One arcane caster party, advice needed


Rise of the Runelords


So our ROTRL group will be starting in the near future, and so far it seems we have a swashbuckler, an oracle, two newer and undecided players and then myself. I was originally looking to play an archer, but the party could use some arcane casting and I'd rather not shove a "You should try a wizard" statement on a new player. I'm pretty sure the AP runs to 17, so that's what I've been looking at.

I've played wizards before in previous editions. I'm pretty well researched, so I have it down to three choices:

1) A Paladin1/Wizard1/EK10/Wizard6 archer/mage. This brings lots of versatile ways to do damage and bring utility/control but the drawback is the -2CL from the paladin and EK levels.

2) cross blooded draconic/orc Sorcer 1/ Admixture Wizard 16. This thing brings a lot of daze based AOE damage for wide area control and mook cleanup allowing the party to focus on the BBEG. A slightly less noticeable -1CL is the drawback here.

3) Wizard 17. Just straight wizard with a lot of single and wide area control stuff.

I know a wizard is well regarded for any party in this AP. Will 1 and/or 2 be noticeably "behind" what the AP demands for spellcasting? What do you recommend here?


Edit: It's actually a mobile fighter and an oracle of battle, so melee is covered for the most part


I'm currently playing an Eldritch Knight in Runelords. We're 13th level and the GM has brought in the guild membership rules so I can regain the missing casting abilities using our fame points.

It's been noticeable that being a full spell level behind has made me weaker as a wizard than we've needed. Conversely, the extra hit points has been very useful.

So, if you can end up with full casting, Eldritch is better.


If your GM is allowing traits (which is recommended, considering the Campaign Traits in the RotRL Player's Guide and APG) you can take the Magical Knack trait to get those two caster levels (though not the associated spells) back from the EK build.


Yes, I'm aware of the traits. It's still a toss up if wayang spell hunter and magical lineage stack. A free daze on every slow spell is pretty amazing for both the EK and the straight mage build. The bonus to caster level becomes less appealing as time goes on but manipulating the level of the spell after metamagic is enticing right up through level 17.


I'd go with straight wizard. Hard to beat in pure arcane power and knowledge skills.
In fact, I just joined a new RL-Party as a Wizard. Party aready had a rogue, a battle oracle, a fighter and a cleric.
Things missing: Arcane spells and knowledge skills. Wizard covers both perfectly.


Paladin/Wizard suffers from *extreme* MAD. I cannot recommend this. You will not end up any beefier than straight wizard because you'll have to sacrifice your CON to boost up DEX, INT and CHA to decent levels.

You also miss out on the most important reason for dipping paladin: divine grace at level 2.

For a straight gish I recommend either paladin 2/Sorc 1/EK 10 or Lore warden 1/Wizard 1/ EK 10, using SLA cheese for early access.

However, as you said yourself there is plenty of melee grunt in your party. My personal suggestion is Wizard 17. Your party will need buff and control to be effective, not another frontline fighter.


No, I will not focus on anything but int and dex, charisma isn't used on a paladin only taking one level. I didn't need it for smite, I needed it to get precise shot without point blank shot early on. The only function of the first level is to obtain all martial weapons for the EK requirement. Getting precise shot free saves me another feat (by either skipping or delaying PBS).

Shifting to the CB dipped wizard: The more I dig around the more it seems that dazing spell is the best CC in the game, and you need a damaging spell to apply it to. This means I'd be blasting one way or another with it, so one level of cross blooded gives me a LOT of power, making blasts completely legitimate.

The first level of CB sorcerer looks like this: We get a bonus feat at first level, I'm thinking of taking

Spell Focus (Evocation) (+1DC to evocations)
Mages Tattoo (Evocation) (+1CL to evocations)
Spell Specialization (Burning Hands) (+2CL to Burning Hands, swapped to fireball at 6th)

Also the trait Lore Seeker, which gives 3 spells +1 CL and +1DC, which I would apply one of to burning hands (the other to fireball, not sure what on the final one.)

This means at first level my burning hands does 5d4+10 damage... at first level... It's pretty substaintial DPR for a caster right off (even though my focus will really be CC).

I know I could go straight wizard for slightly better optimization of utility and control, but that one level sorcerer dip makes every fireball over 50% better. It's a lot to miss out on.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Lastoth wrote:
This means at first level my burning hands does 5d4+10 damage... at first level... It's pretty substaintial DPR for a caster right off (even though my focus will really be CC).

You don't need this, or anything so broken as Dazing Spell, to be successful and have fun playing Rise of the Runelords.

I'd actually recommend a Ranger/Wizard/Arcane Archer, since you have melee covered so well.


Majuba wrote:
Lastoth wrote:
This means at first level my burning hands does 5d4+10 damage... at first level... It's pretty substaintial DPR for a caster right off (even though my focus will really be CC).
You don't need this, or anything so broken as Dazing Spell, to be successful and have fun playing Rise of the Runelords.

This.

Such a build is pure powergaming. Unless your GM is significantly raising the CR of all encounters, it's total overkill. And it will most likely not be fun for the rest of the party. Your melee guys are an oracle and a mobile fighter, both solid but hardly the best at melee. And the other players are "newer", as you said, which probably means they won't go that deep into optimization.

I'm GM-ing a RL-group myself, all new-ish players. The most experienced one read some guides online and brought a min-maxed Paladin when his cleric died. The Paladin absolutely destroyed 2 encounters, one of them a boss fight, with the non-optimised rest of the group hardly contributing at all. That's no fun, neither for the GM nor for the players.

I asked him to tone down his paladin, and he did. He's still probably the strongest character but no longer more powerful than the rest of the group combined.

Long story short: Carefully consider the power level of the party before building an extreme character.

The Exchange

I see all the references to taking a single level of wizard or sorcerer before taking Eldritch Knight. Am I missing something? Doesn't EK require the ability to cast 3rd level arcane spells?


Qakisst Vishtani wrote:
I see all the references to taking a single level of wizard or sorcerer before taking Eldritch Knight. Am I missing something? Doesn't EK require the ability to cast 3rd level arcane spells?

The requirement is the ability to cast 3rd level arcane spells; however as of last year spell-like abilities qualify. There are a number of races that will give you the requisite SLA, which means you only then need a class with Arcane spells (not as a requirement but because otherwise you miss out on the +1 level of arcane spells which is the point of EK) and Martial Weapon proficiencies.

Have you considered Warpriest instead of Paladin? it grants access to the Cleric spell list, meaning you can cast all sorts of useful wands such as Freedom of Movement, gives you the requisite Martial Weapon proficiencies and, most important of all, makes you eligible for the Divine Protection Feat (functionally the same as Divine Grace), all for 1 level. Blakmane is right to say that it does not stack well with Wizard, a CHA based arcane is best (e,g, Sorceror).


Honestly, I think straight Wizard will be fine. You have two undecided players, one of them will probably go ranged. This AP is good to Wizards, especially single-classed Wizards. Remember that you don't get your two free spells added to your spellbook per level for those EK levels, which makes you entirely dependent on loot and what scrolls you can find in cities to expand your spellbook, and then you have to pay money to copy them into your spellbook. You will probably either find your gear lagging behind where you want it as an EK, or you'll find yourself lacking the spell you need for a given situation. I'm assuming the GM isn't going to increase the loot for the AP, which, while abundant for 4 players, is not quite so much for more than that.

The Exchange

Gavmania wrote:
Qakisst Vishtani wrote:
I see all the references to taking a single level of wizard or sorcerer before taking Eldritch Knight. Am I missing something? Doesn't EK require the ability to cast 3rd level arcane spells?

The requirement is the ability to cast 3rd level arcane spells; however as of last year spell-like abilities qualify. There are a number of races that will give you the requisite SLA, which means you only then need a class with Arcane spells (not as a requirement but because otherwise you miss out on the +1 level of arcane spells which is the point of EK) and Martial Weapon proficiencies.

Okay, but Lastoth did not mentioned what race he's planning to play. That's why I was wondering what I was missing.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Rise of the Runelords / One arcane caster party, advice needed All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rise of the Runelords
Ruining Rise of the Runelords