My friend plays 4e and he enjoys the swordmage class. He was wondering if it's in 3.5 so he can use it in a campaign I'm making. Is it?
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
5
-
3\$\begingroup\$ What are the relevant characteristics of the class in question that he'd like to replicate? \$\endgroup\$– ErnirAug 14, 2014 at 16:54
-
\$\begingroup\$ @Ernir I think just a sword fighter who uses magic \$\endgroup\$– JayjayAug 14, 2014 at 17:21
-
\$\begingroup\$ As it stands, this is a duplicate of an existing question, that was also closed because it is too broad. We need more details than "sword fighter who uses magic." Note my answer to that question, which lists an enormous number of options for doing that. If you provide more details, we can open this question back up as distinct from (and better than) the linked question. \$\endgroup\$– KRyanAug 14, 2014 at 17:28
-
\$\begingroup\$ @KRyan I think they're just looking for the class/flavour, not an optimisation or build strategy. \$\endgroup\$– SevenSidedDieAug 14, 2014 at 21:51
-
\$\begingroup\$ @SevenSidedDie That's fine, but it should say that. All we have so far is "sword fighter who uses magic." That's what the other question answers. \$\endgroup\$– KRyanAug 14, 2014 at 22:43
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
5
I'm not an expert on the Swordmage, but it sounds to me like he either wants to play a Duskblade (warrior with some crowd-control and cursing magic) or one of the Tome of Battle classes (Swordsage, Crusader, etc) which are warriors with unique "spells" only they get. The Tome of Battle classes are in the book of the same name, while the Duskblade is in Player's Handbook II (thanks Colin D for that location).
answered Aug 14, 2014 at 16:15
-
\$\begingroup\$ Tome of Battle maneuvers are not spells, not even kind of like spells; the only similarity is in the way they are formatted. A few of them are quite supernatural, which would be a stronger argument, but the overwhelming majority are very much like typical combat maneuvers and fighter feats, only streamlined and improved, with better mechanics backing them. Aside from that objection on terminology, I still think Tome of Battle, swordsage in particular, can be a useful answer, and the duskblade is, of course, right on. \$\endgroup\$– KRyanAug 14, 2014 at 17:27
-
1\$\begingroup\$ I'm thinking of the one that throws a fireball, the one that creates a wall of fire, and the one that heals all allies nearby. They do magic, even if they're not technically spells. Also, for a player who is used to 4e (where spells ARE maneuvers ARE techniques ARE ki powers), it's certainly close enough. I'm answering the question for the asker, not the super-technical rules lawyers. \$\endgroup\$ Aug 14, 2014 at 23:12
-
1\$\begingroup\$ It's not rules lawyering, it's very much about flavor and feel. Part of what I find 'off' about 4e is how similar nominally-different powers feel to use. In 3.5, being an initiator means you are playing very differently with your resources than you are as a spellcaster. And yes, there are a few maneuvers, as I said, that are similar to spells (though officially, the healing maneuvers are all Ex). But most are not, and the entire game-play approach of an initiator is very different. \$\endgroup\$– KRyanAug 14, 2014 at 23:52
-
\$\begingroup\$ True enough. The primary reason I suggest the Tome of Battle stuff is that I'm guessing that's what the Swordmage actually feels like in 4e. \$\endgroup\$ Aug 15, 2014 at 0:02
-
\$\begingroup\$ Actually, swordmage is a defender, which is a role 3.5 has absolutely no analogue for. There’s not really any good way to replicate the way the class plays in 3.5. \$\endgroup\$– KRyanAug 15, 2014 at 0:08
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
1
For 3.5e, the simplest close match would be the Duskblade, which isn't in the core books but is in Players' Handbook II. The Pathfinder equivalent to this would be the Magus, from the Advanced Players' Guide.
-
\$\begingroup\$ There's the Spellsword Prestige Class but that's just icing on top of a Fighter/Sorcerer type build. Still, it's an option. \$\endgroup\$ Mar 9, 2019 at 12:49