Ah, I think I am getting your point now. You mean you wish to allow EKs who pursue a fighter progression first / do not have to wait until ridiculously high levels to qualify if they do?
I can see how that would broaden the class up to more concepts for "lower" levels. I am not sure how to best do / balance it though, nor whether the effect would be notable.
Class: "Swordmage"
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
The power of concealment lies in revelation.
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
I don't wish to change EK. It's SRD after all. (Although in PnP you must have a warrior class level as you can't get profs for all martial weapons with just one feat). The change was to point out the difference of what's proposed to EK.
What I would like to see is a new class, made after a canon PrC likely (we can't get 1 to 1 on NWN2 engine anyway), that allows a fighter to progress into a balanced PrC that gives the warrior some arcane talent, sacrificing some of his fighting mojo, but not gimping it like simply multiclassing to wizard or sorcerer.
So this would be it:
"wish to allow a [arcane prc] who pursue a fighter progression first / do not have to wait until ridiculously high levels to qualify if they do?"
What I would like to see is a new class, made after a canon PrC likely (we can't get 1 to 1 on NWN2 engine anyway), that allows a fighter to progress into a balanced PrC that gives the warrior some arcane talent, sacrificing some of his fighting mojo, but not gimping it like simply multiclassing to wizard or sorcerer.
So this would be it:
"wish to allow a [arcane prc] who pursue a fighter progression first / do not have to wait until ridiculously high levels to qualify if they do?"
-
Blindhamsterman
- Haste Bear
- Posts: 2396
- Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:13 am
- Location: GMT
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
if you wan't a generalised Arcane Warrior PRC, I'd go with Spellsword, it's simple, clearly designed with a martial character in mind and wouldn't be over difficult to create.
However if you do implement it, don't try and make it something it isn't, a spellsword is a spellsword, just as an Eldritch Knight is an Eldritch Knight, neither of them are Abjurant Champions, Suel Arcanamachs, bladesingers, swiftblades or jade phoenix mages.
If you want to make another different one, it should have an RP background and clear story linked to it too, it doesn't need to be linked to a race or whatever, but don't make it something it isn't. I have no doubt that a few players at least would strongly consider Spellsword if it went in.
It's why we spent so long working out how to implement the class, which it still may be, or may not be. Time will tell.
However if you do implement it, don't try and make it something it isn't, a spellsword is a spellsword, just as an Eldritch Knight is an Eldritch Knight, neither of them are Abjurant Champions, Suel Arcanamachs, bladesingers, swiftblades or jade phoenix mages.
If you want to make another different one, it should have an RP background and clear story linked to it too, it doesn't need to be linked to a race or whatever, but don't make it something it isn't. I have no doubt that a few players at least would strongly consider Spellsword if it went in.
The reason for this, is that folk that wish to play a Bladesinger don't want to play a half baked version, those that have previously played one (and myself now) stuck to the strict rules on what weapons could be used, no shields and light or no armour, taking other classes just means you 'pay' the RP price and the mechanical price linked to doing so, but don't get the benefits of their style etc.It seems somewhat odd, though, considering there was significant interest to Bladesinger, that a general way to help RP that path, and other similar, holds no interest.
It's why we spent so long working out how to implement the class, which it still may be, or may not be. Time will tell.
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
Spellsword wouldn't be difficult to create? I would have thought scripting the channel spell ability would be seriously challenging, if not impossible. I can also see some major balance issues around both channel spell and the ability to ignore arcane spell failure...
Just as a fun sample of what a Spellsword can do, how about a lvl 10 character who can add 8d8 pts of acid/fire/sonic/electrical or cold damage to a melee attack 3 times per day as a free action which incurs no AoO (by channeling 2 lesser orb spells). Oh, and once he's done that three times, he can add 8d6 points of fire dmg 6 times (channeling scorching ray). Note that even if he misses, the spell is not wasted, and goes off the next time he successfully attacks. And if he faces a crowd, he can start throwing 9d6 fireballs with no chance of failure in a mithral breastplate.
edit: Actually, the above refers to the 3.0 spellsword. The 3.5 version is slightly tamer, in that it can only channel one spell at a time and can only channel a limited number of times per day, but the 3.5 version can also channel any spell it can cast, regardless of spell level. The 3.5 spellsword also gains spellcaster lvls faster, meaning the character can channel the Orb line of spells at the level I discussed above. 9d6, plus saves vs. status effects.
Just as a fun sample of what a Spellsword can do, how about a lvl 10 character who can add 8d8 pts of acid/fire/sonic/electrical or cold damage to a melee attack 3 times per day as a free action which incurs no AoO (by channeling 2 lesser orb spells). Oh, and once he's done that three times, he can add 8d6 points of fire dmg 6 times (channeling scorching ray). Note that even if he misses, the spell is not wasted, and goes off the next time he successfully attacks. And if he faces a crowd, he can start throwing 9d6 fireballs with no chance of failure in a mithral breastplate.
edit: Actually, the above refers to the 3.0 spellsword. The 3.5 version is slightly tamer, in that it can only channel one spell at a time and can only channel a limited number of times per day, but the 3.5 version can also channel any spell it can cast, regardless of spell level. The 3.5 spellsword also gains spellcaster lvls faster, meaning the character can channel the Orb line of spells at the level I discussed above. 9d6, plus saves vs. status effects.
Last edited by mogonk on Wed Dec 22, 2010 8:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
It'd need to be balanced, naturally. And yes, Channel would probably be a significant challenge tech and balance wise both, likely to be replaced by something less potent. However, as I read the class, he can't channel as free action, but as move action. So the spellsword could cast a damage-single-target spell and standard attack on same turn, with the spell effecting the target if the attack hits. As opposed to full attack.
And that mithral breastplate, greater mage armor gives more AC. Not having to cast does frees up the spellslot, though, and with IG time going as it is, keeping up hour/level buffs is not given.
So it's hardly beyond balancing, imo. Beside, for tech reasons alone Channel would almost certainly need be revamped.
And that mithral breastplate, greater mage armor gives more AC. Not having to cast does frees up the spellslot, though, and with IG time going as it is, keeping up hour/level buffs is not given.
So it's hardly beyond balancing, imo. Beside, for tech reasons alone Channel would almost certainly need be revamped.
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
Yeah, in 3.5 it requires a move action...to channel the spell. Meaning he can channel an orb of fire into his sword, then open the door containing the bandit king. Roll initiative, make a full attack, and if any of those attacks hit, the target takes 9d6 and has to make a fort save or be dazed. If none of those attacks hit, he makes a full attack next round, and next round, until one of the attacks hits and his spell goes off.
Spells that require an attack roll are supposed to be balanced by carrying the risk of being wasted if you miss with them. Channel obviates that.
I honestly don't think there is a balanced way to implement channel without making it unrecognizable. Since Channel Spell is the defining Spellsword feature, I don't think Spellsword is a good choice.
I think we'd be better off adding duskblade, or just making up a brand new PrC. I could totally get on board with:
Swordmage
req:
knowledge arcane 6 ranks
BAB +5
2nd lvl arcane spells
Good fort and will save
d8 HD
fighter AB
spellcasting on even lvls
bonus feat from fighter list at 1, 5 and 9
Seems preferable to getting into the Channel Spell nonsense.
Spells that require an attack roll are supposed to be balanced by carrying the risk of being wasted if you miss with them. Channel obviates that.
I honestly don't think there is a balanced way to implement channel without making it unrecognizable. Since Channel Spell is the defining Spellsword feature, I don't think Spellsword is a good choice.
I think we'd be better off adding duskblade, or just making up a brand new PrC. I could totally get on board with:
Swordmage
req:
knowledge arcane 6 ranks
BAB +5
2nd lvl arcane spells
Good fort and will save
d8 HD
fighter AB
spellcasting on even lvls
bonus feat from fighter list at 1, 5 and 9
Seems preferable to getting into the Channel Spell nonsense.
Last edited by mogonk on Sun Dec 26, 2010 5:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Ithildur
- Dungeon Master
- Posts: 3548
- Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 7:46 am
- Location: Best pizza town in the universe
- Contact:
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
Spellsword is hardly impressive due to 5/10 caster progression in most pnp campaigns (although they're slightly better casters than bladesingers since they enter the prc casting lvl 2 spells as opposed to the bladesingers lvl 1), but in a low power setting like ALFA I can see it moving up the food chain. Still, at PRC lvls (7+) an EK will soon eat both half progression guys for breakfast with a hand tied behind his back.
Channel spell afaik was difficult to implement in nwn1 properly; not sure if much has changed in nwn2.
FYI This new generic martial class is something that I actually would be potentially interested in from a selfish perspective, as my current toon is pretty much a ftr/mage that has more ftr lvls than wiz lvls. However I still don't see it as a great priority; I was simply going to have him go for being a sub optimal EK (with more ftr lvls than I needed, and life being hard at mid lvls if I ever get there). I'd love to try a duskblade or spellsword in ALFA, but I just don't see it as a high priority right now, especially when it looks like bladesinger (which was under discussion as early as a year and a half ago) is still drydocked. Maybe someday when we have more resources?
Channel spell afaik was difficult to implement in nwn1 properly; not sure if much has changed in nwn2.
FYI This new generic martial class is something that I actually would be potentially interested in from a selfish perspective, as my current toon is pretty much a ftr/mage that has more ftr lvls than wiz lvls. However I still don't see it as a great priority; I was simply going to have him go for being a sub optimal EK (with more ftr lvls than I needed, and life being hard at mid lvls if I ever get there). I'd love to try a duskblade or spellsword in ALFA, but I just don't see it as a high priority right now, especially when it looks like bladesinger (which was under discussion as early as a year and a half ago) is still drydocked. Maybe someday when we have more resources?
Formerly: Aglaril Shaelara, Faerun's unlikeliest Bladesinger
Current main: Ky - something
It’s not the critic who counts...The credit belongs to the man who actually is in the arena, who strives violently, who errs and comes up short again and again...who if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement, but who if he fails, fails while daring greatly.-T. Roosevelt
Current main: Ky - something
It’s not the critic who counts...The credit belongs to the man who actually is in the arena, who strives violently, who errs and comes up short again and again...who if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement, but who if he fails, fails while daring greatly.-T. Roosevelt
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
Are we talking CvC? If we are, that's definitely not the case. That fight will be decided by which party fails a save first, making it pretty damn random. The SS has much better saves, so he has the edge, but die rolls are what they are. Pointless to address it from that angle, though, as CvC shouldn't be the primary balance concern since it's not something most people engage in.Ithildur wrote:Still, at PRC lvls (7+) an EK will soon eat both half progression guys for breakfast with a hand tied behind his back.
The SS is one of those prestige classes that has little lore or flavor associated with it, it's mainly about the mechanics. If we're going to have to screw with the mechanics, we should just start fresh.
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
If a fighter-centric variant class like this is implemented, I would likely make most of my fighter characters somewhere along these lines. As it stands, EK is just not very good for fighter types. You need to go with a spellcaster first to be decent with it mostly.
Lore or whatnot wise... I believe this should be secondary to fun. There are about two million reasons I could list off the top of my head why tying classes to lore strictly is such a bad idea... but for the purposes of this discussion, I will say my main one:
This is a fictional setting of imagination and make believe. You can, almost certainly, ICly justify just about anything you wanted. DMs do this all the time because that is their *job* (figuratively speaking). I see no reason why we can't bend things a bit to accomodate more fun.
That being said, I'm just the first vocal one who wants something like this. I'm pretty sure if you ask around others would want it.
Lore or whatnot wise... I believe this should be secondary to fun. There are about two million reasons I could list off the top of my head why tying classes to lore strictly is such a bad idea... but for the purposes of this discussion, I will say my main one:
This is a fictional setting of imagination and make believe. You can, almost certainly, ICly justify just about anything you wanted. DMs do this all the time because that is their *job* (figuratively speaking). I see no reason why we can't bend things a bit to accomodate more fun.
That being said, I'm just the first vocal one who wants something like this. I'm pretty sure if you ask around others would want it.
First Character: Zyrus Meynolt, the serene Water Genasi berserker. "I am the embodiment of the oceans; serene until you summon the storm." Zyrus: http://tinyurl.com/9emdbnd
Second Character: Damien Collins, the atypical druid. "What? Being a stick in the mud is boring. No pun intended grins"
Western Heartlands HDM: On break. PM for emergencies
Second Character: Damien Collins, the atypical druid. "What? Being a stick in the mud is boring. No pun intended grins"
Western Heartlands HDM: On break. PM for emergencies
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
Yeah. I don't disagree. I wasn't raising the issue of related lore as an argument against implementing a martial-arcane class at all, but against the Spellsword.
We can look at a PrC in two different lights, mechanically or in terms of flavor. In cases like the Bladesinger, the appeal of a PrC's flavor may invite us to ignore or remedy mechanical problems. In cases like the EK, mechanical effectiveness is sufficient, despite the absence of distinctive flavor. Then there are classes like the Doomguide which are distinctive in terms of lore and mechanics. Those are the ideal, but not all PrC's are going to be like that. That's understood.
The SS is a different case from those discussed above, one in which there is no flavor to speak of, AND the mechanics are problematic. It has no redeeming qualities.
I have to disagree with your assessment of more martial EK's, incidentally. The fact that the PrC gets taken later doesn't in any way gimp fighter/wizard multis who take the class. They wind up with weaker spellcasting, more BAB and more HP, exactly as one would expect. I think the only real drawback is that people don't like waiting to take PrC levels.
That being said, I don't particularly object to the basic idea of a more martial fighter/wizard oriented PrC. But there isn't anything in 3.5 sources that would work well for that purpose. We would need to create a class from the ground up. If we do that, I think there are a couple of core factors that we can draw from the Spellsword and similar PrCs.
req. +5 BAB, 2nd lvl casting, and a skill that would not be in class for for a full BAB class such as Knowledge (arcane) or Spellcraft.
Not better than d8 HD.
Full BAB.
Alternate level casting increase.
As long as you stick to that basic framework and don't add anything crazy, the result should be fairly balanced.
We can look at a PrC in two different lights, mechanically or in terms of flavor. In cases like the Bladesinger, the appeal of a PrC's flavor may invite us to ignore or remedy mechanical problems. In cases like the EK, mechanical effectiveness is sufficient, despite the absence of distinctive flavor. Then there are classes like the Doomguide which are distinctive in terms of lore and mechanics. Those are the ideal, but not all PrC's are going to be like that. That's understood.
The SS is a different case from those discussed above, one in which there is no flavor to speak of, AND the mechanics are problematic. It has no redeeming qualities.
I have to disagree with your assessment of more martial EK's, incidentally. The fact that the PrC gets taken later doesn't in any way gimp fighter/wizard multis who take the class. They wind up with weaker spellcasting, more BAB and more HP, exactly as one would expect. I think the only real drawback is that people don't like waiting to take PrC levels.
That being said, I don't particularly object to the basic idea of a more martial fighter/wizard oriented PrC. But there isn't anything in 3.5 sources that would work well for that purpose. We would need to create a class from the ground up. If we do that, I think there are a couple of core factors that we can draw from the Spellsword and similar PrCs.
req. +5 BAB, 2nd lvl casting, and a skill that would not be in class for for a full BAB class such as Knowledge (arcane) or Spellcraft.
Not better than d8 HD.
Full BAB.
Alternate level casting increase.
As long as you stick to that basic framework and don't add anything crazy, the result should be fairly balanced.
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
Second level CL still means you need 2-3 levels in your spellcaster class. a D8 is the same as EK as well... I agree it should not be unbalancing, but I'm seeking a *fighter* variant. I'm more partial to making it second CL and a D10 instead... and make some sort of limit to spellcasting... though to be fair, I can understand why you'd want a D8.
First Character: Zyrus Meynolt, the serene Water Genasi berserker. "I am the embodiment of the oceans; serene until you summon the storm." Zyrus: http://tinyurl.com/9emdbnd
Second Character: Damien Collins, the atypical druid. "What? Being a stick in the mud is boring. No pun intended grins"
Western Heartlands HDM: On break. PM for emergencies
Second Character: Damien Collins, the atypical druid. "What? Being a stick in the mud is boring. No pun intended grins"
Western Heartlands HDM: On break. PM for emergencies
-
Blindhamsterman
- Haste Bear
- Posts: 2396
- Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:13 am
- Location: GMT
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
FYI EK is d6hp.
not a huge fan of making up random classes, there are a reasonable number of PRCs out there that can be taken for multi arcane/warrior types. We should really use one of those.
The more I think on it, Abjurant champion might be a good basis.
Yes it has full spellasting full BAB and d10 hp, but this is to a major extent balanced by being on a 5 level class and ALFAs rule of only one PRC per character. With it's 5th level ability being to make a PCs caster level equal to their BAB if BAB is higher, it'd suit more warrior based spellcasters nicely (by this i mean the character isn't gimped in caster level for the few spells they know) also with only 5 levels they will never be as good spellcasters as an EK could be (especially with a BAB of 5 requirement that they come with).
the only further balancing I'd do to Abjurant champion is make its hp d8 rather than d10 and remove the arcane boost ability (arguably its most powerful ability and also most complex ability to implement).
That being said, as we haven't even reached a decision on a single one of the PRCs initially discussed, bringing up more before they're ready seems rather silly to me...
not a huge fan of making up random classes, there are a reasonable number of PRCs out there that can be taken for multi arcane/warrior types. We should really use one of those.
The more I think on it, Abjurant champion might be a good basis.
Yes it has full spellasting full BAB and d10 hp, but this is to a major extent balanced by being on a 5 level class and ALFAs rule of only one PRC per character. With it's 5th level ability being to make a PCs caster level equal to their BAB if BAB is higher, it'd suit more warrior based spellcasters nicely (by this i mean the character isn't gimped in caster level for the few spells they know) also with only 5 levels they will never be as good spellcasters as an EK could be (especially with a BAB of 5 requirement that they come with).
the only further balancing I'd do to Abjurant champion is make its hp d8 rather than d10 and remove the arcane boost ability (arguably its most powerful ability and also most complex ability to implement).
That being said, as we haven't even reached a decision on a single one of the PRCs initially discussed, bringing up more before they're ready seems rather silly to me...
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
I disagree in the strongest possible terms about Abjurant Champion. I know I raise balance concerns about a lot of things, but AC is in an entirely different class of broken. I don't even know where to start.
A fight5/wiz1/AC5 can do obscene things. Such as casting a shield spell which occupies a 1st lvl spell slot but is affected by quicken spell and extend spell, and grants +9 AC instead of +4...and lasts 22 minutes. Please note that there is nothing in the description of the abilities that limits it to arcane spells, only abjuration spells. It can quicken and extend divine spells for free too, such as shield of faith (which will stack with its other AC buffs), sanctuary, protection from alignment, etc. Cler6/wiz2/AC5...dear god.
AC is one of the few PrC's that should be banned in any PnP game. It's right up there with Ruby Knight Vindicator. Removing arcane boost and dropping the HD by one die type doesn't even scratch the surface of what you would have to do to make that class balanced. Hell, even if you took away all of the class abilities, the fact that it gains full BAB and full spellcasting while requiring virtually nothing makes it unacceptable.
Fun fact: AC would be much stronger than it is if the abilities worked as described. It specifically mentions mage armor in the text of an ability that is supposed to only work on abjuration spells. Lucky for us, the authors of that book either forgot or never knew that mage armor is a conjuration spell. Really inspires confidence in WoTC, huh?
You're right of course that none of the first crop of PrC's has gotten past the drawing board, so the whole discussion is highly theoretical.
A fight5/wiz1/AC5 can do obscene things. Such as casting a shield spell which occupies a 1st lvl spell slot but is affected by quicken spell and extend spell, and grants +9 AC instead of +4...and lasts 22 minutes. Please note that there is nothing in the description of the abilities that limits it to arcane spells, only abjuration spells. It can quicken and extend divine spells for free too, such as shield of faith (which will stack with its other AC buffs), sanctuary, protection from alignment, etc. Cler6/wiz2/AC5...dear god.
AC is one of the few PrC's that should be banned in any PnP game. It's right up there with Ruby Knight Vindicator. Removing arcane boost and dropping the HD by one die type doesn't even scratch the surface of what you would have to do to make that class balanced. Hell, even if you took away all of the class abilities, the fact that it gains full BAB and full spellcasting while requiring virtually nothing makes it unacceptable.
Fun fact: AC would be much stronger than it is if the abilities worked as described. It specifically mentions mage armor in the text of an ability that is supposed to only work on abjuration spells. Lucky for us, the authors of that book either forgot or never knew that mage armor is a conjuration spell. Really inspires confidence in WoTC, huh?
Why? Because splatbook PrC's are so well balanced, or because they're so grounded in lore? Neither of those is true, so I'm at a loss to justify limiting ourselves to them. Abjurant Champion is ludicrously broken, Spellsword is potentially overpowered and definitely problematic to implement...most of the rest have similar issues.Blindhamsterman wrote: not a huge fan of making up random classes, there are a reasonable number of PRCs out there that can be taken for multi arcane/warrior types. We should really use one of those.
You're right of course that none of the first crop of PrC's has gotten past the drawing board, so the whole discussion is highly theoretical.
-
Ithildur
- Dungeon Master
- Posts: 3548
- Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 7:46 am
- Location: Best pizza town in the universe
- Contact:
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
Agreed that Abj Champ would be pretty overpowered for ALFA.
Spellsword on the other hand... someone who's 1 or 2 caster lvls behind a straight wizard (the EK) will eat someone who is 7 to 9 lvls behind (spellsword, cw bladesinger) for breakfast at higher lvls. Channel spell is nice but not impressive in pnp when you package it with the lost caster lvls, practiced spellcaster or no. Is it better than a fighter at high lvls? Sure, but then, most things are.
Bringing things over to ALFA/NWN2... which means lower lvls, smaller selection of spells, etc, the Spellsword's viability does go up, possibly on par if not higher than the EK, because getting to the lvls where casters get the 'game over' spells/tactics is much more difficult (and there's far less of them available); may as well enjoy the ability to have decent AB and have some armor/shield options and channel a few low lvl spells. Chances are you're not going to live long enough to see the day that the EK is bigby'ing or casting Avasculate at you.
Problem is channel spell; I don't think it will ever work in nwn the way it's supposed to. If it works even half as well as it should, there probably aren't better alternatives than Spellsword. JPMage is of course out of the question; Raumathari Battlemage is FR flavored but the regional flavor is more limiting than elf/half elf-only (it's also more mage than fighter); Duskblade requires not only chanelling mechanics but a separate spellbook; I'm sure people will say Swiftblade is overpowered; what else is out there that's more viable?
Spellsword on the other hand... someone who's 1 or 2 caster lvls behind a straight wizard (the EK) will eat someone who is 7 to 9 lvls behind (spellsword, cw bladesinger) for breakfast at higher lvls. Channel spell is nice but not impressive in pnp when you package it with the lost caster lvls, practiced spellcaster or no. Is it better than a fighter at high lvls? Sure, but then, most things are.
Bringing things over to ALFA/NWN2... which means lower lvls, smaller selection of spells, etc, the Spellsword's viability does go up, possibly on par if not higher than the EK, because getting to the lvls where casters get the 'game over' spells/tactics is much more difficult (and there's far less of them available); may as well enjoy the ability to have decent AB and have some armor/shield options and channel a few low lvl spells. Chances are you're not going to live long enough to see the day that the EK is bigby'ing or casting Avasculate at you.
Problem is channel spell; I don't think it will ever work in nwn the way it's supposed to. If it works even half as well as it should, there probably aren't better alternatives than Spellsword. JPMage is of course out of the question; Raumathari Battlemage is FR flavored but the regional flavor is more limiting than elf/half elf-only (it's also more mage than fighter); Duskblade requires not only chanelling mechanics but a separate spellbook; I'm sure people will say Swiftblade is overpowered; what else is out there that's more viable?
Formerly: Aglaril Shaelara, Faerun's unlikeliest Bladesinger
Current main: Ky - something
It’s not the critic who counts...The credit belongs to the man who actually is in the arena, who strives violently, who errs and comes up short again and again...who if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement, but who if he fails, fails while daring greatly.-T. Roosevelt
Current main: Ky - something
It’s not the critic who counts...The credit belongs to the man who actually is in the arena, who strives violently, who errs and comes up short again and again...who if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement, but who if he fails, fails while daring greatly.-T. Roosevelt
Re: Class: "Swordmage"
Obviously the Spellsword has 2 qualities: 1) Channeling 2) Casting in armor. You could choose call channeling "the most defining" simply because it's something other classes discussed don't have. All of these 1/2 CL progression classes have some sort of cast in armor, and thus that's what we should keep.
So bottom line, you could just drop channel spell with the Spellsword. Between the 1/2 CL progression and being able to cast in increasing amounts of armor, it's enough, as this isn't supposed to be a power-creep contender with the EK. I'd further advocate the asf reduction working only to armor and not to shields. If desired, the channel ability could be replaced by having extra spellslots at low levels, adapting the class to the PW environment in a general manner. Or something else, or nothing whatsoever.
Finally, I'm not convinced the CvC -based argument of power you give Ith is near the best estimate of actual character power in the PW environment we play. Mostly because it relies on the PC having his/her maximum momentary power output available at the moment it matters, and deployed properly at that moment. If we adopt that simplistic power assessment, it certainly does mean higher spell level wins and no other PC attribute matter much. But that assumes the character/player assesses the situation correctly to neither be too aggressive and spend the ace prematurely, nor too conservative and realize it should have been fired when the battle is lost already. Something that shouldn't be a given.
So bottom line, you could just drop channel spell with the Spellsword. Between the 1/2 CL progression and being able to cast in increasing amounts of armor, it's enough, as this isn't supposed to be a power-creep contender with the EK. I'd further advocate the asf reduction working only to armor and not to shields. If desired, the channel ability could be replaced by having extra spellslots at low levels, adapting the class to the PW environment in a general manner. Or something else, or nothing whatsoever.
Finally, I'm not convinced the CvC -based argument of power you give Ith is near the best estimate of actual character power in the PW environment we play. Mostly because it relies on the PC having his/her maximum momentary power output available at the moment it matters, and deployed properly at that moment. If we adopt that simplistic power assessment, it certainly does mean higher spell level wins and no other PC attribute matter much. But that assumes the character/player assesses the situation correctly to neither be too aggressive and spend the ace prematurely, nor too conservative and realize it should have been fired when the battle is lost already. Something that shouldn't be a given.