but design-wise, the hunter is still far more interesting, not to mention more capable out of combat.

File: 1467490095988.jpg (45KB, 400x391px)

45KB, 400x391px

>>48419125
>Is there a game out there where everyone is some level of gish?

Sort of video games where the characters do not really fall into class categories well and everyone has magic. Like Final Fantasy 7 or Chrono Trigger style stuff.

File: 1467489148462.jpg (112KB, 800x681px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 800x681px

I have never seen anyone use it but I always thought the 5e Elements Monk fall into this category.

And with the same limitations too.

I don't think we should be applying the term gish when it's merely a supernatural fighter and not actually a spellcaster. Granted, that's a fuzzy line but I feel it matters anyway.

>>48419125
AD&D, 1e: Elf Magic-User/Thief (confused about his path, he tried being a ninja, pickpocket, burglar, wizard, highwayman, monster-hunter...now he's settled down as a community administrator). Wood Elf Ranger/Magic-user, Wood Elf Fighter/Magic-User/Thief (Wood Elves were a brother/sister team), and Half-Orc Cleric/Fighter (played as a kind-of Paladin).


(oh, there were others, but these were the most fun).

>>48433154
>I suppose a Fighter+Sorcerer/Wizard multiclass would work
>Perhaps a full Wizzy/Sorc with a few feats
One or two levels of fighter then straight caster with GFB and BB is probably ideal here. Doesn't delay spellcasting much and saves your feats. Paladin of course works out as well cut the same way, if not better.

What do you guys think of the Spellsword the D&D Prestige Class from Complete Warrior?

>>48447812
Garbage.

>>48419125
>What kinds of gish play would you really like to see?
I'd like to see being able to mix and match martial styles with magical talents that boil down to more than choosing a weapon and generic set of spells A B and C. Something with some depth, synergy and style no matter what you go with.

>>48422490
Single college Movement Magery, Haste and Great Haste. Don't go past Magery 1, just put a bunch of points in Great Haste and become the blender. If you can get GH to 20 or 25 you will be a monster.

>>48433592
Anyone have source on this?

>>48452487
Huh, I thought I could do an image search on sadpanda for you but for some reason its broken right now. Hopefully the original poster comes back for you.

>>48452487
Im not sure, but I think this was one of the artist sketches, not finishend and I don't think there is more of it.

>>48419125
Now that i think on it I've never done a near even mix, just fighty types with a bit of supernatural or full on casters. Of course I done get to play much... anyway gotta make a point to a bard or something next time.

>>48432029
In OD&D cleric was the primary gish class
You had a Fighting-Man who was rough and tumble, a Magic-User who had special powers and in between you had the Cleric who had special powers related to rough and tumbling.

>>48419125
bump

>>48422490

There're a lot of cheap and easy spells that would really fuck up any martial opponent. Things like Spasm or Stun. Get them to a good enough skill that you can cast without much effort, and you're golden.

To a degree that involves being a one-or-two-trick pony, but that's really all you need, and the spell prerequisite system means you'll have plenty of other utility spells as well.

Otherwise: Imbuements is *all about* being a gish. It's a skill-based way of adding special effects to your weapons, armour and vehicles, such as homing or fragmentation arrows, electrical blades, blinding armour and regenerating equipment.

Ritual Path Magic, a focused specialist could easily be hilariously effective - mastering an AoE ritual that turns metal into liquid and preparing a dozen charms of it and other spells will let you be monstrously lethal against anyone who can't resist it.

>>48419125
>The Gish: a person with a combination of martial prowess and magical power.

GET2OUT FAGGOT

>The Gish: A title of rank among the highest level Githyanki warrior-mages of the Astral Plane, riders of dragons, bestowed only a few levels before their souls will be fed to Gith herself

>>48436953
>Real talk though, has anyone here actually played a proper Gith Fighter/Wizard? Like, memory crystal, silver sword, the whole 9 yards?

I am primarily a DM so no. I did have a player who played a Githyanki Swordmage in a 4E game. He'd gone rogue (and so did not have the Gish title, but DID have hunters after him) because "getting your soul eaten" did not sound like the kind of thing he was into.

>>48467407
Words change and grow over time, anon.

>>48442592
Makes me wonder how prevalent the fighy-casty type is in japanese ttrpgs. I know basically nothing about them save that they're usually more narrative.

File: 1309203108498.jpg (22KB, 320x228px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 320x228px

>>48425620

It really makes me wonder if you've even played 2e reading your post.

It just seems like you're really waxing nostalgia about shit balance and arbitrary restrictions on classes. It's like you're taking the worst parts of the OSR movement and ignoring the rest.

Paladin spells were pretty garbage, lay on hands was unimpressive to say the least and what immunity to disease and a free horse? For the XP penalty it's not worth a shit.

The only good thing about Paladins, mechanically, was their wyrm slayer kit and like most kits they were even more of a broken mess.

Especially once you get into combat and tactics.

Weapon specialization isn't negligible, I mean basically every edition of D&D is chasing +1s. Fighters being able to go higher on the % Str chart alone can fucking destroy the other classes.

>>48471097
That very much depends on your exact definition of "fighty-casty type".

>>48437047
Many thanks.

only time i've ever had fun playing a "gish" type character was when i played things out of the Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic.

5e doesn't allow real gish types, 4e was not something i would enjoy, and 3.5 required 5 prestige classes from different books.

Weeaboo FIghtan Magic was a straight shot and easy.

>>48471953
So does the rest of the thread. Let's say, a character that can simultaneously have martial skills that significantly exceed the minimum ability of the system while also granting obviously supernatural powers usable in combat and/or as utility.

>>48473675
Well, that gives a lot of games.

Ryuutama has Magic Type combined with Noble or Hunter.
Tenra Bansho Zero has Monks, Samurai, Ninja, even combat-tested Onmyouji.
Every Double Cross character has obviously supernatural abilities.
Same for Grancrest.
In Night Wizard, everyone's a wizard.
Make You Kingdom can produce a Knight with one of the casting jobs.
And Maid RPG has everything.

>>48474136
I think I've only heard of half of those. I should probably look these up when I have time.