D&D 5E Return of the Fighter/Mage ... Swords & Sorcery characters

[Olgar Shiverstone]

From the BECMI Elf to the 1E/2E multiclass Fighter/Magic-User to the 3E Eldritch Knight to the 4E Swordmage, and all of the classes in between, D&D has long had the trope of a character who blends swords and sorcery, able to fight on the front line with steel while simultaneously attacking and defending with spells. Mechanically those characters have varied in viability and ability to execute the concept through the editions, though.

One of the things I'm finding intriguing about 5E is the number of ways to approach that particular trope, whether it's mountain dwarf wizards, eldritch knight fighters, war domain clerics, blade pact warlocks, or various multiclass combinations.

Assuming you have a basic concept that says you want a character to be able to fight on the front line effectively with a martial weapon (or two) in armor (medium or heavy), and be able to also sling spells that attack and defend, and perhaps boost martial prowess while allowing a little out-of-combat flexibility ... what do you think are the pros and cons, mechanically and flavor-wise, to different approaches?

How would you go after this sort of character in 5E?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

This thread title may be hurting you: It promises Conan when you're asking for Elric.

 

[Juriel]

Paladin is your best bet for a warrior-caster, really.

Eldritch Knight flunked out of magic school, and cannot even cast with a weapon in hand. Good luck with your 2nd-level spells at lv12! They're just a meaningless detail on top of their otherwise regular basic attack routine.

Warlock has no reason for the warrior part, because Eldritch Blast is better than weapons.

Valor Bard could work out. But as a full caster (who can copy any other spells), why would he need the warrior part? Except to be a dick, as he has access to the highest Ranger/Paladin spells WAY before they do...

 

[beefcake_wizard]

Paladin is your best bet for a warrior-caster...

Eldritch Knight is weakling who cannot even cast with a weapon in hand.

False. Feat is called Warcaster, and was made for fighter/caster types (fighters get a few feats btw ). Also not only that, he can eventually cast and melee attack in the same turn! And even moreover Eldritch knight probably is the 'toughest' and likely has the best multi-encounter DPR of the options presented. So... really worth considering.

Warlock has no reason for the warrior part, because Eldritch Blast is better than weapons.

False. Warlock has great reason for Blade pact, Eldritch blast is at disadvantage close up, and susceptible to cover penalties (and thank god it is, way too good without some caveats). Taking blade pact doesn't impugn on warlock's ability to cast Edritch blast, thus he can do both and be more versatile in combat, i.e. not have to worry if he gets surrounded.

Valor Bard... may work out. But as a full caster (who can copy any other spells), why would he need the warriro part?

Valor Bard casting is mainly support oriented, he gets no damage cantrips and much less dmg spells at higher levels. With his bonus spells at 10th he can boost his melee dramatically (w/smites or hex). Bard does't need melee persay, but would be more effective and versatile to have the option.

You guys mention Ranger? What about Monk? My impression is that most caster/martial multi-classing is weaker then the pre-existing gish classes and subclasses.

 

[Juriel]

False. Feat is called Warcaster, and was made for fighter/caster types (fighters get a few feats btw ). Also not only that, he can eventually cast and melee attack in the same turn!

Feat tax to get a subclass to work, and that cast + attack comes at the cost of all your extra attacks... still fails to impress me. Still, unlike Pally, EK has an extra reason to pick Warcaster (because weapons in hand and Shield spell as reaction), which combos nicely with his Con save proficiency for keeping whatever buffs you can scrounge up running.

It's his available slots that are the problem, as he will get 3rd level spells when there's already Forcecages and such starting to fly around. It just seems like anyone could accomplish the same by carrying a few scrolls around.

False. Warlock has great reason for Blade pact, Eldritch blast is at disadvantage close up, and susceptible to cover penalties (and thank god it is, way too good without some caveats). Taking blade pact doesn't impugn on warlock's ability to cast Edritch blast, thus he can do both and be more versatile in combat, i.e. not have to worry if he gets surrounded.

OP is talking about fighter/mages, not mages who may have a back-up weapon in their sleeve...

Not to mention that it'd still be better to just keep blasting with Eldritch Blast in most melee, if Eldritch Blast is what you've spent your resources on. Because you don't need to spend invocations on getting multiple attacks with it, and if it's just one melee enemy, you can push them back with the first hit (as you have the knockback Invocation, if this is your focus). 4 attacks at disadvantage and all your boost focus (Invocations, Hex) on them is better than 2 attacks without disadvantage.

And if the Eldritch Blast has to deal with cover (which the opponent will get pushed out from with the first successful hit), that means he is at a range where the sword could not reach the enemy at all, so... I'm not sure how that factors in.

Valor Bard casting is mainly support oriented, he gets no damage cantrips and much less dmg spells at higher levels. With his bonus spells at 10th he can boost his melee dramatically (w/smites or hex). Bard does't need melee persay, but would be more effective and versatile to have the option.

Honestly, Bards get enough spell copying to pick up smites and whatever else spells they want. Valor is the fighter/mage option, but Lore is the stronger option (because it gets to copy more stuff and earlier). I just think they can solve most cases by going through their spells first, then using physical attacking as the last 'nah, cannot be bothered to spend any of my hundred slots on this' resort, because they ARE full casters. And if they have slots available, and the melee situation IS an actual threat, well, melee proximity doesn't hinder spells with save.

You guys mention Ranger? What about Monk? My impression is that most caster/martial multi-classing is weaker then the pre-existing gish classes and subclasses.

Ranger doesn't get much, and besides most of what he gets, isn't exactly magical. Like, shoot many arrows as their lv5 spell, such magics.

Monk does have the elemental path, which might work for OP's criteria. Admittedly, it looks weak (just different variants of elemental blasts), but yeah, it should count. Curious to see if people can make that work.

 

[grimslade]

It can replicate the Grey Mouser the best out of all editions

I like the granularity of the sword and spell swingers. You can have a mountain dwarf abjurer or pact blade fiendlock at the high magic/ low sword. The Ritual Caster feat at the lowest end.

 

[Prism]

If you want a character that can teleport into combat, fly up to melee with a dragon, throw up a magical shield to deflect a blow, blast their enemies aside with gale force winds and immolate themselves in protective fire, that's an Eldritch Knight.

If you prefer a more aggressive arcane spell caster you'll probably be looking to multiclass Eldritch Knight with wizard or sorcerer. A key level for EK is 7th as they can then mix weapon attacks and cantrips. Spells up to 7th level allow for fairly heavy casting of the big spells. Conjuration school allows you to teleport almost freely to help protect your allies and Abjuration lets you magically shield them - much like a 4e swordmage

 

[77IM]

Eldritch Knight/Wizard seems like a reasonable combo, as EK contributes 1/3 level to the combined spell table and Action Surge lets you cast 2 spells in one round. Fighter's high rate of Ability Score Increase helps this build too (especially when making up for the wizard's d6 hit die).

Mountain Dwarf Blade Pact Warlock has a nice ring to it too, though. d8 hit die is good. If you really want to be on the front line, HP are pretty important.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I like the granularity of the sword and spell swingers. You can have a mountain dwarf abjurer or pact blade fiendlock at the high magic/ low sword. The Ritual Caster feat at the lowest end.

Agree, theres a great spectrum of fighter/caster types to choose from.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Not to mention that it'd still be better to just keep blasting with Eldritch Blast in most melee, if Eldritch Blast is what you've spent your resources on. Because you don't need to spend invocations on getting multiple attacks with it, and if it's just one melee enemy, you can push them back with the first hit (as you have the knockback Invocation, if this is your focus). 4 attacks at disadvantage and all your boost focus (Invocations, Hex) on them is better than 2 attacks without disadvantage.

A level or two (or three!) of fighter, ranger or paladin can make a big difference here.

Take your first level as fighter and you pretty much have your choice of fighting styles. TWF will give you as many attacks per round as a blaster warlock until level 17, with each of them adding str or dex AND Cha AND hex damage. Alternately, dueling with a shield will give you great ac and attacks that do 1d8+str/dex+cha+2+1d6 hex damage each. Meanwhile, two levels of paladin lets you do the sword and board bit plus smite (or cure wounds) twice per short rest. And so on.