Blade Adept Eldritch Knight


Advice


I am interested in making an EK for PFS. My original plan was fighter 1/teleportation wizard 1/EK 10 (from early entry via the aasimars daylight). But after reading about the blade adept, I'm curious how this would work out, and if it would be better than my original plan.

My plan for arcanist so far is as follows.

Spoiler:
Perikin aasimar
str 15
dex 13
con 14
int 16
wis 12
cha 10

Traits: Blade of Mercy, Bruising Intellect. Take additional traits, get magical knack and something else.

lv1 lore warden fighter
lv2-7 blade adept arcanist
lv8+ eldritch knight

Feats:
lv1 enforcer, additional traits
lv3 power attack
lv5 combat casting (not sure yet)
lv6 arcane exploit - ???
lv7 extra exploit - ???
lv8 (ek bonus feat) ???
lv9 extra exploit - eldritch blade
lv11 improved critical

Since the blade adept loses their first 2 exploits at lvs 1 and 3. I am not able to take extra exploit until I've become a 5th lv arcanist, correct?

Some exploits I'm interested in.
Dimensional Slide - Sounds like it could be fun and powerful.
School Understanding - To get teleportation's shift ability, then I would no longer have to worry about being grappled.
Arcane Accuracy - Would help with my lower hit bonus.
Eldritch Blade

With the retraining rules, I could later retrain power attack to get another exploit, since (as far as I'm aware) you just need to qualify for the feat at the time of retraining. Then I could choose power attack as my EK bonus feat. Or maybe go with improved initiative instead of power attack.

Haven't decided on a weapon, but it would have to be a 1 handed slashing weapon, preferably with a high crit range. So probably a scimitar or cutlass.

A few things I will not change, aasimar race, enforcer feat and the blade of mercy/bruising intellect traits. But the rest I am open to suggestions and advice on how to improve this.


Do you have a boon to play an asimar or does this character have a boon from last season? If not then you can not donna aasimar is no longer always allowed.

Everything else looks pretty solid. You loose a lot in EK, but you would have lost a lot no matter how you got into it.

Only thing I might do differently is take two levels of the caster cases for better spells early on and same bab progression.


I have 2 aasimar that have been grandfathered in. So no worries about that.

Regardless of the method took, I would not have gotten the EK capstone during normal PFS play.

I don't understand what you mean by "take 2 levels of the caster cases". Could you explain further?


Im guessing he meant start with spell caster levels then snag the fighter lv?
I dobt see any big benefit.. maybe if you were starting at lv 1.. but even then id like the nice intial boost..

What arw you gonna do with Armour and spell fail chance?


Zwordsman wrote:

Im guessing he meant start with spell caster levels then snag the fighter lv?

I dobt see any big benefit.. maybe if you were starting at lv 1.. but even then id like the nice intial boost..

What arw you gonna do with Armour and spell fail chance?

Ah, then no. Taking fighter at lv 1 would give me a little more hp and something to do when I'm out of spells, as well as a slightly higher bab and a boost to fort saves.

For armor, I was thinking of going armorless, and use spells like mage armor, mirror image, and displacement etc for defense.


Maybe instead of a Fighter as your martial component, what if you went Swashbuckler? You can rely more on your Dexterity that way if you also get Slashing Grace.


I support swashbuckler by far, assuming it fulfils the needes armour proficiency. Beong dex based would help stats a ton on this one, and way way help ypur ac if your going armourless.

Otherwise that fighter type, or paly or barb. Rage could be nice for whem your spell less, some str and ho. Could eyeball urban barb, I dont know much about it except I think it lets you raise sex not str wih rage. Probably still has the spell restrictions while raging tgo. paly is well paladin.

Chances are acg has better 1 lv dip for eknights prereqs


Ventnor wrote:
Maybe instead of a Fighter as your martial component, what if you went Swashbuckler? You can rely more on your Dexterity that way if you also get Slashing Grace.

Slashing grace requires weapon focus, and I don't think I can get both feats without dropping something. Also with slashing grace, can you use a weapon 2-handed?


I have no experience with PFS, what martial classes are allowed? Also, is the bonus feat super important to you?


Every class from core, APG, UC, UM, ACG is allowed, as well as most archetypes. You can see what is and isn't allowed here. http://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety/about/additionalResources

The bonus feat? It is not required, but is good to have.

Sovereign Court

The swashbuckler automatically gets swashbuckler finesse which is a version of weapon finesse.


Kodger wrote:
The swashbuckler automatically gets swashbuckler finesse which is a version of weapon finesse.

Yes, and that allows you to use dex to hit. But to use dex for damage, you would need the slashing grace feat, which requires weapon focus in that weapon.


Well weapon focus isn't too bad of an idea for the blade adept anyway.


Zwordsman wrote:
Well weapon focus isn't too bad of an idea for the blade adept anyway.

Yea, it's just a question of where to fit it in.


What I meant is that most people I see take one level of the caster and one level of the martial and then the PrC.

I take one martial and two caster and then PrC. You do not loose bab progression doing this and you get dome more spells early, and you get your bonus feats a touch later when they give you more options.


I think he needs a few levels in blade adept to get the discovery thingy to base his blade off caster level insstead of adept levela.so I dont tgink he can pul early access quite


Some Random Dood wrote:
Zwordsman wrote:
Well weapon focus isn't too bad of an idea for the blade adept anyway.
Yea, it's just a question of where to fit it in.

If you're willing to wait a month or two to play this character, maybe you could play a Rapier-Focused Eldritch Knight? The Swashbuckler's Inspired Blade archetype grants you weapon focus in Rapiers as one of its features, which means that qualifying for Fencing Grace would be pretty easy. Plus, the panache pool is based partly off your Intelligence modifier in the archetype, which synergizes pretty well with Arcanists.


Some Random Dood wrote:

Every class from core, APG, UC, UM, ACG is allowed, as well as most archetypes. You can see what is and isn't allowed here. http://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety/about/additionalResources

The bonus feat? It is not required, but is good to have.

I've said it in other threads, but I personally like the Gunslinger as the martial side of the EK. The Fighter has the bonus feat over you, but you've got a good reflex save, proficiency in firearms, more skills and a better skill choice(Perception!), at least one point of Grit to fuel deeds, and(if you are a Gun Tank) you get Light Fortification against an attack once per day.

Now we've got some new martials, though. I imagine Bloodrager would easily fit in.


I know this isn't really the focus of the discussion, but I feel a powerful need to point out that your original plan wouldn't work; being able to use a SLA once per day does not meet the "able to cast 3rd-level arcane spells" requirement of Eldritch Knight.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sandal Fury wrote:
I know this isn't really the focus of the discussion, but I feel a powerful need to point out that your original plan wouldn't work; being able to use a SLA once per day does not meet the "able to cast 3rd-level arcane spells" requirement of Eldritch Knight.

Except that it does:

FAQ wrote:

Spell-Like Abilities, Casting, and Prerequisites: Does a creature with a spell-like ability count as being able to cast that spell for the purpose of prerequisites or requirements?

Yes.
For example, the Dimensional Agility feat (Ultimate Combat) has "ability to use the abundant step class feature or cast dimension door" as a prerequisite; a barghest has dimension door as a spell-like ability, so the barghest meets the "able to cast dimension door prerequisite for that feat.

Edit 7/12/13: The design team is aware that the above answer means that certain races can gain access to some spellcaster prestige classes earlier than the default minimum (character level 6). Given that prestige classes are usually a sub-optimal character choice (especially for spellcasters), the design team is allowing this FAQ ruling for prestige classes. If there is in-play evidence that this ruling is creating characters that are too powerful, the design team may revisit whether or not to allow spell-like abilities to count for prestige class requirements.


Interesting, Dot.


Your idea is viable, but it seems like a lot of time and effort to end up 3 levels behind a wizard in spell progression. At least the fighter 1/wizard 1/ek gets to enjoy the fruits of his labor earlier while melee is relevant, not to mention having a higher BAB and faster casting progression.

Also, Foresight Diviner>Teleportation Conjurer.


Suichimo wrote:
Sandal Fury wrote:
I know this isn't really the focus of the discussion, but I feel a powerful need to point out that your original plan wouldn't work; being able to use a SLA once per day does not meet the "able to cast 3rd-level arcane spells" requirement of Eldritch Knight.

Except that it does:

FAQ wrote:

Spell-Like Abilities, Casting, and Prerequisites: Does a creature with a spell-like ability count as being able to cast that spell for the purpose of prerequisites or requirements?

Yes.
For example, the Dimensional Agility feat (Ultimate Combat) has "ability to use the abundant step class feature or cast dimension door" as a prerequisite; a barghest has dimension door as a spell-like ability, so the barghest meets the "able to cast dimension door prerequisite for that feat.

Edit 7/12/13: The design team is aware that the above answer means that certain races can gain access to some spellcaster prestige classes earlier than the default minimum (character level 6). Given that prestige classes are usually a sub-optimal character choice (especially for spellcasters), the design team is allowing this FAQ ruling for prestige classes. If there is in-play evidence that this ruling is creating characters that are too powerful, the design team may revisit whether or not to allow spell-like abilities to count for prestige class requirements.

Well, that's... ew.


Sandal Fury wrote:
Suichimo wrote:
Sandal Fury wrote:
I know this isn't really the focus of the discussion, but I feel a powerful need to point out that your original plan wouldn't work; being able to use a SLA once per day does not meet the "able to cast 3rd-level arcane spells" requirement of Eldritch Knight.

Except that it does:

FAQ wrote:

Spell-Like Abilities, Casting, and Prerequisites: Does a creature with a spell-like ability count as being able to cast that spell for the purpose of prerequisites or requirements?

Yes.
For example, the Dimensional Agility feat (Ultimate Combat) has "ability to use the abundant step class feature or cast dimension door" as a prerequisite; a barghest has dimension door as a spell-like ability, so the barghest meets the "able to cast dimension door prerequisite for that feat.

Edit 7/12/13: The design team is aware that the above answer means that certain races can gain access to some spellcaster prestige classes earlier than the default minimum (character level 6). Given that prestige classes are usually a sub-optimal character choice (especially for spellcasters), the design team is allowing this FAQ ruling for prestige classes. If there is in-play evidence that this ruling is creating characters that are too powerful, the design team may revisit whether or not to allow spell-like abilities to count for prestige class requirements.

Well, that's... ew.

Yeah. I'm a pretty lenient GM, and I love prestige classes so I houserule some stuff to make them better, but in my games I don't let players use SLAs to qualify for feats and PrCs (unless of course the prereq is literally to have a SLA). It just reeks of cheese to me, even though it isn't making anything overpowered or anything like that.

Everyone is allowed to have a few irrational hatreds, and I've chosen mine.


@sandal and zodiac: that's literally the only thing that makes PrCs like eldritch knight or mystic theurge even worth looking at. otherwise the magus outclasses the EK pretty much entirely (and with less paperwork involved), and MT is a poor stunted little man who never accomplishes anything before level 14+ (see: when most adventures are over and done with).

it makes arcane archer and arcane trickster (iirc) worth considering more as well, along with a great many others that you would need to otherwise sink levels and levels into something that's only marginally good, if that.


AndIMustMask wrote:

@sandal and zodiac: that's literally the only thing that makes PrCs like eldritch knight or mystic theurge even worth looking at. otherwise the magus outclasses the EK pretty much entirely (and with less paperwork involved), and MT is a poor stunted little man who never accomplishes anything before level 14+ (see: when most adventures are over and done with).

it makes arcane archer and arcane trickster (iirc) worth considering more as well, along with a great many others that you would need to otherwise sink levels and levels into something that's only marginally good, if that.

Agreed. It was a rule my initial shock was that it was bad ruling. I read through it, looked at what it actually effected, and was super stoked with it. I can understand your initial shock but take a look, you may find its not so bad, and may even be a boon to the game. I have an EK and AT in the game I run now that I love having as players, and neither would've been viable pre-ruling.


Suichimo wrote:
Sandal Fury wrote:
I know this isn't really the focus of the discussion, but I feel a powerful need to point out that your original plan wouldn't work; being able to use a SLA once per day does not meet the "able to cast 3rd-level arcane spells" requirement of Eldritch Knight.

Except that it does:

FAQ wrote:

Spell-Like Abilities, Casting, and Prerequisites: Does a creature with a spell-like ability count as being able to cast that spell for the purpose of prerequisites or requirements?

Yes.
For example, the Dimensional Agility feat (Ultimate Combat) has "ability to use the abundant step class feature or cast dimension door" as a prerequisite; a barghest has dimension door as a spell-like ability, so the barghest meets the "able to cast dimension door prerequisite for that feat.

Edit 7/12/13: The design team is aware that the above answer means that certain races can gain access to some spellcaster prestige classes earlier than the default minimum (character level 6). Given that prestige classes are usually a sub-optimal character choice (especially for spellcasters), the design team is allowing this FAQ ruling for prestige classes. If there is in-play evidence that this ruling is creating characters that are too powerful, the design team may revisit whether or not to allow spell-like abilities to count for prestige class requirements.

It doesn't work in the second case because Eldritch Knight requires 3rd level arcane spells, and Perikin give up the Daylight SLA (3rd level arcane equivalent) in exchange for the Pyrotechnics SLA (2nd level arcane equivalent).

To my knowledge there are only three ways to get 3rd level arcane SLA's:

1. Standard Aasimar with the Daylight SLA
2. Svirfneblin with the Nondetection SLA
3. and the Scryer School power Send Senses which is equivalent to Clairaudience/Clairvoyance.

The last condition could be met through the School Understanding exploit, but that would preclude the original poster from gaining the Teleportation School power.

I think this second build is better because getting Exploits early is really, really nice.


AndIMustMask wrote:

@sandal and zodiac: that's literally the only thing that makes PrCs like eldritch knight or mystic theurge even worth looking at. otherwise the magus outclasses the EK pretty much entirely (and with less paperwork involved), and MT is a poor stunted little man who never accomplishes anything before level 14+ (see: when most adventures are over and done with).

it makes arcane archer and arcane trickster (iirc) worth considering more as well, along with a great many others that you would need to otherwise sink levels and levels into something that's only marginally good, if that.

Actually personally I'd take the hit if I could get in a game going high enough I could multi-class into EK simply because of the fact that a magus for all their nifty abilities don't get higher than 6th level spells. An EK even with the level hit will get you 9th level spells in the end and a decent amount of 7/8th level ones. Really Magus and EK are to me flipped sides of a coin with the magus being more martialy and the EK more magically focused.


I'm really intrigued that the Blade Adept can choose a piercing weapon instead of a slashing one. I'm considering a trident or shortspear.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Liam Warner wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:

@sandal and zodiac: that's literally the only thing that makes PrCs like eldritch knight or mystic theurge even worth looking at. otherwise the magus outclasses the EK pretty much entirely (and with less paperwork involved), and MT is a poor stunted little man who never accomplishes anything before level 14+ (see: when most adventures are over and done with).

it makes arcane archer and arcane trickster (iirc) worth considering more as well, along with a great many others that you would need to otherwise sink levels and levels into something that's only marginally good, if that.

Actually personally I'd take the hit if I could get in a game going high enough I could multi-class into EK simply because of the fact that a magus for all their nifty abilities don't get higher than 6th level spells. An EK even with the level hit will get you 9th level spells in the end and a decent amount of 7/8th level ones. Really Magus and EK are to me flipped sides of a coin with the magus being more martialy and the EK more magically focused.

main issue i find with that is that in the end you're just a wizard with less CL, because what is the point of having a sword if your spells will do literally everything better for you? and given that you have to choose whether you're going to stab someone OR cast a spell each turn, you're bogged down with decisions.

and the magus can use it's magic AND it's combat at the same time, which puts it leagues ahead of the EK in overall efficiency at level 2.

edit: blade adept arcanist gets around this somewhat, but requires you to have at MINIMUM 7 levels in arcanist (because the AT eats the level 1-3 ones, and level 5 will HAVE to be eldritch blade if you want any use out of the thing in EK, allowing you to get the spellstrike exploit at level 7), which means it only comes online at level 8 at the earliest (1 full BAB / 7 arcanist / 10 EK)? and 18 if you go all-in on EK as soon as possible (early entry: full bab 1 / arcanist 1 / EK 10 / arcanist 6)

edit-edit: actually you only need 5 levels in arcanist (if you take the extra exploit feat), so reduce the levels stated above by 2 in that case.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor

Quote:
what is the point of having a sword if your spells will do literally everything better for you?

Being an arcane spellcaster with the option to stab is never going to be the 'optimized' route. There are going to be martial characters who can out-stab you and straight spellcasters will have more powerful spells. If there is an advantage to the Eldritch Knight it is that he is more versatile. When you've run out of spells or when magic doesn't work, you still have interesting things you can do without burning your resources.

As for magus, I don't really see them as spellcasters. The majority of spellcasting they do is to enhance their melee combat. On whole the magus is much nicer in the lower middle levels... 4-8th level, where the knight is in it's awkward transition phase. Starting around 9-10th level, the knight's casting really starts to pull ahead of the magus and never looks back. The eldritch knight is unlikely to ever match the magus in melee due to spell combat, but he can wield a great sword or falchion which the magus can't. More important, the eldritch knight gains access to spells like dragon form and earlier access and more frequent castings of things like beast shape. Plus... tons of 7-9th level spells which the magus never sees.

Edit: IMO if you never reach 10th level, you are almost certainly better off playing magus due to the bumpy transition between wizard/ fighter and eldritch knight. I really wish it were laid out where the two missed caster levels were spread apart a lot more. Or perhaps drop the requirement for all martial weapon proficiency and have them lose 1st and 5th level casting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

the magus also has the advantages of it's various peripheral class abilities (spell recall, magus arcana, bonus feats, etc.), while the EK gets less bonus feats and a gimped spellstrike as a capstone (you can cast a spell, but still cant use a 2H weapon if the spell requires somatic components--on top of ASF from armor anyway).

i still have to raise my question of how getting great spells later is a point in EK's favor--besides the obvious, naturally. they're supposed to be a combo of might+magic, but in the late game (where they pull ahead of the magus' spell progression) they're going to completely ignore melee anyway due to how much better spells are comparatively. i mean being a roughly 3/4 BAB character in an antimagic field is neat and all, but the magus is that as well, on top of other abilities.

then again these comparisons have gone back and forth since the magus was first introduced.


Never been a fan of melee EK's at high levels, something pfs is not, now a ranged EK dipping into AA can be fantastic, reliable damage no matter what, spells for all that utility world shaping stuff wizards are blamed for. Not a beginners character, but can be extremely viable. No armor substitute is always 100% effective, surprised rounds may kill a cast for defense.

YMMV

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor

AndIMustMask wrote:
i still have to raise my question of how getting great spells later is a point in EK's favor--besides the obvious, naturally. they're supposed to be a combo of might+magic, but in the late game (where they pull ahead of the magus' spell progression) they're going to completely ignore melee anyway due to how much better spells are comparatively.

The way I would sum up your thought here is: "It's a better caster, but it doesn't matter." Which doesn't make any sense to me. If you feel wizards "win the game" because spells always win, you aren't playing either of these classes. When you pick one of these classes, you've already decided that you want to engage in melee and cast spells.

As for the magus being a comparable spellcaster at lower levels... maybe you should review their respective spell lists again. Casting charm person, sleep, create pit, fear, stinking cloud, confusion, dominate person, are very often vastly better options than fireball or shocking grasp. Guess who can't cast any of those? A magus can be invisible but can't see invisibility, nor can he teleport, dimension door, or stone shape; summoning even a minor ally is similarly outside his abilities. Tons of great combat spells are outside the magus's list and almost all the great utility spells are missing. There are a few levels where the magus comes close, but in general their spells are limited to evocation.

Saying one of these classes is better than the other is misleading, they are much more different than they appear at first. A magus is always going to be better at DPR, but the eldritch knight has options the magus lacks. Don't under-estimage the advantage that spell-list offers.


i was more aiming to say "it's a better caster, but it doesnt matter (in the martial+mage archetype) due to completely overshadowing it's other half."

i was more saying that the magus is better than the wiz/EK at being a martial caster. for EK on a given turn (before the capstone which i already addressed), you're either a martial or a caster--there's no middle ground.

you're CERTAINLY more powerful on the spell end for EK by way of better spell list, but when you're spending more rounds dropping these amazing end-the-encounter spells (pits, clouds, tentacles, SoDs, etc.), why even carry a sword in the first place?

to that end, my opinion for the 'spellsword' niche is: EK is more effective overall (but schizophrenic and it's martial side largely superfluous), whereas magus is less effective overall (but more focused/action-efficient).

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor

AndIMustMask wrote:
you're either a martial or a caster--there's no middle ground.

Picking one path or the other is certainly easier.

Quote:
you're CERTAINLY more powerful on the spell end for EK by way of better spell list, but when you're spending more rounds dropping these amazing end-the-encounter spells (pits, clouds, tentacles, SoDs, etc.), why even carry a sword in the first place?

Again, it's not about optimizing. If it was, just go straight wizard.

Lots of those encounter ending spells don't entirely end encounters. Instead they massively change the odds. Instead of fighting 4 bad-guys you are fighting 1-2 and rather than waste a bunch more spells, the eldritch knight can just wade in and help finish the job. Spells are a limited resource in the game, stabs are not.

Also, being able to cast magic jar and take over a fire giant and smash a bunch of other fire giants is cool. Or being able to transform into a dragon and actually kick butt like a dragon.


Dennis Baker wrote:
Casting charm person, sleep, create pit, fear, stinking cloud, confusion, dominate person, are very often vastly better options than fireball or shocking grasp. Guess who can't cast any of those? A magus can be invisible but can't see invisibility, nor can he teleport, dimension door, or stone shape; summoning even a minor ally is similarly outside his abilities.

Magus has a bunch of battlefield control spells like glitterdust, web and stinking cloud on his spell list, not to mention dimension door and teleport. EK doesn't pull away in spell quality until higher levels.


I put a table together comparing various EK builds to the Magus, and it's really not worth it unless you're making an archer, or you start the game at a high level. Even then, it assumes you're taking Hell Knight Signifer after you finish Eldritch Knight - As far as I know that's the only prestige class with 10/10 Arcane Casting and 3/4 BAB. And it's not a safe assumption that you will be taking it, due to the alignment restriction, fluff/setting issues, and burning a feat on Arcane Armor Training that you won't be using anyways.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor

Gah! How did I miss stinking cloud, dimension door, and teleport... I must have been dozing off.

The point isn't that magus doesn't have a good spell list, their spell list is fairly narrow and misses key spells. Not sure what you mean by "pull away", but fear and confusion are pretty much mainstay spells. Sleep? Summon Monster?


Around level 11 EK spellcasting "pulls away" from the Magus by accessing the next level of spells at an earlier character level. At 15 or so (assuming a Wizard/EK) the EK gets 7th level spells, which a Magus will never have.

Also, neither the Magus nor EK will generally use spells that allow a saving throw, as they cannot focus all resources into casting stat and raising DC's, and they're already behind on spell levels without adding metamagic (such as Persistent Spell).


I find summoning rather touchy on anything but standard action chassis--especially when youre trying to be in the thick of things. Too many opportunities to fail.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

My take:
Level 1: About Even
Level 2-6: Magus is the clear winner.
Level 7-10: roughly even, magus probably slightly ahead at 7th still.
Level 11+ EK pulls ahead.

That being said, you don't have to be a magus. The magus is so overdone. I do a lot of PFS and its pretty rare when I'm at a table without at least one, and I've had three at one table. Even with the four or so different magus builds out there they all are nearly identical, and other than a black blade, being naked or hexing you'd never know the difference. Magus is the only class I ban in my home games, not because of power or anything, just because I'm so done with the class.

If I was to build one, it'd not follow an optimal build anyway, so the EK would probably be better even earlier.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Blade Adept Eldritch Knight All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice