an Elemental weapon Striker, clad in scale (plate eventually)
but i can at all think of a name... which holds things up considerably more than it should..
anyone got any suggestions?
Soulblade
Attuned One
I don't know if it's an intentional design point, or simply a coincidence, but ALL official classes have a single word name. Just something to consider.
but alas... only 1 word names atm
soulblade..............possibly.... i WAs thinking somehting along the lines of the swordmage, but ofc i need to kinda highlinght what they do.
elemental power source, melee combatant, striker- sec leader.
good ideas Qube.. but not ones that strike me.
haha... thats one for the books. most HB creators (me included) ask for advice on balancing traits, powers etc... but im having trouble with a name.
any more?
elemental power source, melee combatant, striker- sec leader.
There's no such power source as "Elemental". Drawing power from the Elemental Chaos (or creatures in it, like an Infernal Warlock) is Arcane. Drawing power from the natural elements around you would be Primal.
But anyway.
elemental power source, melee combatant, striker- sec leader.
There's no such power source as "Elemental".
Yet. It's one of the power sources the developers have planned that they haven't used yet.
However, i think the current issue with the elemental powersource, is that we don't truely know what sets it apart from the others.
Arcane: Knowledge, be it inspiring (bard), enchanting (artificer), swordsmanship (swordmage), self-taught (sorceror), or generalist (wizard). I know i'm a bit off, but Arcane is a messy powersource.
Divine: Energy tapped from the astral sea, the methods to do so are closely guarded by the priests of the gods.
Primal: Granted by the primal spirits and communion with nature.
Shadow: Trading something from the shadowfell.
Psionic: tapping mental power thats been mysteriously developing as a counter to the far realm.
Elemental: We don't know, just simply 'drawing power from the elemental chaos' is indeed covered well by arcane, particularly the chaos sorceror. I personally thing elemental will be more about creation.
Going with the creation theme, something like Warsmith, Meldsmith, or Forgecaster. I find it hard to come up with 'true' one-word concepts for elemental classes, since there really isn't anything historicly or mythologicly that matches them.
Power source and the class's name carries the Whole class on it's shoulders
Power source is, exactly that... hwo ure PC views thew world, interacts, aspires for...
heck even your HP, +Hp/lv and HS are deterrmined (primal being slightly better off atm)
but yeah... the name has heavy weight as well... its the focal point of builds.... such as my current project a 4e necromancer... without the necromancer... it would be Soul ********* affliction ********* and rebirth *******. (the builds)
ir in the case of one of my pps. and the wizard too
Wizard of the Spiral Tower... Necromancer of the Spirit Legion
and also.via the name you can instantly discern what the theme is for it... with the exception of the swordmage and artificer.
i think i have all the class features sorted.. and a few power themes. (barb dailies are rages) my necro summons are "Souls" ie: vengeful storm rage- Soul of the Firehammer Dwarf...
here we come to the nitty gritty of making a class.. Its power source, name and role
(there is an elemental... or at leas tthere should be... i remember seeing a brill elemental class in the Hb section... about 6-9 pages ago.)
but the reason for this class is that someone was tired of the "magic" type classes being weakling rear fighters. asnd wanted some more swordmage type ppl. so i saw it as a challenge. and indeed it is.
cheers for the hel;p folks. ill let u all know if i get an idea afore u "smarter" ppl do :+)
Because right now we know that it is a striker, wearing scale and somehow elemental stuff comes into play.
How is this class different from other strikers? What is it's defining trait? Why would I play this class instead of a DPS fighter? Why wouldn't I want to play this class (what is it's drawback)?
Kinda hard to name that which we do not know.
Ravager
Chaosblade
Lawbane
...etc.
Yeah, it's hard to name something without a basic idea about it's modus operandi.
so ill attempt to give an idea of what the class does. (main features etc)
1. Striker (well yeah... said before)
i was thinking to "up" the stats... say to 14 + CON for Hp, 7 P/lv and 7 + CON MOD HS...
cause it's a new "power source" and its an up front melee combatant. (so need be mroe durable)
and it's feasable for him to be slightly less shift happy due to scale/plate stuff.
I have a good vision... of, well basically a fighter(base image)- he uses scale too.
mould it, so that some of his attacks, more so that the other melee's are area/close or multiple enemy damaging.. or something liek that.
Augmented attacks (lightning, fire, cold, thunder etc (discouting necrotic, acid, radiant?)
- a good point i suppose... what keywords discern the "elements"?
-----
the striker bonus... i was thinking of.. since augmented attacks... an augment situational bonus.. say; once per when you use an (class here) power, whether you hit or miss you can choose to activate the effect(bonus)
scales the same with ranegr quarry/sneak dmg/curse dmg... but the effect is
until the start of your next turn, you gain a *D6 damage bonus to all attacks made with powers with the (chosen keyword)?
--
i can see that this "area" effect/augmented attack stuff has briliant ties for ANY secondary rolls... area/close + some penalties/effects= controller
augmented attacks that strengthen ally defesnes (ice) or attack (fire)= leader
not sure besides marking waht a defender has, but im sure this could fill it
so its a pretty... versatile class.. but kinda slightly too versatile in the sense that too many secondary choices can ruin it... cause youll need power slots that tend to the role.. so i was thinking Striker/leader. or striker/defender.
if ive missd anything please tell me
hope this helps
Were you imagining twohanders or onehanders.
A class that takes advantage of offhand weapon, or just the mainhand?
you mentioned striker, so I assume sword and board are out.
Were you imagining twohanders or onehanders.
A class that takes advantage of offhand weapon, or just the mainhand?
erm.. (thats one thing i forgot)
i am completely versatile with that... as is the image i suppose two builds to go via paths... Hey!
Build1: two-hand- single target focus
build2: 1h wep/board... secondary defender
build3: 2x 1h wep- multiple target focus..
how does that go ?
Or, to put it another way, a Fighter as an Arcane Striker?
Remember that all strikers we've currently seen have two things in common: a bonus damage mechanic, usually conditional (sorc is unconditional, if I remember correctly), and mobility. If you're wanting someone to just stand there and take it, you should be thinking defender, not striker.
Note: I'm not suggesting heavy armour is incompatible with striker. But simple tanking is a defender trait, not a striker. Strikers need to be mobile in some manner.
So if I'm reading this correctly, you are looking for a melee character who imbues his/her weapons with elemental power?
My first thought is, wouldn't this work out well as a paragon path? Or maybe a new fighting style for the fighter (you lose the ability to mark, and gain a +d4 per tier elemental damage of your choice at character creation to one enemy per turn)? Seems a shame to re-invent the wheel.
But as far as names go: Conduit, Cheval, channeler, elemental blade (but this one feels like such a cop-out), or Scion.
I don't know if it's an intentional design point, or simply a coincidence, but ALL official classes have a single word name. Just something to consider.
Where is this coming from? Lots of people keep saying it, but the Sword-Mage has been out for a while, so it's clearly complete BS. Plus, there's evidence to suggest one of the PHB3 classes will be called Battle-Mind. Removing the space doesn't make either of those a single word; it just makes the writers look illiterate. Those should be hyphenated at best.
Anyways, I like the above sugggestion of Conduit the best so far. It's short and sweet.
Removing the space doesn't make either of those a single word; it just makes the writers look illiterate.
Wait, so, no words can ever be combined to form new words? Language never changes? Or does it just require sanction by a greater force than a game designer (such as a dictionary) before we can call them words? Are dictionaries meant to prescribe language or describe it?
Edit: I didn't mean to react so sharply, but I'm not really sure what you're getting at, hehe.
Wait, so, no words can ever be combined to form new words? Language never changes? Or does it just require sanction by a greater force than a game designer (such as a dictionary) before we can call them words? Are dictionaries meant to prescribe language or describe it?
Edit: I didn't mean to react so sharply, but I'm not really sure what you're getting at, hehe.
Compound words do happen to form new words, but this generally occurs in a linguistic process. First, the words remain separate for a time. Sword Mage, Base Ball, Bed Room. Then, as usage increases, it begins being written as a hyphenated word. Sword-Mage, Base-Ball, Bed-Room. Finally, after a longer period of usage and being standardized into the language, it's condensed into a single word. Swordmage, Baseball, Bedroom. In the age of the internet, this process has begun moving much more quickly than it has historically, to the point where it's almost unhealthy (no, "email" is not and will never be a word!), but introducing a term as a compound word like that usually either makes you look illiterate or pretentious, especailly when there's no practical need or even desire for the term to be a single word instead of two. Frankly, Sword-Mage and Battle-Mind don't have enough usage to be single words, and my hyphenating them is literarily generous.
Note that even Mind Flayer, which has been a part of D&D since I don't even know when, has yet to even make the jump to a hyphenation in the MM, even though it probably could.
I'm just looking forward to the gith zerai.
None of those words exist to begin with, so it's less of an issue (read: non-issue) with them. In fact, the words "gith" and "zerai" and "yanki" didn't exist before "Githzerai" and "Githyanki" did. Further, this is assuming that you're correct that "zerai"and "yanki" are even their own words, because I don't remember them being, and if they're not, then it's even more of a non-issue.
I think I'd enjoy them more than the dragon born.
Hyphenating that would be proper, as "-born" is a legitimate suffix, and since I'm generous enough to accept Sword-Mage into hyphenation, I'm also generous enough to accept a normally hyphenated Dragon-Born into compound status upon introduction, but again, that's just me being generous.
EDIT: No, that's not called a suffix. ... what's it called? ... It's a morpheme of some sort. Time to consult Wikipedia...
So if I'm reading this correctly, you are looking for a melee character who imbues his/her weapons with elemental power?
My first thought is, wouldn't this work out well as a paragon path? Or maybe a new fighting style for the fighter (you lose the ability to mark, and gain a +d4 per tier elemental damage of your choice at character creation to one enemy per turn)? Seems a shame to re-invent the wheel.
But as far as names go: Conduit, Cheval, channeler, elemental blade (but this one feels like such a cop-out), or Scion.
spot on mate... with the flavour. I suppose. It might end up that way.
oh, muahhaaha some great conjunction names can come from "Conduit"
i think i'll take it(sounds like im shopping in the HB section of a D&D store... haha
None of those words exist to begin with, so it's less of an issue (read: non-issue)
I think this sentence could really apply to any word the designers feel like creating for their game, including 'swordmage.' Or do the fact that "sword" and "mage" already exist preclude them from being used to describe a fantasy concept? Can they make entirely new words, but not re-configure old ones to suit their needs? What if "swordmage" has been a compound for centuries, in-game? Is "Warforged" any better than Dragonborn? What if I had a word that was half-and-half, like a githmage? "Bugbear?" "Dustmen?" Would "Blackguard" be better as "Black Guard"?
(Apologies for the derailment...)
The names of the class in quest-ion are operat-ing with-in a sett-ing (forgot-ten realms specific-ally) in which the whole shift-ing of language has already happen-ed.
Thus, you get 'swordmage' as a single entity- it's not literarily pretentious, in fact, to presume that the fictional world in which they are operat-ing just arbitrarily mimics ours in its entire-ty would be pretentious itself. Rather, the approach that they have taken, referenc-ing the in universe name seems to be fair-ly well done, and to be complete-ly honest. I do not see a problem with it.
The only issue here is that you have a problem, and you think you're god's mandated director of the english language.
You are not, but you are welcome to think what-ever you want.
You would be wrong, of course, but that is your perogative, Concerto, Son of Crim.