Best Reasons NOT to Gish

[quetzalcoatl5]

So I was thinking about how easy it is in 3.5 to add spellcasting to a build. There are so many prestige classes that can add ok to decent spellcasting with minimal loss of martial capabilities or continue a progression from a dip, so one could easily turn any fighter into a divine, arcane, or psionic gish. Fighter 4/Knight of the Weave 4/ Spellsword 1/ Abjurant Champion 5 is a pretty sturdy character. Hell, with classes like Divine Crusader and something like Knight of the Raven, you could be BAB 19 and have a limited list of 9th level spells right alongside your Wizards and Clerics. While you don't match a full caster in this, it helps keep a character from falling victim too much to the martial caster divide.

So my question is: when is it beneficial NOT to take levels in a spellcasting (or equivalent system) class?

I mean, outside of Initiators, of course.

Bear Warrior Barbarians come to mind. So do Daring Outlaw Swashbuckler builds. What have you all got?

[pabelfly]

Purely martial characters are great if the character you want to play as doesn't cast magic, and when you don't want the added complexity of casting in a build. Some people aren't good with the complexity of a spellcaster but are just fine if you give them, say, a Barbarian with Pounce.

The martial/caster divide is only really relevant in PvP, or the martial can't buy what they need to keep up (whether it's because of limited shops or limited money). If you just have a variety of encounters against a variety of enemies, roughly average wealth by level and decent item selection, a decently-built mundane martial will contribute just fine.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Story reasons? Your character hates magic and refuses to use it. A very poor survival strategy that ensures that you will receive your Darwin Award quickly.

Maybe there's not enough room in your build, or the campaign is VERY low op, or you are really good at optimizing and want to nerf yourself into oblivion. Maybe you can work your way around not having casting using skills, magic items, and alchemical items. Probably not a great idea, even so, but...

Or maybe the DM actively punishes casters, such as stacking taint and insanity whenever you cast a spell.

Otherwise, if your mental stats are very low, and spellcasting just won't work for you. You still will use magic items, but spellcasting is simply a no-go.

Beyond that, there's not much reason not to. Spellcasting will always make you more capable, even if it's really crappy spellcasting, like the healer. Under normal conditions, any adventurer with even a lick of sense will get as much magic as they can as soon as possible. Magic is easily the most powerful thing in any setting, and getting more of it will make survival much easier. And forgoing it will do the opposite.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Wild Shape Ranger/ Master of Many Forms/ Warshaper does pretty well without spellcasting. You may as well keep your 1st level Ranger spells for casting Rhino's Rush and maybe a daily Endure Elements, even use 1st level pearls of power for more of the former.

[holbita]

This is so build dependant. On a non planned build then yes... it's difficult to beat some of the gish classes, but if you are doing a planned one? a lot of times that would mean 10 level prc + 5 levels of prereqs, none of those having casting, that you are going to want to have as soon as possible. And then you come at the last 5 levels and you have to weight something as simple as fighter for more feats to improve your stick, or going for level 1 spells at 16+? probably reducing BAB and hit points? yeah... no point in doing so.

So basically, any cool prc that you want to build towards that doesn't have spells is going to be a very good reason to not go gish.

[lylsyly]

Caster caster, always the same argument. When the real decision point is what type of table your playing at allowed sources, ect . I'm in the process of putting together another build I've used many times
We always play gestalt. So even generalist wizard 20 /// Duskblade 13 / swiftblade 7 is a seriously fun build to play. But guess what! Even just Duskblade 13 / swiftblade 7 can rock

[Doctor Despair]

Wild Shape Ranger/ Master of Many Forms/ Warshaper does pretty well without spellcasting. You may as well keep your 1st level Ranger spells for casting Rhino's Rush and maybe a daily Endure Elements, even use 1st level pearls of power for more of the former.

I'm not sure a limited number of 1st-level ranger slots are worth more than the free fighter feat you can get from Champion of the Wild.

[holbita]

I'm not sure a limited number of 1st-level ranger slots are worth more than the free fighter feat you can get from Champion of the Wild.

For sure the spellslots you get are NOT worth it in comparison... access to spell list for trigger items... that's when the decision becomes difficult.

[Inevitability]

Sometimes you want higher-level features of a class that doesn't grant casting - isn't that reason enough?

An Iaijutsu Focus build gets a lot from the higher levels of iaijutsu master. A war hulk will probably like war hulk more than whatever gish class can even be entered without mental skills. A crimson scourge is probably planning to do something with the nonlethal damage immunity, but that requires staying in for eight levels.

[Zancloufer]

Tome of Battle? Crusader or Warblade 20 is a pretty solid build on it's own, let alone mixing and matching the ToB (prestige) classes. Might be some niche value in a Rouge or similar skill monkey as well. Beyond that? Probably not much. Maybe a straight Fighter or Barbarian would be nice and simple to play, but on the flip side they are so easier to screw up than most Divine casters or ToB characters.

There are obviously story/RP/setting reasons as well, but that is way to setting/player dependent for an objective discussion on.

[quetzalcoatl5]

Thanks to Biffoniacus_Furiou for engaging with the thesis here. I almost mentioned that build in my examples!

Like, I tagged this Optimization for a reason... I'm asking for fun builds that avoid casting. Obviously there are roleplaying reasons or poor dice rolls or a desire NOT to be optimized, but I was explicitly looking for good options for non-caster builds. And I would categorize "good" here as "fun to play and contributes to the party"

For example, in a 5e game I'm playing, I deliberately wanted to avoid any casting and built a charisma heavy dex rogue/fighter build. It ended up going mostly fighter, but it could have gone either way almost every level up because there are no bad fighter/rogue multiclass splits in that edition and every level brought some fun thing to my character.

A champion of the forest wildshape ranger swift hunter build with a lion totem barbarian dip so you can pounce with a bear and do a ton of extra damage is fun! See?

What are fun builds that are purely martial?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Thanks to Biffoniacus_Furiou for engaging with the thesis here. I almost mentioned that build in my examples!

Like, I tagged this Optimization for a reason... I'm asking for fun builds that avoid casting. Obviously there are roleplaying reasons or poor dice rolls or a desire NOT to be optimized, but I was explicitly looking for good options for non-caster builds. And I would categorize "good" here as "fun to play and contributes to the party"

For example, in a 5e game I'm playing, I deliberately wanted to avoid any casting and built a charisma heavy dex rogue/fighter build. It ended up going mostly fighter, but it could have gone either way almost every level up because there are no bad fighter/rogue multiclass splits in that edition and every level brought some fun thing to my character.

A champion of the forest wildshape ranger swift hunter build with a lion totem barbarian dip so you can pounce with a bear and do a ton of extra damage is fun! See?

What are fun builds that are purely martial?

Abuse the heck out of monk?

[quetzalcoatl5]

I love this!

[pabelfly]

What are fun builds that are purely martial?

Swift Hunter build is pretty fun. Ranger can go full mundane with Champion of the Wild to get some extra feats, you have plenty of skill points to play with, and skirmish does pretty good. This can work either for a volley archer or a TWF/MWF build, but the latter will want a level of Barbarian for Pounce.

A high-STR volley archer is also really enjoyable. Find some high STR sources for cheap (eg. Half Minotaur template, Lolth-Touched, etc), and use a class that gives bonus feats like Fighter or Ranger. Ranger has more skill points, but Fighter has better accuracy, damage, and higher armor types, so it depends what you want to do, but both are good options.

Lastly, Barbarian 1 + Fighter X is really solid. The main issue is the lack of skill points, but you can go with either Golarion Fighter or Thug Fighter to get up to 4 + INT skill points with your Fighter side. Fighter gives you plenty of feats to sort out combat, so you can use your regular feats for stuff you might not normally have the feats to do.

[Anthrowhale]

Fighter 4/Knight of the Weave 4/ Spellsword 1/ Abjurant Champion 5

KotW requires BAB+5 to enter.

Mechanically, I agree that a spellcaster-based approach is typically superior. For example, a persistomancer cleric is approximately equivalent to a fighter at level 1 and has pulled ahead by level 5.

[Maat Mons]

I consider pure martials to be appealing in an e6 environment. Notably, Shock Trooper requires base attack bonus +6, which in e6 requires taking only full base attack bonus classes.

[quetzalcoatl5]

KotW requires BAB+5 to enter.

Ah! Typo on my part but thanks for catching it.

[Gnaeus]

Purely martial characters are great if the character you want to play as doesn't cast magic, and when you don't want the added complexity of casting in a build. Some people aren't good with the complexity of a spellcaster but are just fine if you give them, say, a Barbarian with Pounce.

This is the only correct answer. Mechanically, a huge majority of martials will benefit from dipping a level of cleric or similar, and 100% of martials can be outcompeted in terms of total contribution by a tier 1. Honestly, a vast majority of martials can be outcompeted in terms of martial ability by a tier 1's minions. Its a casters game, and where better is defined as more effective, casters are better. If better includes Simpler, or better suited to X concept, or faster to play, or better balanced to an AP, or you start with a range of nerfs of the strongest abilities, martials can compete. But I doubt you can find a fighter 20 build in the game that wouldn't be mechanically stronger as a fighter 19/cleric 1. And I'm sure you can't find one better than CoD 20 at equivalent optimization. Even if somehow the martial is as good as a Solar, you can gate in a second Solar.

The closest thing to an exception is WS Ranger. But 1. I don't actually consider that a martial build, any more than a warlock is. It is a caster with a variant magic mechanic. and 2. Its still worse at its schtick than a Druid (at comparable levels of opti-fu or guide reading).

[AMFV]

So I was thinking about how easy it is in 3.5 to add spellcasting to a build. There are so many prestige classes that can add ok to decent spellcasting with minimal loss of martial capabilities or continue a progression from a dip, so one could easily turn any fighter into a divine, arcane, or psionic gish. Fighter 4/Knight of the Weave 4/ Spellsword 1/ Abjurant Champion 5 is a pretty sturdy character. Hell, with classes like Divine Crusader and something like Knight of the Raven, you could be BAB 19 and have a limited list of 9th level spells right alongside your Wizards and Clerics. While you don't match a full caster in this, it helps keep a character from falling victim too much to the martial caster divide.

So my question is: when is it beneficial NOT to take levels in a spellcasting (or equivalent system) class?

I mean, outside of Initiators, of course.

Bear Warrior Barbarians come to mind. So do Daring Outlaw Swashbuckler builds. What have you all got?

Well I mean the main reason why you wouldn't want to add a complex subsystem to your build is that you don't actually want a complex subsystem in play. Spellcasting, particularly Vancian casting is a pretty complex system. So I could see choosing not to add that for that reason. I could also see doing it as a challenge, you want to keep your character in an environment where it's easier. It's also worth noting that a lot of the necessary parts of magic can be covered by party members or magic items. That's why the Necessary Items List has things like "Flight" on it, so you should be able to manage that.

Personally I think the best answer is to be some form of initiator.

[pabelfly]

Well I mean the main reason why you wouldn't want to add a complex subsystem to your build is that you don't actually want a complex subsystem in play. Spellcasting, particularly Vancian casting is a pretty complex system. So I could see choosing not to add that for that reason. I could also see doing it as a challenge, you want to keep your character in an environment where it's easier. It's also worth noting that a lot of the necessary parts of magic can be covered by party members or magic items. That's why the Necessary Items List has things like "Flight" on it, so you should be able to manage that.

Personally I think the best answer is to be some form of initiator.

Depends on why you're eschewing caster completely.

If the reason you don't want to play a caster is because the flavour doesn't suit your martial build idea, initiator is a fine solution.

If the reason you don't want to play a caster is because you want the simpler mechanics of a martial, initiator doesn't really solve your problem, because you still have a bunch of mechanics you need to learn, understand and choose from with the martial, same as a spellcaster.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Like people said, several builds like WS Ranger get a strong enough progression that you don't want to deviate from it much.

Also if the DM uses a lot of monsters/classes that have anti-caster abilities (like Magebane weapons, Arcane Hunter favored enemy, various monsters that hurt or screw over casters beyond what they do to noncasters), having a few low level spells might be more of a drawback than a positive.

If the DM provides substantial wealth and easy access to purchase magic items, then a simple UMD investment can grant access to the same low level magic effects that a few CL would've granted anyway, and mathematically the non-caster class features you can obtain might genuinely be better or more valuable than some 1st level magic.

Those are the main mechanical/logical reasons I can think of. Obviously if you want to RP someone who uses no magic, that settles it anyway.

I'm not sure a limited number of 1st-level ranger slots are worth more than the free fighter feat you can get from Champion of the Wild.

Wand use alone is worth more than 1 bonus feat.
And a single prepared Healthful Rest will heal a crazy amount of hp for a WS Ranger/MoMF build. By level 10, it's providing potentially up to 60 extra healing per day (in practice it'll be less b/c optimizing healing won't be your main concern w/ when to change forms), and it just keeps scaling up the higher you go.

[AMFV]

Depends on why you're eschewing caster completely.

If the reason you don't want to play a caster is because the flavour doesn't suit your martial build idea, initiator is a fine solution.

For sure!

If the reason you don't want to play a caster is because you want the simpler mechanics of a martial, initiator doesn't really solve your problem, because you still have a bunch of mechanics you need to learn, understand and choose from with the martial, same as a spellcaster.

I mean... not really, casting is way more complex with a lot more mechanics and a lot more junk options than ToB. Maybe if there was more ToB content released that would be different.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

What about a Paladin? That dips Cleric for turn undead and the inquisition domain, not for spellcasting.

[pabelfly]

I mean... not really, casting is way more complex with a lot more mechanics and a lot more junk options than ToB. Maybe if there was more ToB content released that would be different.

Fair point, but it's still more complex than a mundane martial is.

[Zancloufer]

If the reason you don't want to play a caster is because you want the simpler mechanics of a martial, initiator doesn't really solve your problem, because you still have a bunch of mechanics you need to learn, understand and choose from with the martial, same as a spellcaster.

Except they aren't really anymore complicated? Sure you technically have more things to choose from in a round, but if you can't select and use Martial Adept abilities correctly, you probably have trouble avoiding bad feat picks on a Barbarian, let alone a Fighter. Feat choice is much more impactful for non-ToB martial and can make or break a character.

On the flip side as Warblade, just choose two schools that sound cool, invest in the school skills and like 2-4 others. Take feats that let you go first or hit harder and main a two handed weapon. If you find a better +something weapon just swap your weapon specific feats to said weapon. Get close, use skill that sounds like it would help and full attack/flourish to recover powers.

I suppose a quick and dirty Warblade 6 would be;

Spoiler: Warblade 6

Show

Human
17 Str
14 Dex/Con/Int
10 Wis/Cha
[32 Point Buy]
Feats; Improved Initiative, Power Attack, Weapon Focus, Blind Fight, Weapon Specialization
Skills; Balance (11-2), Climb (13-2), Concentration (9), Intimidate (9), Jump (11-2), Swim (11-4), Tumble (9-2)
Maneuvers: Steel Wind, Moment of Perfect Mind, Punishing Stance [Stance], Emerald Razor, Disarming Strike, Iron Heart Surge, Sapphire Nightmare Blade, Absolute Steel Stance [Stance]
Gear; +1 Two Handed Sword, +Str Item, +1 Mythril Breastplate, Other misc stuff.
HP; 6d12+12 [29-84 HP, 56 HP average rolls]
AC: 18
Saves: 6/5/1
Attack +12/+7 2d6+9 19-20x2
(Pretty light on gear tbh, but I went for a simple baseline here).

It's not the most effective front-liner, but I would argue you'd have to make a real effort in optimization to out do this with just a Fighter or Barbarian 6. Could go dumpster diving for feats or pick a slightly more optimal line up of Maneuvers, but we got multi-attack, hitting touch/flatfooted ac, extra speed, something to shore up our crap Will Save and the ability to shrug off a lot of CC/Debuffs.

[Troacctid]

Wand use alone is worth more than 1 bonus feat.

Technically, you can get wand use with a feat, so I'd argue that that particular aspect of ranger casting is worth exactly 1 bonus feat.

[AMFV]

Fair point, but it's still more complex than a mundane martial is.

I don't think that's actually true. A Warblade you could build pretty effectively without having to dive through six sourcebooks take ACFs on Barbarian Dip so you can pounce. Like in play a initiator is slightly more complex. But building a Mundane is so involved if you want them to be even a little bit successful. Which is again, part of why you might not want to Gish, because you're doing this whole build exercise. The complexity is what you're looking for. A Fighter in 3.5 is a series of problems for you to figure out ways to solve via optimization. If I slap spellcasting especially good spellcasting on that Fighter, I've solved those problems. They're solved. Which is okay and can be fun, but from the perspective of somebody looking to optimize and challenge themselves that's the easiest solution to the challenge.

[Gnaeus]

Also if the DM uses a lot of monsters/classes that have anti-caster abilities (like Magebane weapons, Arcane Hunter favored enemy, various monsters that hurt or screw over casters beyond what they do to noncasters), having a few low level spells might be more of a drawback than a positive..

That's not untrue I guess. But in general there are a lot more anti mundane monsters that you can bypass or combat with low level spells than specifically anti caster measures. So yes, if the DM is known to hate casters probably don't play one.

[Doctor Witch]

Mechanically the best reason not to Gish is when your party absolutely has your back and realize you're one of their best weapons. If they treat you like their main offense, like when you're playing Pathfinder and your party invests in Bonded Mind and Share Spells? It's up to your imaginations how powerful that mundane can be.

If that isn't possible, UMD and easy access to scrolls and wands mean not having to take a level without high BAB. I guess that counts if money is plentiful.

[holbita]

Mechanically the best reason not to Gish is when your party absolutely has your back and realize you're one of their best weapons. If they treat you like their main offense, like when you're playing Pathfinder and your party invests in Bonded Mind and Share Spells? It's up to your imaginations how powerful that mundane can be.

If that isn't possible, UMD and easy access to scrolls and wands mean not having to take a level without high BAB. I guess that counts if money is plentiful.

That's probably the biggest reason, if you have someone in the party casting buffs for you... do you really want delayed caster progression instead of more martial goodness?