What is a Gish?

[gfishfunk]

I've seen the term thrown around, and I have a vague idea of what people mean when they talk about a Gish, but could someone explain it to me a bit more thoroughly? It sounds like a dabbler class, but then I hear people saying things like 'but that is not a true gish.' It seems (and I'm not knocking it) that the idea is being able to do everything: close combat, armor, and magic.

1. Anyone know where the term came from originally?

2. What should a Gish be able to do?

3. What should a Gish's source of magic be from?

4. What limitations should be on the Gish in terms of game-balance?

[Khedrac]

I've seen the term thrown around, and I have a vague idea of what people mean when they talk about a Gish, but could someone explain it to me a bit more thoroughly? It sounds like a dabbler class, but then I hear people saying things like 'but that is not a true gish.' It seems (and I'm not knocking it) that the idea is being able to do everything: close combat, armor, and magic.
There have been a number of threads on this recently, but here goes for another one.

1. Anyone know where the term came from originally?AD&D 1st Ed Fiend Folio - the low (4th?) level Githyanki Fighter/Wizards were called 'gishes'.
Charles Stross, the creator of the Githyanki does not recall if he invented the term or if it was added to the article after he wrote it.


2. What should a Gish be able to do?Fight as a fighter (which means wearing armor though spells can be better) and cast arcane spells.


3. What should a Gish's source of magic be from?Arcane.


4. What limitations should be on the Gish in terms of game-balance?This totally depends on the game.

With regards to a "true" gish, in 3.5 D&D that usually refers to a character with 9th level spells and a 16 BAB (for the 4th attack) by level 20.

[Airk]

It's a super annoying term that just means "Someone who can fight and use magic" aka the "I want to do everything" character.

It has origins with some specific lore like thing regarding the Githyanki.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gish

I tend to be of the opinion that these types of characters generally awful, because you end up with someone who is either constantly overshadowed, or constantly overshadowing the rest of the party, so I'm not much interested in proposing answers to questions 2 and 3, because I think the answer to 4 is "you basically can't, unless they're the only character type in the game."

[Flickerdart]

"Gish" comes from "gith" - githyanki and githzerai, Dungeons and Dragons creatures that are both adept warriors and psionics users. It refers to any D&D character that can fight and cast spells with a degree of competence (though not necessarily cast spells that make it better at fighting). One common benchmark in D&D 3.5 is that a gish must, by level 20, have 16 BAB and 9th level spells.

Typically, a gish's source of magic comes from an arcane spellcasting class, as those spells are more powerful. However, divine casters tend to have medium BAB in the first place, making them gishy by default.

The limitation on a gish balance-wise is that D&D encourages specialization. Someone that splits resources between two things will never be as good at either, and will be especially weak in the early levels. And when you only have a certain number of actions per turn, your versatility is not as powerful as it seems at first.

[CharonsHelper]

As an example of a gish class which does a pretty good job of splitting the difference - being playable without generally overshadowing either martials or casters - check out Pathfinder's magus.

There are a few magus builds which can spike rather silly amounts of damage (though not that much more than some well built martials - though it's easier to do) but it's generally pretty well done.

[Spellbreaker26]

Yep. Other examples of Gish classes include the Eldritch Knight subclass for the fighter and the Bladesinger subclass for the Wizard in 5e.

[gfishfunk]

Cool, thanks.

And my apologies if this was asked in a recent thread.

[Segev]

Prior to this thread, I'd never heard of the "requirement" for 9th level spells.

The big thing that, to me, defines a gish is that they are a fighter who produces buffs for themselves from arcane magic. And their self-buffing is a major schtick, not just a minor help. If they have spells for non-fighting purposes, that's fine, but it's not required to be a gish. If they're not using magic to bolster themselves in a fight, they're not a gish; they're a fighter who can do magic or a mage who can fight.

[CharonsHelper]

The big thing that, to me, defines a gish is that they are a fighter who produces buffs for themselves from arcane magic. And their self-buffing is a major schtick, not just a minor help. If they have spells for non-fighting purposes, that's fine, but it's not required to be a gish. If they're not using magic to bolster themselves in a fight, they're not a gish; they're a fighter who can do magic or a mage who can fight.

I'd say that their spells would have to be primarily combat and self-buff rather than group-buffing.

I don't really see combat bards being qualifying as gishes. (But - maybe I'm splitting hairs.)

[Pugwampy]

Sweet i always wondered about that too .

Thanks

[lightningcat]

I'd say that their spells would have to be primarily combat and self-buff rather than group-buffing.

I don't really see combat bards being qualifying as gishes. (But - maybe I'm splitting hairs.)

Bards are the definition of the Rogue/Mage combo, where gishes are the Fighter/Mage combo. But I'll agree that the primary mentality is "Magic makes me fight better" instead of "I fight with magic."

I like JOAT characters, although how well they work depends a lot on both the character build, and how the player uses it. Attention hog players will quickly annoy a group when they actually can do something in every situation, even if it is not as effective as what the specialist character can do.

[CharonsHelper]

Attention hog players will quickly annoy a group...

I think that you can end that statement there. :P

[LibraryOgre]

Bards are the definition of the Rogue/Mage combo, where gishes are the Fighter/Mage combo. But I'll agree that the primary mentality is "Magic makes me fight better" instead of "I fight with magic."

Depends highly on the bard... 1e bards are explicitly fighters, first, and may not have any thief HD. 2e Bards also have armor up to chain mail and the ability to learn any weapon, while thieves are limited to leather and a more select list.

I think it would be relatively easy to develop a very gishy bard in d20, and have done so in the past.... spells and feat selection can go a long way towards making your bard a gish.

[Segev]

Depends highly on the bard... 1e bards are explicitly fighters, first, and may not have any thief HD.No, no, no. 1e AD&D would-be Bards start off as Thieves. AFter hitting a certain level, they dual class to Magic-User. After hitting a certain level of THAT, the dual class to Druid, at which point they're actually Bards under druidic instruction.


2e Bards also have armor up to chain mail and the ability to learn any weapon, while thieves are limited to leather and a more select list.2e Bards were trying to be fighter/mage/thief without having to actually multiclass. Which is good, because 2e still restricted multiclassing, and I'm not sure it permitted the human dual classing.


I think it would be relatively easy to develop a very gishy bard in d20, and have done so in the past.... spells and feat selection can go a long way towards making your bard a gish.Absolutely a thing you can do.

There's a reason Elan asks Nale if he didn't think that Fighter/Sorcerer/Rogue was a bit overcomplicated for a build.

[CharonsHelper]

2e Bards were trying to be fighter/mage/thief without having to actually multiclass. Which is good, because 2e still restricted multiclassing, and I'm not sure it permitted the human dual classing.


I think it did. Or at least you could in Baldur's Gate. :P

Really - besides playing a human only class, dual-classing was about the only reason to play a human in 2e from a mechanical perspective. But some of those combos were pretty sweet once they came online. I especially liked starting fighter to max out weapon specialization before going into thief - as the bonus damage would stack with backstab - while a multiclass fighter couldn't specialize as much in a weapon. (Though - maybe that was a Baldur's Gate only thing - they took some liberties - and I never played a real 2e session.)

[Khedrac]

No, no, no. 1e AD&D would-be Bards start off as Thieves. AFter hitting a certain level, they dual class to Magic-User. After hitting a certain level of THAT, the dual class to Druid, at which point they're actually Bards under druidic instruction.
Err no, I mean flat out no - magic user is/was not involved in a bard in any way.

My memory (which I admit is rusty) says that the order is Fighter -> Thief -> (Druid) Bard

I don't know how Mark gets it to work without actual Thief hit dice, but it is a very long time since I read the 1st Ed Dual-classing rules and I think Mark still plays 1st Ed so he is rather more up-to-date...

[weckar]

Err no, I mean flat out no - magic user is/was not involved in a bard in any way.

My memory (which I admit is rusty) says that the order is Fighter -> Thief -> (Druid) Bard

I don't know how Mark gets it to work without actual Thief hit dice, but it is a very long time since I read the 1st Ed Dual-classing rules and I think Mark still plays 1st Ed so he is rather more up-to-date...

You almost got it: It's Fighter -> Thief -> Druid -> Bard.
Druid is an explicit step.

On the topic of Gishes... I think divine gishes are totally viable. And spells not required.
In my opinion, a Glaivelock is a gish (3.5).

[Mystral]

A gish is a character who fights like a fighter and casts arcane spells to supplement his fighting skills. He should have a BAB close to his HD and his magic abilities should either be for utility or for enhancing his abilities to fight in melee. Not every character who has levels as a fighter and a wizard qualifies, like those masters of none that want to cast fireballs and then swing a longsword.

One of the best gish builds is the so-called sorcadin, who starts as a paladin and then switches over to sorcerer for a few levels, before taking prestige classes that advance both his fighting ability and his melee abilities. The synergy of high charisma makes up for any deficiencies, though he is a bit weak in the early levels.

One of the traditional builds looks like this: Paladin2/Sorcerer4/Spellsword1/Abjurant Champion5/Sacred Exorcist 8

As for power level, a gish has a similiar powerlevel and feel to a swordsage or warblade from the Tome of Battle, with many cool abilities that don't detract from the fighty focus of the character. They are usually tier 3, as they know how to fight well while bringing some aditional utility to the table, but their focus on self-buffs don't leave much room for reality-breaking.

[weckar]

DO Gishes need to be melee? Can't they be archers?

[gfishfunk]

The main reason that I am curious is because I am homebrewing right now...and just because something isn't to my taste does not mean that the thing should not be available.

So, its time for everyone's favorite game: is it a Gish?

1. 1d8 hit dice per level, Medium Armor (but no shield proficiency), Half Caster with no offensive spells - only range of self.

2. 1d6 hit dice per level, Heavy Armor (with Shield), melee weapons proficiencies only dealing 1d6, full caster with self-ranged spells, enemy-targeting control spells, no damage spells.

3. 1d8 hit dice per level, Medium Armor + Shield Proficiency, simple weapons proficiency, full caster with self-ranged spells and close ranged (either touch or 30' range) damage spells, some control spells.

[NecroDancer]

DO Gishes need to be melee? Can't they be archers?

In my personal opinion a Gish must be melee. A magical archer would be called an arcane archer (very creative name I know).

[Flickerdart]

The main reason that I am curious is because I am homebrewing right now...and just because something isn't to my taste does not mean that the thing should not be available.

So, its time for everyone's favorite game: is it a Gish?

1. 1d8 hit dice per level, Medium Armor (but no shield proficiency), Half Caster with no offensive spells - only range of self.

2. 1d6 hit dice per level, Heavy Armor (with Shield), melee weapons proficiencies only dealing 1d6, full caster with self-ranged spells, enemy-targeting control spells, no damage spells.

3. 1d8 hit dice per level, Medium Armor + Shield Proficiency, simple weapons proficiency, full caster with self-ranged spells and close ranged (either touch or 30' range) damage spells, some control spells.

HD doesn't matter. Magic can help you not die.

Armor and shields don't matter. Magic can help you not die, and if you reduce ACP to 0, you don't even need to be proficient.

Damage spells don't matter. Most casters that have damage spells on their list probably shouldn't use them.

Likewise, weapon proficiency doesn't matter. Clerics are gishes even if they decide to beat your face with their fists.

A half-caster is not a gish, because half-casting is useless. Rangers are not gishes (but Mystic rangers are). Paladins are not gishes. But anything more than half works. Bards and psychic warriors are gishes. Duskblades are gishes.

[Anonymouswizard]

The definition will differ from person to person, for me it goes as follows:

Eldritch Knight: primarily a warrior with some skill with magic (closer to the 5e definition than the 3.X prestige class). Magic is probably utility with some buffs.
Sword mage: a wizard with some sword skills. May use magic enhanced swordplay, or may just be able to fight effectively.
Gish: roughly equally proficient as a warrior and a mage, probably focuses on a mixture of utility magic and self-buffs. If speed of their weapon they'd lose to a wizard, and if striped of their magic would lose to a fighter, but with both can stand their ground.

On that note, I believe that any class with more than half casting can't be a Gish, full casting means you're mainly a mage, while a Gish focuses on being a warrior as much as a mage. I'd say that either full or 3/4 BAB can make a Gish, but the resulting classes would be built differently.

[LibraryOgre]

No, no, no. 1e AD&D would-be Bards start off as Thieves. AFter hitting a certain level, they dual class to Magic-User. After hitting a certain level of THAT, the dual class to Druid, at which point they're actually Bards under druidic instruction.




Bards begin play as fighters, and they must remain exclusively fighters until they have achieved at least the 5th level of experience. Anytime thereafter, and in any event prior to attaining the 8th level, they must change their class to that of thieves. Again, sometime between 5th and 9th level of ability, bards must leave off thieving and begin clerical studies as druids; but at this time they are actually bards and under druidical tutelage.

Fighters, then thieves, then Druids.



My memory (which I admit is rusty) says that the order is Fighter -> Thief -> (Druid) Bard

I don't know how Mark gets it to work without actual Thief hit dice, but it is a very long time since I read the 1st Ed Dual-classing rules and I think Mark still plays 1st Ed so he is rather more up-to-date...

Fighter to 5th to 7th level. Switch to thief, and switch out at 5th or 6th level (7th if you went to 7th level fighter, and you really should, since a 7th level fighter has 3/2 attacks).

Because you don't get any thief HD unless your thief level exceeds your fighter level ("Characters with Two Classes", page 33), so long as your thief level never beats your fighter level, you won't gain any thief HD... that not necessarily the best way to do it (I say, go to 7th/8th), but it is possible.

[lightningcat]

The main reason that I am curious is because I am homebrewing right now...and just because something isn't to my taste does not mean that the thing should not be available.

So, its time for everyone's favorite game: is it a Gish?

1. 1d8 hit dice per level, Medium Armor (but no shield proficiency), Half Caster with no offensive spells - only range of self.

2. 1d6 hit dice per level, Heavy Armor (with Shield), melee weapons proficiencies only dealing 1d6, full caster with self-ranged spells, enemy-targeting control spells, no damage spells.

3. 1d8 hit dice per level, Medium Armor + Shield Proficiency, simple weapons proficiency, full caster with self-ranged spells and close ranged (either touch or 30' range) damage spells, some control spells.

With only this information, to go on.
1 - maybe
2 - no
3 - likely

[Tiktakkat]

Fighters, then thieves, then Druids.

No, fighters, then thieves, then Bards.
Just "under druidical tutelage" and casting druid spells as a result of their "clerical studies as druids".

Check the DMG, page 86:

Bards are a special profession, as they have already earned levels as fighter and thief. Once they begin gaining experience as bards, each must pay tuition to his respective college.

And the DMG again, page 181:


Bard t 11th-18th

t 7th or 8th level fighter ability, 6th to 9th level (d4 for determination) thief ability.


Also The Rogue's Gallery, page 5:

The use of bards in a campaign is optional and therefore only 20 are listed. Since they combine the skills of fighters, thieves and druids, certain information for each class is presented here. The F/L, T/L, and B/L refer to their levels as fighters, thieves, and bards respectively.

And the NPC Fletcher Dandairia in The Rogue's Gallery, page 41:

Fletcher's fighting ability is that of a 5th level fighter. His thieving skills are equal to a 7th level thief.

The only notable NPC Bard I know of is Earl Querchard of Sterich in Greyhawk.
The World of Greyhawk Folio, page 16:

His Magnitude, the Earl of Sterich (Fighter//Thief///Bard, 7th//8th///9th level)

I'm sure there is one in the Forgotten Realms.


AD&D (1st) Bards never gained any actual levels as Druids.

[Tanarii]

Historically, I've always seen it mean: a physical fighter who uses spells to buff herself. In other words, not a general arcane spell caster, but a specific focus on her spells of self-buffing (both offensive and defensive).

This is hardly surprising, because in older editions of D&D, that was the only feasible option for two reasons:
1) It was effectively impossible to cast spells in melee prior to 3e, and even in that edition it meant provoking an OA and needing to make a concentration check if you were hit.
2) casting arcane spells in armor generally wasn't possible, or required some special armor, or some other special method of getting both at the same time.

However, this is apparently a fairly archaic association with the word GISH as it's used nowadays, which seems to just mean 'multi-class warrior / arcane caster.

[Razgriez]

I'd also argue the Duskblade from DnD 3.5's PHB2 also falls into the Gish category

Is it a full caster? Technically no (but it gains spells that are as high up as at least level 8 spells, like Polar Ray, despite having a max spell level of 5). However, it makes a fairly decent front-line fighter, and a better mid-line fighter with a reach/trip weapon. Can wear any armor and shield (minus Tower), and with a mere 4 levels, gets to ignore arcane spell failure for Light and medium armor (including Mithril heavy armors). The ability to self buff, debuff, and provide a bit of a (admittedly, focused target) blaster mage, as well as channel spells into weapon attack is very nice.

EDIT also Forgot that it has Full BAB


Not sure if it's been mentioned yet, but there is also the Hexblade as well from 3rd edition, though it being an early idea of a Caster/Fighter Gish base class for 3.x definitely shows (Light armor, only 4 levels of spell. M.A.D.)

[Dr_Dinosaur]

What is a Gish? A miserable pile of Arcana!

[sktarq]

I'd also argue the Duskblade from DnD 3.5's PHB2 also falls into the Gish category

... as well as channel spells into weapon attack is very nice.

Yeah I always figured the Duskblade was an official attempt to fill the "gish" type slot which also harks back to a lot of the 2e elf fluff and pre-2e elf classes

[tomandtish]

You almost got it: It's Fighter -> Thief -> Druid -> Bard.
Druid is an explicit step.


Not quite...


No, fighters, then thieves, then Bards.
Just "under druidical tutelage" and casting druid spells as a result of their "clerical studies as druids".

.....

AD&D (1st) Bards never gained any actual levels as Druids.

Tiktakkat sums it up correctly. Part of it is that the wording can be confusing. it's druidical studies, but not actually druids (same way rangers in that system cast druid spells).



Bards begin play as fighters, and they must remain exclusively fighters
until they have achieved at least the 5th level of experience. Anytime
thereafter, and in any event prior to attaining the 8th level, they must
change their class to that of thieves. Again, sometime between 5th and 9th
level of ability, bards must leave off thieving and begin clerical studies as
druids; but at this time they are actually bards and under druidical
tutelage. Bards must fulfill the requirements in all the above classes before
progressing to Bards Table 1. They must always remain neutral, but can be
chaotic, evil, good or lawful neutral if they wish.

Part of it is that further down they specifically mention druid spells (which is what they cast then) but they DON'T mention other druid abilities. So they DIDN'T get any of the other druid abilities. ,

They specify druidic tutelage because you might have to seek out a druid teacher (if your DM actually required it). Training with a suitable teacher used to be one of the requirements, although not many people actually required it.