Talk:Sword Mage (5e Class)

Clarification on Attack roll modifier

Before I go wild on editing/clarifying because I believe it to be so: Am I correct that the Int-modifier is only meant to replace Str/Dex on Hit-Rolls and not on Damage-Rolls? Otherwise there is not so much need (aside from Techniques) to invest into Str or Dex based on the Archetype. Speaking of Attack rolls per se can be misleading. Welkin (talk) 10:44, 5 September 2018 (MDT)

 Answer: The Int-modifier is used instead of Str/Dex for both attack rolls and damage rolls since the sword mage uses telekinesis or magic to control the swords through concentration and manipulation. 

Tool Proficiency

Given that the Sword Mage is a kind of Scholar and gets to choose either Scholar's Pack or Diplomat's Pack, I think it'd be suiting to add the Calligrapher's Supplies proficiency. Welkin (talk) 10:44, 5 September 2018 (MDT)

  Answer: I took away the Diplomat's Pack from the equipment because Sword Mages are either Scholars, Adventurers or Explorers. The reason being diplomats are for people who have the charisma while scholars have the brains. Since I am trying to make it evident that Sword Mages are using the brains, then diplomat's pack is out of the picture. 

Archetype

I would figure the sword mage would be an archetype of the sorcerer, warlock, or wizard.--209.97.85.48 13:14, 27 October 2018 (MDT)

 Answer: It would be more like a arcane rogue's archetype because of the fact that it's a fighter and mage not an actual spell mage.

NeedsAdmin

I'm not sure what help you need here in regards to your template. Could you be more specific? —ConcealedLight (talk) 06:35, 4 November 2018 (MST)

Sure! In what places do you need an explanation? I'll be glad to explain it better or revise it again if need be.

I can see you've made dozens of edits in an attempt to revert and clean up the page. If the issue is about the edits the ip's have made then you can revert the page to an older version without an admin, however, doing so now will also revert your changes. In short, you've solved the issue yourself so I'm not sure what you'd need an admin for. —ConcealedLight (talk) 08:25, 5 November 2018 (MST)

needsAdmin stub was by me, primarly based on anonymous IPs and I was worried whether I can just revert it. Thought such extensive edits should rather be a variant version than edits. Given the work Rocket now put into this I might end up making the variant based on an old version, as I liked the flavor of the old version. --Welkin (talk) 09:22, 5 November 2018 (MST)

That's why we have variants after all. Feel free too just make sure to put in the ", Variant" after the you recreate the page. —ConcealedLight (talk) 12:16, 5 November 2018 (MST)

Attribution / Credits

I've removed the attribution based on this wiki's Help:Attribution_Policy --Welkin (talk) 09:34, 5 November 2018 (MST)

Thanks. —ConcealedLight (talk) 12:16, 5 November 2018 (MST)

Clarification on simultaneous attacks

Greetings and Salutations. Currently using this in a campaign and was a little confused about what you mean by simultaneous attacks with the Imbued weapons. Is it one attack roll with each weapon die as a group in damage (4d6 etc) or is it one attack roll with each imbued weapon? Thank you for your time and this class.

Concentration clarification

Hi! so I notice a good portion of the swordmage's spells are concentration. Does this interfere with the imbued weapons since you're also concentrating on them?

Wording and balance issues

First of all, I really like the concept this class is based on and the way it is reflected here, the problem comes when you try to understand the actual mechanics in the class and the way it all interacts to throw some stupid numbers for some particular levels of play.

Wording issues

• Both Call to Arms and Sword Study are a mess, two unreadably long walls of text with several wording issues and confusing mechanics. Right of the bat:

• This feature should have a minimum for the number of weapons you can animate, we don't need someone trying to animate -1 swords.
• "Equiped" is NOT 5e terminology, and it shouldn't be used as such. If needed, you could add a specific definition for the word somewhere so as to differentiate it from "attuned" magic items and "wielded" weapons (which would be incredibly vague considering that you can drop your weapon for free and grabbing it only takes an Object Interaction, of which you can make one per turn for free).
• If it requires concentration it should say something along the lines of "as if concentrating on a spell".
• Opportunity Attacks: Alright, so I can make an opportunity attack with them, but how? Do I need the creature to be within their reach? Can I make opportunity attacks from their position as an Echo Knight would?
• The hp thingy should be better worded. As it is, creatures need to "use their action" to "attack the weapons", does this allow them to use the Attack action or they have to make a single attack? I would recommend changing the condition to the weapon recieving a certain amount of damage in one round (and maybe have it scale with your level in the class) or simply giving it hp.
• Am I supposed to use my Attack action to attack with them instead of the weapons I'm wielding or I can do this on top of attacking with whatever I am holding? It is not as too clear and it can result in major balancing problems. One with the Weapons tellls me that the intended behaviour is the former but this still needs to be clarified in the feature.

• Techniques of the Blade: All pretty cool features but the wording could still be polished a little.
• Last Attempt: The format is messed up here.
• Subclasses: I won't go into too much detail yet but these require some polishing too.
• Spellcasting: This one is a bit problematic. I would recommend taking wording from the sorcerer (with "known" spells) or the cleric (with prepared spells). In my opinion, the former is the most appropriate for this particular class. That said, do I get cantrips? It is reflected in both the class table and the spell list but the feature doesn't say I do.

Balancing issues

• Call to Arms and Sword Study:

• Being capable of animating a number of weapons equal to your intelligence modifier is too powerful at early levels, this allows a character with 16 int (something perfectly reasonable using point buy or standard array) to animate 3 weapons at level 1 for a total of 6d6+3*int damage (using Greatswords or mauls) without even considering Sword Study, which adds a lot more damage. All of this from level one and without spending resources. My suggestion is to tie this feature to Sword Study instead of your int modifier in order to keep the number of weapons more controlled.
• As I've already pointed out, if you can use this on top of your normal Attack Action all that damage is practically free. And that's a lotta damage.

• Telekinetic Mastery: I like the feature and Telekinesis is a rather humble spell but this is still a 5th level spell that you can use as soon as fifth level. You can also cast it using your 5th level spell slot but let's be honest, unless you are multiclassing that's not gonna happen.
• Extra Sword: No problem here, even though I would move the levels at which you get extra weapons to those in which the Fighter gets extra attacks.
• Subclasses: I won't go into too much detail yet but there are some incredibly strong features here.
• Spell List: In my opinion the wizard spell list is way too big to be used here, so I would recommend restricting the list.

And that's it, feel free to express your oppinion on these issues, I'll probably adopt the class in a week or two if no one opposes. Draelm (talk) 15:28, 24 October 2021 (MDT)

Hello, how are you? I created this account just now to help you with some things. I have been playing this class in a campaign for almost two years and I’ve changed a lot of things to balance it a bit. About the wording problems, I completely agree with everything you are going to change. About the balancing problems, you pointed about using greatswords at level 1 to deal massive damage, but the Call to Arms feature says that only one handed weapons that deal slashing and piercing damage can be imbued, while the technique (Two Handed Wapons) that makes this possible also says that versatile weapons are considered two handed. About the telekinesis spell, because I use an older version of this class, I end up having unlimited access to this ability, and because we are a very united group, this is used as a good resource to boost the adventure, but obviously I try not to overuse it. Since some campaigns are not like that, I agree that you need to balance this feature. About the subclasses, I really don't know much about Art of the Duelist since it wasn't the subclass I chose, but the other one for sure has some extremely strong features, mainly the hold person feat. I still haven't reached the point of having living steel, but it can be something broken for sure, I completely remade the summon giant sword feat, however I haven't gotten to the point of having it either. I very much agree that the spell list needs to be reworked as well. From my point of view playing with this class, is basically playing a glass cannon, it far outdamages all other classes in the game with ease, to the point that in a part of the campaign, not even doubling the damage of the other players could get them even close to causing the same damage as me, BUT, the class with the exception of higher levels and with some caveats has no way to defend itself relatively well, and because of the hit dice being a d8, I could barely survive one turn more than a wizard or a sorcerer. That's all I have to say (whew!), I hope you can make good changes to this class, this last year was very dead for it and seeing new things ahead makes me very excited for what may come, I look forward to see your changes and hope my experience with this class can help you in something.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Peste Burka (talk • contribs) . Please sign your posts.

You are right, I hadn't noticed the part about them needing to be one-handed weapons. It is still a lot of damage when using rapiers or war picks (in the same circumstances and with the same stats, 3d8+3*int piercing damage) or even lances (for a total of 3d12+3*int piercing damage, this one maaaaay require some discussion with your DM but, as of RAW, the lance is still not a two handed weapon), so the problem remains but the damage and flexibility are certainly reduced. Appart from that, thanks for pointing out the glass cannon thing, that's something I hadn't noticed at first. I guess I'll have to provide some defensive features here and there if I'm going to nerf the damage. And now that I think about it this one could actually make for a decent wide area tank (moving shields around to protect your allies so you can reduce the damage the whole party takes). Finally, I'm not too worried about Living Steel considering it is a capstone feature (the spell level should be limited though). Draelm (talk) 01:47, 26 October 2021 (MDT)

Clarification on magic weapon bonuses

If you bind yourself to weapons with a bonus to attack rolls, do these bonuses stack when making the simultaneous attack with all weapons? Making the 1 attack roll do you either add that +X bonus once or add up the bonus from weapons that may have it?

Magical weapons are not compatible with Call to Arms, but they do stack with with Sword Study (unless I've skipped a clause forbidding that). As normal, these weapons deal +1 damage when using them for melee weapon attacks (i.e. all other effects and AOE features would be excluded). That's my general understanding of the (admitely clunky) mechanics here, could you tell us what's the specific feature you are confused with? Draelm (talk) 12:09, 22 November 2021 (MST)

If you were bound to two +1 weapons, would your to hit bonus with call to arms then become intelligence mod + proficiency + 2? And up from there with however magical weapon bonuses you may have. I would assume that the damage bonuses would stack because it is different weapons, all using the same attack but each weapon has individual damage (That's made as one collective roll).

I'd say the modifier in that particular case would be int+prof+1 since multiple effects from the same source/spell/whatevs don't stack in 5e. The damage modifier would certainly stack since they are separate rolls as you've already pointed out. That being said, such weapons are usually imbued with magic and thus are not compatible with the feature (meaning you can't use Call to Arms with them). The issue can still arise with other features butI'm fairly sure that ruling can be applied there too. Anyway, I'll add that to my TO DO list if I ever get to reworking this. Please sign your comments btw. Draelm (talk) 07:17, 23 November 2021 (MST)

Rework

I'll be reworking the class slightly and cleaning the wording as much as I can. I'll re-adjust the feature distribution last so the balance will be slightly off until then. Any contributions and constructive criticism on the changes will be greatly appreciated. Draelm (talk) 17:58, 27 August 2022 (MDT)

Done. I've removed all the templates due to the changes. Draelm (talk) 06:30, 14 October 2022 (MDT)