Talk:Battlemage (3.5e Class)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Class Feature Linking[edit]

Have I done something wrong here putting class feature linking in? They won't go down to the class features like they're supposed to... I checked the coding, and it's the same as other pages where it DOES work, so what gives? -- Danzig 00:38, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Never mind. It works now, for some unfathomable reason. -- Danzig 00:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

This Class is Finished[edit]

So, if anybody pays attention to these things, this class is finished and ready for play. I intended this to be a replacement for Complete Arcane's warmage, which I always thought was unbelievably kife. Especially the MAD going on between Intelligence and Charisma, and the ridiculous spontaneous spellcasting, which coming from a class that trains in their spells, doesn't make any sense. --Danzig 03:15, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I find this to be overpowered. This is much better then the wizard. Same spell types, same amount of bonus feats (if selected - I think). and other special abilities which are arguably better then bonus magic-related feats. I don't know. Maybe you could decrease the spell-levels gained and if one really wants them standard they can increase them with the special ability? Your thoughts? Also this needs an example NPC. --Green Dragon 04:35, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
To be blunt, barring five schools means the base wizard owns this seven ways from Sunday. That said, the class abilities here are far too loquacious. The wall of text under braided spell is positively soporific. -- Jota 08:41, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Try not to use big words to try to sound smarter when you're not even using the words correctly.... Its an old internet argument staple and it doesn't fool anyone. Lets keep to the topic at hand.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   13:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Jota, in response to your statement about the class features being too loquacious, the original source for these features was from an OGL publication by Mongoose publishing, and was explained so thoroughly I decided to keep it.. I happened to work it into my class's description so as to take the original idea (a prestige class) and turn it into a base class (sans mortis harness), much like how WoTC took the Soulknife from 3.0 and revised it for 3.5. Also, Jota, it's supposed to be owned by the wizard, like you said. Focus can bring power, but at the expense of a lot of standard magical knowledge. That said, a small party of these can operate much like a magical version of G.I. Joe, that is, a small unit comprised of specialists. And, I'll have a look at maybe delaying access to higher-level spells, GD. -- Danzig 23:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
First, to Hooper: online dictionaries are free. If you cannot understand what I type (as inferred from your statement about using words incorrectly), you can keep your bafflement to yourself. My use of Brobdignian adjectives is my prerogative (although I admit sometimes accessibility is a preferable); you can mind your own business. That said, loquacious and soporific are not 'big words' from my perspective, merely moderately sized. If I perplexed you, I am truly sorry, and will reduce my diction to one- and two- syllable vernacular in any further correspondences we might have.
To Danzig, if that's the case, that's fine. It's just intimidating at a glance to the casual reader, and especially with homebrew material there's the worry of overcomplicating things. As far as the balance is compared to a wizard, I was only making my disagreement with Green Dragon's previous statement known; I was not condemning or judging the class in any way. -- Jota 01:37, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Please remain civil or warnings will be issued. To reply I did not actually read further then "casts like a wizard" and assumed the rest. Having one given school and two more allowed could balance this - however still their are still so many spells and since they are wizard like it only costs money to get more. Dunno. I still feel the spells should be lowered a bit (consider, for example, a wizard who specializes in a school). Who knows. What are your thoughts? --Green Dragon 02:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I'd be fine with the class's features and the theme of its abilities if it was sort of magic demolition man. But if it's supposed to be on a battlefield...well, there's other features to consider. Maybe I'm too spoiled by all weird stuff I encounter, but I saw a Warmage class which had Create Water at-will and Create Food (creates one pound of whatever Murlynd's Spoon creates per class level), likewise at-will and was struck by how obvious that is. War isn't just the battlefield. Provisions and shelter come into war, too. Also, I'm with Jota on Braided Spell. It's a wall of dense text which is daunting to go through, with inheritance and qualifiers read like something from a contract that I don't want to sort out right now. I'd break it down to its big points/features, put those as bullet points, and then throw in an example paragraph (citing rules and so on) below to show how it's used normally. The current version is indeed soporific (I hate to say it, Hooper, but soporific does mean "inducing drowsiness or sleep" and the length and density of Braided Spell in return for the payoff gained from understanding it does make the adjective applicable.) Also, clarify if the save-boost options from Special Ability stack. If they do, okay. If not, you may want to go on and make them a +3 bonus. Otherwise, you might as well say "Get Great Fortitude/Iron Will/Lighting Reflexes" and let the people get the benefits of having the feats for whatever PrCs they want to do later. --Genowhirl 05:02, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Okay, to clarify, Geno, it says in the text that the Special Ability save bonuses do stack with the save boost feats. The reason why (to my understanding) the original entry for braided spell was so long was likely to be crystal-clear on the mechanics, so as to discourage munchkinly misuse of the feature, hence the dense wall of text. However, I can most certainly try to condense the text into something shorter. As for Green's suggestion, I do have one avenue I can attempt, but it will only drop acquisistion of 2nd-level spells to 4th rather than 3rd level. In practice, the 5-school ban for a battlemage means that unlike a wizard, they DON'T have a spell for precisely every occaision, which is pretty balanced. Also, I dropped Bonus Feats from this class's features. It honestly wouldn't need them, and is not truly about making magic items. In regards to the whole "Provisions and shelter" I believe there actually are certain spells which can meet such ends, such as Mordenkainen's Secure Billet, but a lot of that can be handled through Craft and Profesion skills, such as Craft (structural) and Profession (Cook). For tonight, I believe I will get a good sleep, and then address everybody's concerns on my class's page. -- Danzig 06:51, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Good morning. Or...whenever you see this. Yes, simplify, simplify! If nothing else, just break the paragraphs up. A bulleted list might be the best for easy reading, but I'm depressingly certain that there are players out there who would find a way to wring unexpected uses out of Braided Spell, no matter how many nips and tucks and conditions were laid on it. Anyway, my point about the Create Food/Water ability for a Warmage is that it's an honest-to-goodness out-of-combat utility ability that changes how a class approaches the world, and those don't pop up much in writeups.
Looking at your class made me remember it, and it's got me thinking about how there aren't enough game mechanics which make a character approach things differently from anyone else. The other one I can think of is the Changeling's at-will disguise self that happens to be a physical alteration. Being able to do that completely changes how a character would see the world, as opposed to having it a couple times a day. I'll think about this --Genowhirl 08:45, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I didn't think that Braided Spell was difficult to understand at all. It merely states what needs to be stated about the feature.--Laucian 16:26, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


Power - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because this class is alot more powerful than other spellcasting and martial classes. I would only allow it in a high-power campaign. Eliminating some of the class features might make a a more on-par class. --Laucian 16:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the text is well worded and well done. --Laucian 16:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it meets all my expectations for a class and is well formated. --Laucian 16:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the text is very descriptive and thought out. --Laucian 16:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Power Level[edit]

On par with what? How is having a slightly higher hit die and slightly higher BAB, plus a couple tricks, overpowered? If you note, the Battlemage does have the same casting progression as a wizard, but with no bonus feats, no familiar, no scribe scroll, and he also has to forgo 5 schools of magic to boot. As I recall, the Warmage from Complete Arcane had more spells and a higher hit die than the wizard, not to mention spontaneous casting. Also at each level of new spells he learned them all at once, rather than having to dole them out like a prepared caster. Hell, you could argue the Beguiler and the Dread Necromancer are overpowered by the same logic. So, I think it's a pretty fair tradeoff to up the BAB a bit and ban 5 schools, and make it a preparatory caster. The other class features are supposed to be self-regulating, something not often seen in 3.5. That said, feel free to drop certain features in your own campaign, or use WoTC's warmage... Nobody's forcing you to use this. -- Danzig 03:17, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Linked, Braided and Reignited Spells[edit]

A special note: These three class features were designed to be used with the mechanic that spellcasting is a kind of exertion (like combat) that one will get tired from. For instance, every two rounds of casting in series would up the DC of a save against being dazed, and the stamina lost would go up. Braiding spells not only counts for the spells being braided, but for the actual casting, which is roughly one half the stamina cost for the spells themselves. Reigniting spells not only takes stamina as if you had cast the spell twice, but could leave the caster dazed, or even stunned. You could also apply stunned as a result of braiding, and in extreme cases, excessive linking. Any ideas on a decent mechanic for this kind of casting? I could always just ask cousin Tim, he suggested "combat and caster fatigue" to me, so he might have a good answer. -- Danzig 05:42, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Some of the mechanics on braiding spells worry me. Mostly, actually, just this one "A braid can be countered by any spell in the braid, or their antithesis." Does that mean if you have a 4 spell braid including reduce person, the entire braid can be undone by Enlarge person? Then you've got some Battlemage who has waisted 4 rounds in combat trying to cast some uber-braid, but got screwed over by a first level sorcerer who happened to prepare "Enlarge Person" that morning. Also, does failing your concentration check to "hold" the braid trigger ever spell in the braid, or just the ones you had "cast" to that point? If it is the latter, do you have to predetermine the order in which your spells effect the target? Seeing as a decent wizard would max out concentration, can he walk around with his braid on a hair-trigger? That is to say, can he "cast" all the spells and then make concentration checks to keep holding it, or does he have to shoot it when it is ready? With a 4 spell braid, with a 3rd level spell being the highest the Concentration check is 6. At 5th level he's got 8 ranks in Concentration, so he'd never fail. --Badger 18:34, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
First of all, yes to the first one. If you had a braid with reduce person in it, the braid can be countered by enlarge person. Them's the breaks, though. However, it is a lot harder to counter than just each spell alone. As for failing a hold check, obviously any spell not yet braided in will not be cast. Simple as that. Holding a braid from round to round requires a Concentration check each round to maintain the hold, with a natural 1 always considered a failure. A failed braid (logically) affects the target in the order they were braided in. Also, if a natural 1 is rolled, the braid detonates targeted at the caster who braided it. Therein lies the beauty and the danger that is battle magic. Sure, you can do some powerful things, better than most wizards, but you could seriously get hurt or killed by being reckless or irresponsible. -- Danzig 19:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Ah, Ok. I was under the impression "braiding" took place during spell prep in the morning, and after that all of those spells were tied together for the day.
Time to get munchkin on spell braiding: How many spells constitutes a braid? What's to stop you from saying "I'm braiding Reduce Person. Just Reduce Person. By itself." There is no penalty to increase spellcasting time. It's essentially a +10 to the DC of Spellcraft, counterspelling, and dispelling checks for free. Also, if it turns out you only needed 2 of 3 spells to kill the enemy, you didn't waste the other one just because it was in the braid. With no limit on braid-able spells per day I see no reason why you wouldn't "braid" every spell to itself, and nothing more. Imagine spending 3 rounds to cast your braid (thereby effectively standing around doing nothing), then the fighter who goes right before you drops the enemy. Suddenly you spent 3 rounds prepping spells you can't use.
The benefits of increasing the DC of a low level spell by tacking it on a higher level braid seems to be overpowered by the fact that you can lose the high level spell just because of your low level one. Also, I would include that rolling a 1 on a concentration check means failing in the body of the article somewhere. Rolling a 1 on a Skill check doesn't mean auto-fail, it means you rolled a 1 (likewise, a 20 doesn't mean auto-success, it means you rolled a 20). Personally, I'm not actually sure this stronger than a well-played wizard. My first inclination is to say this is dramatically weaker. --Badger 21:57, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
For starters, you can't braid one spell by itself, it just doesn't work. But, the only upper limit is time. As for being weaker than a wizard, when it comes to breadth of knowledge, absolutely. But for damage potential, if played well, it can be through the roof. Also, if you look, the HD of a battlemage is slightly higher, as is the BAB. Battlemages are expected to contribute more than just spells to a fight, or otherwise they'd be entirely useless when the spells ran out. -- Danzig 14:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I would include "a braid most consist of at least 2 spells" in the description, if that is the case. As for increased damage potential, I don't see how 2 rounds of nothing followed by a third round of triple damage is any better than 3 consecutive rounds of regular damage. Can you back up "damage potential, if played well, it can be through the roof" with some numbers? He has access to the same spells as wizards do (I've not read through every spell on the battlemage list, but most don't look that much better than other on-level spells). I don't see how he can do more damage in a day than a wizard, considering he has the same number of spells per day (which makes no sense). I see that he's got an average BAB and d6 hit dice, but at level 8 and beyond I don't think the extra 1d6+2 longsword twice a round will be of any help once he runs out of spells. He's not going to be a tank, or even a mid range attacker, like a rogue. Finally, saying that "Spells in a braid must all have the same target" implies that no spell that affects an area can be used (or at least, they don't effect anyone but the target), which would dramatically reduce potential overall damage of certain spells. --Badger 21:25, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
So, you wanted something blatantly overpowered and you're upset that I didn't deliver? What good would playing a wizard be if I did that? This is a wizard-type variant expressly geared toward combat. He's not a tank, but he can hold his own against attackers passably on his own. He just can't do anything stupid like running into a horde of 20 enemies at low levels and expect to walk away unscathed. As for more damage, haven't you even read the part on Battlemage Edge? That edge works for every damage-dealing spell, even ones in a braid. You get enough Intelligence, and enough spells into a braid, and you can end a battle in one hit. Also, there's the special abilities, like Channeling, Linking, Reigniting, and Economic Metamagic. Wizards don't have those either. I don't know about you, but they beat the hell out of the Sudden metamagic feats the old warmage got. And by the way, you have it completely wrong about aiming a braid. Spells that affect an area can and are used in braids, it just means the center/endpoint of any area effect must hit the same target. The area still fills the same space it did. Sorry if it isn't munchkined enough for you. But them's the breaks. -- Danzig 02:19, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Let me be very clear: I don't care how strong this class is designed to be. I don't care if a 1st level monk can sweep the floor with 10th level battlemage. However, in my opinion, when you promise "damage potential...through the roof", I expect you to deliver. Adding Int modifier isn't going to do diddly against most monsters beyond level 5(the difference between 10d6 and 10d6+5 is almost negligible). I don't expect anything with a d6 HD and average BAB to be running around dealing serious damage (unless the word "rogue" is in the class name somewhere). You keep saying things akin to "you can end a battle in one hit", but have yet to substantiate that claim. As best as I can tell, by "in one hit" you mean "in one hit, after spending three rounds failing your arms and doing no damage at all". For the record, I've read the entire class; linking spells, reigniting, economic metamagic included. You'll get no complaints about linking, reigniting, or economic matamagic from me; I rather like those class features (which is why I've not complained about them yet). Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, but you shouldn't claim you can end a combat in one round if it takes you 4 rounds to prep for that one. To sum it up, I don't care if the class is a munchkin or not, but be prepared to back up your claims. --Badger 05:00, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. I'd make it more powerful, but that runs the risk of overpowering the whole thing. In truth, all this was supposed to be was a replacement for the Warmage in Complete Arcane. I never understood why a warmage would be a spontaneous caster if he had trained in his magic, nor why he would limit himself to a tiny fraction of the magic out there. This class was an attempt to address that issue. I fleshed it out by converting the rest over from a book from Mongoose Publishing, taking what was a prestige class and making it into a core class. From here on out, I will not make exorbitant claims regarding damage potential, if you like. Though, if everyone agrees, I might add something in to juice up the damage output. -- Danzig 19:13, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
The Warmage being a spontaneous caster makes sense to me. He knows a select range of spells, and without any prep he can throw any one of them as need be. Nothing sucks more than having your wizard prepare an array of fire spells, then finding out you're fighting something with fire immunity. A spontaneous caster can say "No worries, I'll use frost". By the same token, he has restricted his knowledge to a small field, but has become a master of it. He needn't prepare spells because he knows how to do what few spells he can, by heart. As for making exorbitant claims regarding damage potential, try just making it flavor-text. Instead of saying "A battlemage can out-dpr a wizard", say "A battlemage can let loose a barrage of five fireballs in a single round, decimating the opposing force, and reducing enemy ranks to charred masses on the field of battle". See how those are different? One is a direct (and likely wrong) comparison of classes, and the other is a flavorful and accurate description (if only by omission) of what you might see a battlemage do in combat. Here is what has been bugging me most about all of this: Why does he have to release the braid/link after the rounds are up? Would you consider making it a full round action to release up to 4 spells in a braid, and then he has to "recover" for a few rounds afterwards? Rather than standing for 3 rounds, then killing for one, he'd be killing for one, and then recovering for 3. Make one concentration check (of a high DC, like # of spells*highest level spell used) just before he launches the braid, which if he fails hurts him, and then he spends however many rounds where he can only take non-strenuous move actions.--Badger 22:29, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Why have to recover? Because having to recover really gimps him in the long run. If you have a high enough Concentration, you should be able to meet the DC anyway. Furthermore, why should it be a full-round action to release all that? Doing that only hurts his chances in the long run. Here's an idea I had, though. While the battlemage keeps a book and prepares spells, he prepares a small list per level as normal, but then of that list he can use whatever he prepared for the day as much as spells of that level last? It's more flexible than the array the warmage had to work with, but still allows a little spontaneity. I believe the Erudite did something like that, but with psionics. I just never understood why they had to limit what a battle magic user could cast, as if everybody used all the same weapons and equipment. The Soviets didn't use American gear, and even from one country to the next, everybody buys/makes different stuff, for different kinds of war. Sure, the old warmage got a lot of spells at each level to use, but it was all often pretty Mickey-Mouse, like those stupid Orb of whatever spells. However, I could always use improvements to the array of casting options and ways to pump the destructive potential. That kind of thing is this class's bread and butter. They just won't be able to do all of it all the time. But that's where tactics come in. -- Danzig 04:31, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
You have officially lost me. Are we both talking about spell braiding? Let me try to address your points in order. He should have to recover because there should be some sort of penalty for releasing 4 spells in a single round. Meeting the Concentration DC should be reachable but not guaranteed, the idea being he hurts the enemy more than himself. He can over-extend himself (by putting too many spells, or too strong a spell) and it can blow up in his face (literally), though. I just made it a full round to release a braid because I figure if a fighter has to take a full round action to swing his axe 3 times, a wizard should have to take a full round to cast 3 spells. As for a spontaneous/prepared casting hybrid, I think I might like that idea, but I don't know how it would work power-wise (too strong, perhaps?). I have no idea what you were talking about with soviets using american weapons, or how that applies to spell braiding. --Badger 05:14, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
You know what? This discussion is over. I'm not going to bother explaining myself anymore. If you don't understand the analogy about how the Soviets and the Americans used different weaponry and how that applies to how I approached spell acquisition, then that's your loss. I am not changing the mechanic for braiding spells, because that is the way that it was written in the source. If you have a problem with that, either write your own battle magic class, or take it up with Sam Witt. Braiding spells was originally one of his ideas. I, however, refuse to keep talking in circles about this hangup you have with it, nor am I going to limit the spell list and make it a spontaneous caster because you have a hangup with prepared casting. -- Danzig 02:38, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to come off as antagonistic. I'm sorry if you got the impression I was trying to force you to change core mechanics of your class. I was merely trying to work with you to create a better final product through (what I thought were) minor tweaks. Finally, I never asked you to limit the spell list more than you already have, nor did I ask you to consider making this a spontaneous caster (I was saying I understand why a Warmage was spontaneous, you were the one who brought up making a battlemage a spontaneous caster). I have no hang-ups about prepared casting whatsoever. As for the Soviet/America analogy, the extent of my Cold War military knowledge comes from Top Gun (a fine film, but by no means a documentary). --Badger 05:56, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

→Reverted indentation to one colon

Very well, now that we've both got the vitriol out of our systems, here are the reasons I did what I did with this class:
  • Armor/Weapon Proficiencies/HD/BAB: Because you ought to be able to fight and not always have to cast. Or, for example, what happens when your spells run out?
  • Prepared Casting: Because you can't swap out weapons you didn't train in or bring with you, and different armies/specialists use different weapons and tactics, therefore the battlemage is the same. Sure, a guy could acquire armor piercing bullets, or an MGV 176 submachine gun (.22-calber, but holds 176 rounds in a drum), but if he's not got them on his person (much like not having that spell prepared, then having found them would do him no good). That said, it can always be worked in that battlemages have a more flexible memorisation method and can freely cast from any spell they memorised for that level for that day. That is, they could memorise 4 different 1st-level spells once each, and then use whichever they wanted, as long as the spell slots for 1st-level spells held out. That may be too drastic of an improvement, and it might not. Like I said before, people use different weapons for different tasks, so obviously, limiting the list of spells you can choose like WoTC did with their warmage is asinine. What soldier passes up a different kind of weapon, if it's not standard-issue? In real battle, you use whatever is expedient at the time, be it a .45, an SMG, an assault rifle, grenade launcher, or even just a combat knife or your fist. Therefore, limited spell list goes bye-bye.
  • Combat Casting: Defensive casting, which is a must.
  • Linked Spells: Not my original idea, borrowed from Sam Witt, this allows for rapid fire magic. Not extreme rapid fire, but in a pitched battle, even a rate of 3 per 2 rounds can add up. Also, the feat Enhanced Linkage (which I have yet to post) allows a rate of 2 spells per round, which can get pretty badass facing casters who do not cast linked series.
  • Braided Spells: Once again, I borrowed this from Sam Witt's work, and like Linked Spells, this was extensively playtested. What this is for is more for casting a bunch of spells into a pile, then releasing as a simultaneous concentrated attack (think Samus's charge-up beam in the Metroid series), which is harder to block or counter than the individual spells would have been. Braiding is supposed to be used against spell resistance, DR, and casters. where casting a conventional spell one after the other would not be wise. The reason it is released all at once after possibly being held for a few rounds (or many) is because they are all tied together and in effect become one single spell that does everything its components did, but is harder for the target to deal with because it has been altered so much by the act of braiding. There is a feat called Eldritch Knot, which I haven't posted yet either, that allows different schools of magic to be braided into one braid. As you know, there are some decent tactical advantages to being able to do this.
  • Advanced Training: Self-explanatory in their descriptions. Just different and further ways to advance one's magical skill.
  • Special Abilities: Similar to what the rogue has. Designed to represent talents above and beyond the call of duty. All are decent choices, even the save bonuses. Two of them allow casting of touch spells through weapon strikes, another two allow the ability to avoid area-effect damage, another to keep one's mind their own, and another to punish any enemy caster foolish enough to be counterspelled.
  • Reignite Spells: Obviously, some people wish they could have cast the same spell again but didn't have it either memorised, or didn't have a spell slot to use. Or maybe they just want a convenient way to follow up with a free casting of the spell they just used. In effect, this allows for slightly more spells per day than a wizard has, and it disregards material components, which is handy sometimes.

I think that covers everything? I will clarify the braiding mechanics I clarified here on the talk page over on the main article, so as to not have any confusion. -- Danzig 15:38, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

The only thing I have a problem with is spell braiding. Because all the spells are braided into a single uber-spell, they must all release at the same time. I can live with that, that makes sense. Why do we have to spend 4 rounds braiding the spell? I get the flavor argument for why that is, but in a situation most adventurers find themselves in, the first 3 rounds of combat are crucial (and shouldn't be spent making a braid, it should be spent releasing a braid). The only change I'm asking you to consider is making it so that a battlemage can use his braid in the first round of combat. Flavor-wise, you'd describe it as "with a sudden burst of arcane energy a battlemage puts every fiber of his being into this single blast, after which he is drained and must recover his strength" rather than the current set up which is more like "with careful decisions, several rounds of concentration, and planing a battlemage can construct a perfect storm of fire and death." The mechanical change is, speaking in terms of rounds: BOOM-nothing-nothing-nothing as opposed to the current: nothing-nothing-nothing-BOOM.--Badger 23:53, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
I understand your concern, but if you did something like what you said, the battlemage would kill just about anything in the first round. The braiding time exists for one reason: As a check on the first-round power of the battlemage. Otherwise, you could say that "Oh, I blast him into next week with 10 spells all at once in the first round, now I just wait around 10 rounds in a daze while he lies there, a smoking corpse"... Braiding is more for if you incapacitated an enemy for a few rounds, and want to finish them off in one shot. For more immediate concerns, there's things like casting in linked series, which is like having a burst/autofire setting on your casting. Throwing all that power into one action in the first round would make it far too easy for munchkins to abuse. This is the exact same reason the excessive front-loading was taken out of the Ranger class. You see my point? If you front-load the damage output, you could easily break the game. You'd actually be safer handing your party a buttload of rapid-fire grenade launchers, which as we all know, is preposterous. -- Danzig 22:45, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
I totally understand the concern with front-loading the power on this class using my concept. I just think back to my games, where most combats take 4 or 5 rounds (and I've seen on-level encounters that end in 1 round when a wizard and rogue team up and get strategic). I'd feel bad for the battlemage who spends 4 rounds braiding. He may not get the chance to even use his braid. If his target dies/leaves combat, does the braid fail? That's my concern with braiding. I don't like the waiting. I agree dealing damage up front probably isn't the best solution, but I think dealing damage at the end of four rounds might be worse. Do you have any thoughts on how to make braiding more worthwhile; either by pumping up the damage to make it more worth the wait, or by changing the wait? --Badger 23:08, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
You could always have a mechanic where the battlemage could freely dismiss the braid, returning the uncast spells to his working memory. That was actually my concern too, and that addresses part of your query. As for braiding being either more dangerous, or a shorter wait time, maybe the first one, but definitely not the second. That infringes too much on the linked-series casting tactic. Maybe there'd be bonus damage based on the total spell levels in the braid, or something? The idea is not without merit. -- Danzig 07:30, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


Other than having a sample NPC, this class has been entirely tweaked out to run properly. If you will note, under "Spells" it says one spell learned per level after first, as opposed to the wizard's two. Sure, you can get more with gold, and time, but it's gonna cost a load of both. More than a wizard would have to shell out, that's for sure. Also, as I noted, battlemages cannot multiclass as wizards, and vice versa, for obvious reasons... -- Danzig 07:03, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Perfecting This...[edit]

I was just thinking, this class may make a good featured article. Just have a quick run through for the power level, throw in a sample encounter and npc, revise a couple parts (I'm not saying you need to, but just in case), add a picture (which I can help with) and viola, you have yourself something in my mind that's deserving of featured article status. What do you think?--Vrail 08:21, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Featured Article status? I'd be honored. I can put in my iconic NPC Danzig (does an NPC need to have all levels in only the featured class?) and if you find a picture for the class, then we're all set. -- Danzig 17:14, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
No, he doesn't have to only have levels in the specific class. I'll go looking for a suitable picture. I'll upload it then post the link on your page so you can check it out before I add it. --Vrail 17:23, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Then we have an NPC ready to be put on. I have hit a bit of a snag though as I got a virus on the laptop I use, and it needs to be cleaned and have Norton put on it. So I'm using my wife's computer, which has an extreme blue tint to the screen for some ungodly and unfixable reason. The two pictures are decent (especially the first), but if you find any others, we'll see how they stack up against the other two... Maybe we could even use more than one? I swear, I saw an article titled God, Christian Faith (3.5e Deity) which had 5 or so. Or is that overkill? I could always use the extras for the other pages related to battle magic, even. In advance, thanks for the solid, Vrail. -- Danzig 14:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
I agree that with an image, and NPC, and a little work this could become an FA. Something I just noticed is that "War. War never changes." but then in the next paragraph it says "It was only a matter of time before magic was first applied to the battlefield." — so was is changed. I would remove the contradictory nature. --Green Dragon 15:57, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I don't think this needs to be changed. This is because he is talking about war in the broader respect, war is destruction, war is killing. I my mind the excerpt "It was only a matter of time before magic was first applied to the battlefield." only reinforces this as it is simply saying that the mentality of war never changes, and we are always thinking of better ways to kill people and destroy. --Vrail 20:41, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
"We are always thinking of better ways to kill and destroy"... That's exactly what I was referring to, Vrail. It's also an homage to the opening narration of the Fallout series. I figured, if you're talking about carnage and mayhem, why not that iconic phrase? -- Danzig 02:24, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Huh. As soon as this has an NPC and you pick an image I will look over this for one. --Green Dragon 22:49, 30 May 2010 (UTC)



Power - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it works well in all reguards. --Vvdarknessvv 10:26, 20 November 2010 (MST)

Wording - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it works well in all reguards. --Vvdarknessvv 10:26, 20 November 2010 (MST)

Formatting - <<<5>>/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it works well in all reguards. --Vvdarknessvv 10:26, 20 November 2010 (MST)

Flavor - <<<5>>>/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it works well in all reguards. --Vvdarknessvv 10:26, 20 November 2010 (MST)


Power - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because the class has increased features like spellbraiding and spell linking that may be quite powerfull but not over the top at all, the fact that they are barred from a lot of schools does not imediatly outweigh my fear for unbalance on this class, and thety also receive bonus damage on most of them. The hit die is increased but I do not imedatly see why that is realy necesary. Eventhough it say's battle mage, 99% of all abilities are completely focused on spellcasting and not melee fighting meaning they should not have much problems fighting at a distance and I realy see no point of them ever going to need to be in close combat. The same goes for the BaB. Those are my reasons to give this class -1 on power. --Crashpilot 17:04, 2 March 2011 (MST)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because no apparent mistakes in grammar except for a line here and there that seem to miss a word. But that may be intentional. --Crashpilot 17:04, 2 March 2011 (MST)

Formatting - 4.5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because you did a great job formating the texts, it is clear in setup and a delight to read, "Applaud", but it is still missing some items. --Crashpilot 17:04, 2 March 2011 (MST)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the class is truly well written, a lot of fun remarks and little stories. Nice quotes, it has lore, in my eyes it has got quality. Having fleshed out rules does not scare me at all, infact I prefer it. It gives me the impression you have put a lot of thought and time in the skills and tried to keep them balanced, this class is of good quality. I want to try it some time but I already have so many classes that I want to try. --Crashpilot 17:04, 2 March 2011 (MST)


Power - 2/5 I give this class a 2/5 because it is the same as a wizard, but it gets d6 Hit Points per level, a better Base attack bonus, a bigger spell list, stronger spells, and it can where much heavier armor than a wizard can. I think that is overpowered. -- 22:36, 4 July 2011 (MDT)

BM spell pool is very shallow, please explain why you think he gets more spells. --Ganre 08:09, 7 November 2011 (MST)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5/5 because you named the special-abilities nicely and explained things thoroughly. -- 22:36, 4 July 2011 (MDT)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5/5 because you filled out all of the areas for the character and i couldn't find any typos. -- 22:36, 4 July 2011 (MDT)

Flavor - 4/5 I give this class a 4/5 because it is a good idea but slightly unoriginal. -- 22:36, 4 July 2011 (MDT)

Personal tools
admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors