# How would you build a melee wizard?



## Halivar (Oct 27, 2003)

In my group we love talking about the 1st ed. wizard, which was almost never complete without a longsword and the ability to use it (they must've loved Gandalf). Then we talk about how much multi-classes wizard/fighters suck in 3rd ed.

It was recently demonstrated to me that, at sufficiently high levels, a cleric can fill a fighter's roll. That got me thinking: can a wizard or sorceror, from their own repetiore of spells, fill out the tank roll?

So, here's the challenge: how tough can you make a wizard for melee combat without multiclassing fighter? I look at spells like _true strike_, _armor_, _shield_ (which stacks with _armor_), _enlarge_, _magic weapon_, _bull's strength_, and of course, _Tenser's magic transformation_ and I have to say that a wizard properly played could make a stand up melee character (not a fighter by any stetch of the imagination, but not a pushover).

So if you HAD to build a straight wizard with a point-buy and a lean towards melee combat, how would you do it?


----------



## FrankTrollman (Oct 27, 2003)

I'd invest in unarmed combat feats.

Then when I hit 9th level I would fight exclusively by Scrying on my opposition, Polymorphing into a badass, and then teleporting in and eating them.

A BAB of +4 - but when you have a strength of 27 and three attacks - who cares?

-Frank


----------



## Piratecat (Oct 27, 2003)

Halivar said:
			
		

> In my group we love talking about the 1st ed. wizard, which was almost never complete without a longsword and the ability to use it (they must've loved Gandalf).




Might you be mis-remembering? 1st edition wizards were utterly prohibited from using a sword. They couldn't even use one at a minus; they couldn't use one at all. Now, fighter/wizards on the other hand....

Hit points are a wizard's big weakness, followed by a lousy BAB.  In order to make a tough wizard in 3e, to start off I'd make my con second only to my int,  and I'd make myself a con boosting item as quickly as possible. Enchant arms and armor is also important, in order to give mself as useful a weapon as possible. That feat can also be used to make magic armor, if the DM allows the quality that reduces arcane spell failure. 

I'll let someone else worry about spells.


----------



## Belgarath (Oct 27, 2003)

_Might you be mis-remembering? 1st edition wizards were utterly prohibited from using a sword. They couldn't even use one at a minus; they couldn't use one at all._

Correction, a wizard could use a longsword with a -5 non proficiency penalty. The could not take a proficiency in the sword.


----------



## clark411 (Oct 27, 2003)

Build a straight Wiz with point buy that leans towards melee... I couldn't do it.  However with 1 level of Fighter, lets work.

Emwan Abrams
Dwarven Wizard 1 / Fighter 1
STR 13
DEX 12
CON 16
INT 15
WIS 10
CHA 6

Feats: Scribe Scroll, Still Spell, Expertise

In time, I'd get Craft Arms and Armor, make myself a sword, shield, and full plate.  I'd have all my utility spells in scroll form, and my 2nd highest level offensive/defensive spells memorized with Still Spell metamagic on them.  Possibly would pick up Craft Wand or Wondrous Item and make a few wands or 5/day big spell weapons.  With CWI i'd also make myself some Con, Int, and Str gear (in that order) to up hp, up my spell saves, and finally reduce any skill check penalties I had from my equipment.

Tactically, I'd enjoy expertise with True Strike cast, and I'd enjoy full plate and dwarven speed with Expeditious Retreat.  Later on, the fun really starts with the right spell selection.

The biggest issues are as mentioned, low hp, low bab, and also not yet mentioned, money.  You'll be dealing with keeping your spellbook updated AND keeping your gear up to speed.  The craft feat will make it twice as easy for you to handle your gear, but every gold piece not going to your spell selection is just that... one less gold going to your spell selection.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Oct 27, 2003)

I've been playing one for the past 2 years in the RPGA's Living Greyhawk campaign. The key is finding synergy between your fighter and your wizard abilities. If you don't you're either a wizard with a lousy caster level or a fighter with lousy hit points and a pathetic BAB. If you can find your niche, however, you can create something effective.

There are two basic types of fighter/wizard: the wizard with a little bit of fighter and the fighter with a little bit of wizard. Since I'm more familiar with the first, I'll discuss it first.

That niche has changed a lot between 3.0 and 3.5.

In 3.0, the niche was high AC.
Normal Armor+real shield+shield spell+dex+long term buffs+haste=very good AC.
Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace, Endurance, False Life, and Polymorph Self could be used to gain physical stats that were at least equal if not superior to the mundane fighter. Haste equalized attacks. Quickened spells or Spellsword channel (useful ability but whatever you do don't take more than two levels of the class) added to your damage potential.

In 3.5 it's much harder to get good AC so you'll have to focus on offense and on miss chances more.

Good spells:
Alter Self (AC boost)
Polymorph Self (physical stat boost, AC boost, size boost (important for tripping, etc)
False Life (hit point boost)
Heroism (medium duration buff helps with your BAB problem)
Mirror Image+blink have good synergy
Ray of Enfeeblement (yet another way to make yourself safer and your enemies more vulnerable to tripping).
There's good synergy between Blink or Improved Invisibility and Expert Tactician. There's marginal synergy between Power Attack and True Strike (better in 3.5 but still not that useful)

Stats: You'll want a good mix of physical stats and intelligence; but you can live with an intelligence as low as 13.

My recommendations on 28 point buy:
Str 14, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 15, Wis 10, Cha 8
or Str 15, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 14, Wis 10, Cha 8
With higher point buys, I'd increase intelligence first then con or strength.

Feats:
3.0 Extend Spell, Persistent Spell, Combat Reflexes, Expert Tactician
3.5 Quicken Spell (so you can cast and attack in the same round), Combat Reflexes (good in its own right since 3.5 combat is very focussed on reach), Expert Tactician, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Power Attack


----------



## Oni (Oct 27, 2003)

With a last will and testament to leave all their worldly belongings to my next character?


Seriously HP would be your friend.  So much so I personally would say that Con would be your most important stat even over Int, as a large portion of your spells are going to be buffing spells and so your spell DC's don't matter as much.  Also you definately want to be casting defensively since you'll likely be in the thick of it and you don't want to bung up your spells.    

I think, as per your original thought, that a sorcerer might be better suited since the buffing spells are limited in 3.5 and so whipping one off when you need it might be more convenient.  

Though on the other hand, wizard would give more flexability regarding item creation, and this is probably a character that is going to have to gird themselves with a lot of the right items to survive.  

On the other hand if self suffiency isn't what your looking for completely and yo u have other casters in your party you might be able to get them to provide the spells so that you can use your item creation feats.  However the problem here is that if you aren't proficient in armour then you apply the armour check penalty to attack rolls, and that is definately no good given an already limited BAB. It takes 3 feats to get to heavy armour, so that is likely not worth it and since we cannot get it by branching out to another class, shield prof. feat might however be worth it. 

If you willing to look goofy lugging around a tower shield, then silent spell might be useful, giving up some of your higher level spells for the ability not to lose them on casting isn't so bad.  

Anyway more thoughts later.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Oct 27, 2003)

A 1st level human wizard transmuter specialist (pick what he gives up) who acts like a fighter? (i've not got point buy costs with me, but just assuming)

St 12
De 14
Co 16
In 13
Wi 10
Ch 8

first level feats - Martial Weapon (Greatsword), toughness *(or light armour prof)

first level spells - enlarge, shield, truestrike.

Wears chain shirt (with shield spell and dex for AC 20). 

He has 10hp.

When enlarged he gets Str 14, Dex 12, his AC goes down to 18 but he has 10ft reach with his sword for 3d6+3 damage and +1 to hit overall.

Carry scrolls around of enlarge and shield (in case your spell failure stops them going off!).

If he has a couple of rounds of prep for an encounter, he could be an effective fighter for his level.

Second level spells would include endurance and false life as early purchases, alongside mirror image and blur. 3rd feat would be create wondrous item, 5th level bonus feat is enchant arms and armour and the normal feat could be extend spell or combat expertise or something.

Each attribute increase goes into INT, which keeps him in line for minimum Int to cast spells until he reaches 13th level, at which point he can't cast 7th level spells... unless he has an INT enhancing magic by that time (which seems very likely).

You could have fun with a character like that in many campaigns.

Cheers


----------



## The Souljourner (Oct 27, 2003)

False Life is your friend!  1d10 +1/lvl temporary hitpoints that last all day.  That's the equivalent of getting d8 hitpoints when you cast it at 5th level, and the equivalent of slightly better than d6 hitpoints until 15th level.  Plus you can cast it multiple times, it's not quite healing, but it's not far off either.

At high levels, empowering it can continue to give you that great d6 feeling.

I'm actually planning on playing a character like this in an upcoming campaign.  Don't forget Eldritch knight.  It's pretty much a must for anyone who wants to do fighter/wizard.

-The Souljourner


----------



## Altamont Ravenard (Oct 27, 2003)

Belgarath said:
			
		

> _Might you be mis-remembering? 1st edition wizards were utterly prohibited from using a sword. They couldn't even use one at a minus; they couldn't use one at all._
> 
> Correction, a wizard could use a longsword with a -5 non proficiency penalty. The could not take a proficiency in the sword.




Wasn't that in _2nd_ edition?

AR


----------



## Halivar (Oct 27, 2003)

I'm sorry for the confusion.  By saying no 1st ed. wiz was complete without a longsword, I was referring to the ridiculously easy multi-class rules, where there was no _real_ penalty to being a Ftr/Mu.

 In 3rd ed., taking levels of fighter is extremely prohibitive to the wizard.  However, taking 1 level has the following benefits:

 - You have an extra feat at level 1
 - You have 6 more hit-points
 - You don't have to spend three feats (or any, for that matter) on heavy armor proficiency

 Of course, there's a part of me that's wondering whether it might not be more beneficial to skip the fighter, keep to light armor and go the Dex route.  Of course, that introduces a third prime stat for our melee-caster.

 I'd bribe my DM into letting me create a weapon with 50 charges of _true strike_ and PA all day long.  But then, my DM lets me get away with too much. Is there another, legal, way to store up on _true strike_ spells?

 Oh, and _cloak of major displacement_ is a must.


----------



## Darklone (Oct 27, 2003)

Eldritch Knight perhaps?


----------



## Gregor (Oct 27, 2003)

Bladesinger?


----------



## maddman75 (Oct 27, 2003)

I was thinking that going the light armor route might be beneficial as well.  You could eventually pick up levels in duelist to get the Int bonus to AC.  Some decent synergy there.  And there's a certain appeal to a spellslinging swashbuckler.


----------



## Nightchilde-2 (Oct 27, 2003)

Warmage.


----------



## the Jester (Oct 27, 2003)

Belgarath said:
			
		

> Correction, a wizard could use a longsword with a -5 non proficiency penalty. The could not take a proficiency in the sword.




Nope, in 1e you _could not use a weapon not on your list,_ at least not by the rules.  EGG himself suggested allowing exceptions _in extremis_ in (I believe it was) UA, but he suggested slapping extreme penalties on the character iirc.


----------



## Tessarael (Oct 27, 2003)

Halivar said:
			
		

> Of course, there's a part of me that's wondering whether it might not be more beneficial to skip the fighter, keep to light armor and go the Dex route.  Of course, that introduces a third prime stat for our melee-caster.




The light armor + AC from Dexterity route doesn't produce a better AC than heavier armors. However, it does reduce arcane spell failure. I think there's two routes to handle the arcane spell failure:
- heavy armor + Still Spell and trying to cast spells without somatic components
- light armor + Dex + possibly a couple of levels in Spellsword
In general, I'd go the heavy armor + Still Spell route, Spellsword levels are fairly weak in comparison to Eldritch Knight progression.

I have a Rogue with a level in Wizard, who eventually wants to advance in Wizard further. For that route Dex + Finesse is a must to make Dex as important as Strength. Still, I'm now at the point where Dex bonus to AC is maxed out, unless I find some celestial chainmail ...


----------



## Pax (Oct 27, 2003)

Halivar said:
			
		

> So, here's the challenge: how tough can you make a wizard for melee combat without multiclassing fighter? I look at spells like _true strike_, _armor_, _shield_ (which stacks with _armor_), _enlarge_, _magic weapon_, _bull's strength_, and of course, _Tenser's magic transformation_ and I have to say that a wizard properly played could make a stand up melee character (not a fighter by any stetch of the imagination, but not a pushover).
> 
> So if you HAD to build a straight wizard with a point-buy and a lean towards melee combat, how would you do it?




Wizard(10)/Thorn Knight(10).  Thorn Knight is a Prestige Class in the Dragonlance Campaign Setting; you eventually get the ability to reduce all arcane failure chances from armor by 20% (mithril full plate thus imposes only a 5% chance to screw a spell up).  Couple other good benefits too -- Weapon Touch (deliver a touch spell through a melee weapon) being chief among them.  Main catch is, you have to be evil ...

Eldritch Knight also works, but you MUST multiclass into ONE level of Fighter to qualify, due to one of the prerequisites.

And frankly, a melee wizard that goes Wizard(5)/Fighter(1)/Eldritch Knight(9)/Thorn Knight(10) can be quite a powerful build; I know, I'm running one in my arena, Exodus ... ^_^'


```
[color=white]PLAYER NAME     : GMPax
CHARACTER NAME  : Sir Mikel Lord Trevayne, TKN
RACE (ECL)      : Human
CLASS (LEVEL)   : Fighter(1)/Wizard(5)/Eldritch Knight(9)/Knight of the Thorn(10)
... NET LEVEL   : 25
ALIGNMENT       : LE[/color]
```

  Optimally, I'd get another level of Eldritch Knight next (for completeness' sake); after that, I'm unsure where this build would go, I'd have to do more research on what'd suit best. ^_^

  Still; this build sacrifices only 2 caster levels (easily made up with items and spells), has a Base Attack Bonus of +17 (+20 including Epic Attack Bonus), and of course, _lots_ of touch spells.


----------



## Halivar (Oct 27, 2003)

Does the Eldritch Knight have +1 caster level/class level? I'm at work so I can't look it up. Others are suggesting duelist, spellsword and bladesinger, but I think anything that keeps you from casting multiple level 9 spells at 20th is too much of a hit for a wizard to take. In the end, I'm not entirely convinced you can't build something just as potent in melee (and more potent in casting) with a Ftr1/Wiz???. 

 It also seems that since there are a plethora of helpful 1st-level spells (and some obviously nice higher level ones), the wizard's melee prowess should scale well with him.

 Another question: if you took the archer route, how does the melee-caster build change? For one thing, I think you could cut back on armor and hit-points and go up a bit on saves and resistances. Change secondary (or primary stat, as the case may be) from Con to Dex.  That should fix the low armor problem, and you no longer have to worry about arcane spell-failure. With a ranged attack, you also get the added benefit of not provoking AoO's when casting _true strike_.


----------



## Pax (Oct 27, 2003)

Halivar: Eldritch Knight DOES have +1 caster level / class level, *except at 1st level*.  There, it gets a Fighter bonus feat, intead.

So Wizard(10)/Fighter(1)/EldKnight(9) has 18 caster levels -- enough to get to 9th level spells.  Heck, with Sorceror instead of Wizard, it's enough.

An Archer-Wizard isn't very attractive in general terms; ignore hte weapons most of the time, and use spells.  However, with a better BAB, you can make better use of Touch and Ranged Touch spells.


----------



## wolfen (Oct 27, 2003)

Diehard:  "Helping characters sleep their way to the next level since 2003."

wolfen


----------



## wolfen (Oct 27, 2003)

Enworld hiccup...double post


----------



## Thanee (Oct 27, 2003)

Now that the buff insanity of 3.0 is a bit in check at least, it'll be a little harder to make a good fighting wizard.

I guess, like Frank hinted, _Polymorph_ is still a key spell to get good fighting abilities. You don't need to go unarmed, tho, as there are enough badass monsters (like troll, some giants) which can use weapons just fine.

In 3.0 one of my preferred characters was an elven rogue/wizard/arcane trickster archer (an incredibly cool character to play, played her from level 1 through 19! ). She could handle herself in combat just fine (and with enough time to buff up (including limited wishing for persistant divine favor ) could get to insane levels, much like clerics), but I'm not sure how the many changes to archery have this work out now.

Because of the lower duration of many spells, I suppose, that the sorcerer is now actually the better choice here, because you have plenty spells to rebuff over the course of a day.

I don't think I'd bother with fighter levels, elves get some fine weapon proficiencies and armor isn't really needed, if you can be mirror imaged, blinking, displaced and greater invisible, as well as stone skinned and whatnot. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## wolfen (Oct 27, 2003)

Enworld silliness...triple post


----------



## fusangite (Oct 28, 2003)

I've set this very question for myself. First things first: assuming you're building a human Wizard, I would start as follows:

Highest score: Intelligence
Second highest: Constitution
Third: Dexterity

If you're doing standard point buy, leave all the other scores at 8. Your first two feats should be Weapon Focus (Touch) and Weapon Finesse. You're probably best off making either an Evoker or Necromancer with enchantment and illusion off-limits.

I'd recommend scribing scrolls with plenty of touch spells and not worrying about getting any Item Creation or Metamagic feats. Instead, as you progress, focus on the Dodge and Combat Expertise suites. I think you should be working towards a Spring Attack based character who discharges touch spells and then 
runs back.

EDIT:

Str 9
Con 15
Dex 14
Int 16
Wis 8
Cha 8

Spells: Mage Armour, Shield, Magic Missile, Shocking Grasp, Burning Hands, Chill Touch, True Strike
Feats: Weapon Focus (Touch), Weapon Finesse

Although I don't think Item Creation and Metamagic would be good ideas, Spell Focus (Necromancy) or Spell Focus (Evocation) deserve consideration.

Basically, this character is just trying to stay alive until he can cast Vampiric Touch; then all hell can break loose and he'll be pretty damned effective.


----------



## Gaiden (Oct 28, 2003)

*A melee wizard build*

Elf

Fig 2, Wiz 4, MotAO 2, Bladesinger 2, Candle Caster 10

Stat order:  Int, Dex, Con, Str, Wis, Chr

Feats: WF-ls, Dodge, CR, CC, Expertise, Still Spell, ET, GF, QS, PA, Coop Spell

The great thing about this build is that you cast spells in armor with still spell but also have the option of lighting candles for all those buff spells that require somatic components.  Dipped Candle and Striped Candle are great abilities.  Dipped can mean two repetitive True Strikes - the only ability in the game that I know of that can effectively give you 3 functional true strikes in a round.  Get a long sword with ghost touch so that you can blink and not have to worry about miss chance and make sure to stock up on touch attack spells.

I


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Oct 28, 2003)

The archer route changes the build completely. Most of the builds suggested so far have been primarily casters. (A primary melee build might be Ftr 4/Wiz 2/Templar 1/Bladesinger 10/Holy Liberator 3; a more basic one would be Ftr 8/Wiz 2/Bladesinger 10). Primary caster builds don't work well for an archer based fighter/wizard. There isn't the same synergy that there is for melee characters (blink and expert tactician, other defensive spells, False life hit points are less of an issue, and there isn't a lot of benefit from polymorph, enlarge, etc). In addition, a character with low base attack and high caster level who wants to inflict damage at range is generally better off casting spells (Scorching ray, fireball, magic missile, etc).

The builds I know of that work well for archer/wizards are:
Rogue 3/Wizard 6/Arcane Trickster 10 on the high caster level side.
(Sneak attack damage adds synergy with blink and greater invisibility as well as allowing the character to equal his spell damage with his limited number of attacks).

And for low caster level builds,
Ftr x/Rgr y/Wiz 2/Arcane Archer
(Arcane Archer isn't as impressive a prestige class in 3.5 as it was in 3.0 so this probably isn't a real powergaming build).
Ftr 4/Rog 4/Wiz 6/Full BAB classes the rest of the way  might be another viable build--enough sneak attack to gain some synergy from Blink, etc but not enough wizard levels to qualify as a high caster level build. It probably suffers compared to archers with fewer wizard levels however.




			
				Halivar said:
			
		

> Another question: if you took the archer route, how does the melee-caster build change? For one thing, I think you could cut back on armor and hit-points and go up a bit on saves and resistances. Change secondary (or primary stat, as the case may be) from Con to Dex.  That should fix the low armor problem, and you no longer have to worry about arcane spell-failure. With a ranged attack, you also get the added benefit of not provoking AoO's when casting _true strike_.


----------



## Thanee (Oct 28, 2003)

Gaiden said:
			
		

> Get a long sword with ghost touch so that you can blink and not have to worry about miss chance...




Ghost touch doesn't help there in the slightest! 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Thanee (Oct 28, 2003)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> (Arcane Archer isn't as impressive a prestige class in 3.5 as it was in 3.0).




No, not really. In 3.5 it was already pretty much useless thanks to Greater Magic Weapon, now it's even more useless, thanks to the non-stacking. It's a bit better now in relation, actually, since GMW is worse, but you should still be able to get at least the same bonus with GMW most of the time.

BTW, now that there is no limit to the mighty bows, Polymorph can be quite a kicker with archery!

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Gaiden (Oct 28, 2003)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Ghost touch doesn't help there in the slightest!
> 
> Bye
> Thanee




Oh?


----------



## Hammerhead (Oct 28, 2003)

Thanee is correct. Ghost Touch is one way-it helps you hit ethereal/incorporeal creatures. It doesn't help when you when you're on the ethereal. 

Can you imagine the power then? Who needs Blink? Just cast Ethereal Jaunt and ginsu your opponent with a Ghost Touch weapon while he is unable to fight back.


----------



## Halivar (Oct 28, 2003)

If there is any weapon enhancement in the SRD that allows ethereal creatures to attack material creatures, that enhancement is getting rule-zero'd out of my game. That would be broken beyond all belief (from a balance standpoint).


----------



## Thanee (Oct 28, 2003)

In 3.5 Ghost Touch doesn't even allow to hit ethereal opponents anymore. It's clarified to work against incorporeal targets only (I guess that was intended in 3.0 already).

Bye
Thanee


----------



## apsuman (Oct 28, 2003)

Instead of a wizard, could you have a sorcerer instead?

Sorcerers get simple weapons, both the heavy mace and the longspear ar acceptable weapons.

Take a few armor profs and silent spell.  Cast all of your spells at a one level penalty.

g!


----------



## apsuman (Oct 28, 2003)

Also, if sorcerers are permitted, then a dragon disciple would be a lot of fun to play.  Unfortunatly, the fun doesnt really start until you have all 10 levels of the class.

I contend (other disagree) that a Sor 6/DD 10 would be a decent combatant and a blast to play.


g!


----------



## Pax (Oct 29, 2003)

Apsuman, better than that ... Sor(9)/Fighter(4)/Half-Dragon.  Same ECL a syour suggestion, with three extra Fighter feats (one less character-level feat, though), and access to Specialisation.  Also all martial weapons and armor proficiencies known.

And most or all  of the half-dragon goodness the DragDis gives you, to boot.


----------



## apsuman (Oct 29, 2003)

Pax said:
			
		

> Apsuman, better than that ... Sor(9)/Fighter(4)/Half-Dragon.  Same ECL a syour suggestion, with three extra Fighter feats (one less character-level feat, though), and access to Specialisation.  Also all martial weapons and armor proficiencies known.
> 
> And most or all  of the half-dragon goodness the DragDis gives you, to boot.




All true, but i thought the challange was to make one without the multiclass in to FTR.


----------



## Halivar (Oct 29, 2003)

apsuman said:
			
		

> All true, but i thought the challange was to make one without the multiclass in to FTR.



 Not to mention that a Sor9/Ftr4 half-dragon can only cast level 5 spells.  Perhaps a stand up melee character, but mince-meat to a straight wizard of the same ECL.


----------



## Pax (Oct 30, 2003)

Halivar said:
			
		

> Not to mention that a Sor9/Ftr4 half-dragon can only cast level 5 spells.  Perhaps a stand up melee character, but mince-meat to a straight wizard of the same ECL.




Better than a Sor(6)/Dragon Disciple(10) along the lines of Apuman's suggestion.  *That* one can only do third-level spells.  

Taken to 20th level, they would be Sor(13)/Ftr(4) Half-Dragon, or Sor(10)/Disciple(10).  Taking the actual half-dragon template gives you 3 extra caster levels of Sorceror.

Another option would be Fighter(1)/Sor(6)/Eldritch Knight(10) half-dragon.  15 caster levels, 7th level spells, decent BAB.  Or swap the Sorceror levels for Wizard levels, and gt 8th level spells.

But generally speaking ... Dragon Disciple is a waste of time.  And it's inclusion in the revised DMG was a waste of page space.  >_<'


----------



## Hypersmurf (Oct 30, 2003)

Thanee said:
			
		

> In 3.5 Ghost Touch doesn't even allow to hit ethereal opponents anymore. It's clarified to work against incorporeal targets only (I guess that was intended in 3.0 already).




Ghost Touch hasn't changed - it only ever worked incorporeal/corporeal, never ethereal/material.

You might be confusing yourself with the unusual wording of 3E _Blink_, which stated that:

a/ an attacker gets a 50% Miss Chance,
b/ an attacker who can see invisible gets a 20% Miss Chance,
c/ an attacker who can strike *ethereal or incorporeal* opponents gets a 20% Miss Chance, and
d/ an attacker who can see invisible and strike *ethereal* opponents has no Miss Chance.

So oddly, if you had a Ghost Touch weapon, you had a 20% Miss Chance whether or not you could see invisible, but if you had a Force weapon, your 20% Miss Chance dropped to zero if you could see invisible.

In 3.5, the "or incorporeal" has been removed from condition c.

-Hyp.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Oct 30, 2003)

apsuman said:
			
		

> Sorcerers get simple weapons, both the heavy mace and the longspear ar acceptable weapons.
> 
> g!




You know, I'd *never* noticed that longspear was a simple weapon! I can't think of many good reasons for a sorcerer to not carry one of those around for keeping the pesky riff-raff away


----------



## tolliver (Oct 30, 2003)

*I agree.*



			
				Nightchilde-2 said:
			
		

> Warmage.




Yup.  From the Minis Handbook.  One of the players in my new Shackled City campaign took warmage, so we'll see how balanced it is.  Seems okay to me.

It's kinda more or less what the original poster seemed to be looking for.  It's a pure melee mage that can wear armor without a penalty and deals extra damage with spells.  It totally lacks 'utility' spells (like _identify, clairvoyance, bull's strength, _ etc.), focusing mainly on Evocations, but it's a near-perfect battlemage.


----------



## Thanee (Oct 30, 2003)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Ghost Touch hasn't changed - it only ever worked incorporeal/corporeal, never ethereal/material.
> 
> You might be confusing yourself with the unusual wording of 3E _Blink_, ...




Yeah, that might be! 

I only looked up the 3.5 version, and not the 3.0 version, but remembered some weird stuff concerning ghost touch...

Bye
Thanee


----------

