The Eldritch Knight seems like a pretty powerful concept when you look at the prestige class - Full BAB progression, d10 hp, and almost full spell progression in Wiz or Sor! Plus the new bonus combat feats... It seems too good to be true. Isn't this the best of everything?
But the reality of playing a Eldritch Knight is a slow exercise in disappointment.
- First off, ability scores- if you want your physical abilities to give you significant bonuses, you might have to put off that18 or 20 Int for another 4 or 8 levels.
- That full BAB, well actually you are THREE down from the fighter, and that is VERY significant difference, especially in terms of getting multiple attacks per round.
- The HP are pretty good, perhaps the best current feature of the prestige class.
- Your caster level being two down is where the disappointment really starts kicking in. All your spells have a little less range, a little less effect, and less chance of beating SR. Oh yeah, you also lack what could have been your highest level of spells, and you have fewer spells. AND you miss out on a few bonus feats, AND your spell like abilities freeze at 6th level.
- The new combat feats are a nice addition, but honestly, what are you going to do with them. Great sword specialization? Two weapon fighting? Improved Grapple? Considering your armor is probably going to be mage armor, your not using a shield, and your STR and CON is going to be mediocre, chances are your going for the ranged stuff. If you go for the longbow, you find yourself at the middle levels with the choice of maybe hitting for 1d8 + 4 at best, or using a wand of magic missile or scorching ray. Hmm, tough choice. If you go for focusing your feats into the ranged touch spells, you have just traded two levels of your primary class for some hp, and a +2 - +5 to hit with ranged touch spells. Are you ready to go back to straight Wizard yet?
These are all conclusions I came to while playing a 3.5 Eldritch Knight from 1st to 16th level. When I replaced him with a 16th level wizard, the power difference really was like going from a poorly built 14th level Wizard to a highly effective 16th level badass Wizard.
Obviously, the core classes should be more powerful, please, Please, PLEASE don't think that I'm trying to make the Eldrict Knight as powerful as the wizard. I just can't see how this prestige class can be anything but a weak wizard who happens to be a little better at shooting ray spells at people. Maybe I'm missing some options that could make this fun to play, but right now I see it as a dead end.
Anyone have any ideas? Armor and shield without spell failure? Tensors Transformation for rnds/level every day? Full spell progression from the start of the prestige class?
If you compare an Eldritch Knight to a full wizard, you're bound to be disappointed at level 16!
But if you compare an Eldritch Knight to a full fighter, you're way, way ahead.
Note that Pathfinder now allows combinations like:
Fighter 2/Bard 4/Dragon Disciple 4/Eldritch Knight 10
You miss a few fighter feats at higher levels, but so what? You have 16 levels of bard casting to make up for it, and you only lose 2 BAB. And at every point along the way, you're basically as good as a straight fighter (IMO); the worst point would be Fighter 2/Bard 4/Dragon Disciple 1 (where you're down 2 BAB with not much casting power to show for it).
These are all conclusions I came to while playing a 3.5 Eldritch Knight from 1st to 16th level. When I replaced him with a 16th level wizard, the power difference really was like going from a poorly built 14th level Wizard to a highly effective 16th level badass Wizard.
Let's look at this conceptually real quick:
At 16th level, you could *at least* be a highly effective 14th level Wizard, with +5 BAB, +22 hp, and more balanced saving throws. You're not missing any net feats vs. Wizard - though you are missing out on a few bonus spells. Overall - not that bad.
On the flip side, you could be a Fighter with 3 lower BAB, and 3-5 fewer feats (counting or not counting the Wizard feats), but things like Power Word Blind, Contingency, Teleport, Mass Charm, Dimension Door, Displacement, (Quickened) True Strike (all without Arcane Spell Failure). Admittedly no Armor and Weapon Training either.
It's a good class, that's been nudged up nicely.
The 3.5 Eldritch Knight quickly faded from usefulness due to a large number of splat book prestige classes that came out which offered the same bonuses with actual special abilities.
While the PRPG Eldricth Knight is better, I don't see the fighter-wizard base being the primary use of it. The Combat Bard and Sorcerer builds we've been playing with it have really run wild.
This is especially true of the combat sorcerer we've been playing. We experimented with two builds, Dragon Disciple and Eldritch Knight, and believe me when I say it struck fear into the hearts of enemies to see a claw-wielding sorcerer with a great BAB and a lot of spells to boot.
I would like to see an arcane spell failure mitigation for the class, but otherwise, it's pretty solid. I mean, if you were only playing it as an archer or a caster, then yes, I can see where you might've had a problem with it. But, if you're going for polymorph, or simply using your spells to augment your combat abilities rather than AS your combat abilities, it's really pretty darn good.
"You're not missing any net feats vs. Wizard"
Assuming that you went EK at 6th level of Wizard, you would loose two wizard bonus feats by 16th level.
Not that it is a big deal for many people, but the familiar stops advancing as well.
Also in pathfinder you would loose out on advancement of the wizard spell like abilities.
How do people resolve the armor class for this build?
When based off of bard, are people still using the bard song?
Can they deal effective damage in melee?
As for fixing armor, mithril platemail with twilight special ability and both arcane armor training feats gets you no arcane spell failure.
As for fixing armor, mithril platemail with twilight special ability and both arcane armor training feats gets you no arcane spell failure.
Yes but AAT needs a swift action to be used, This eliminate the lvl 10 EK ability.
"twilight special ability"
Does not yet exist in pathfinder.
Someone mentioned polymorph - Has anyone tested EK with beastshape, dragonshape, etc.?
How do people resolve the armor class for this build?
A mithral chain shirt, probably, as well as magical protections (shield, mirror image, blink, etc.). If you're really worried about arcane spell failure, you can buy bracers of armor or a rod of still spell.
When based off of bard, are people still using the bard song?
Probably not very much.
Can they deal effective damage in melee?
Sure; arcane casters have all kinds of good melee touch and buffing spells (polymorph, true strike, shocking grasp, vampiric touch, etc.).
In 3.5 the Eldritch Knight obtains almost full spell progression and a bonus combat feat, but the main classes (wizard and fighter) only gains combat feats for the fighter and spells and few feats for the wizard. The 3.5 EK was a good PrC to multi classing because you can be a fine fighter with a good spell repertory.
Now the EK obtain almost the same bonuses: 2 more combat feats, the same spell progression, a better HD (thank paizo) (d6 -> d10), a poor good save, diverse trining, and a lvl 10 ability that can't be used in conjunction with arcane armor feats, dodge, etc, but the fighter now obtains a +5/+4/+3/+2/+1 to BAB and damage with his weapons groups, a +4 to his AC / max dex while using armor and a bonus to will save , and the wizard gains all his school powers and abilities and bonus spells.
I think that the new EK needs a few class features to go in parallel with the other two classes, perhaps a fusion with the spellsword (Complete Warrior page 79-80)?
I think that the new EK needs a few class features to go in parallel with the other two classes, perhaps a fusion with the spellsword (Complete Warrior page 79-80)?
15th level Fighter: Look at me! I have a +4 to my AC from my Armor Mastery ability!
15th level Eldritch Knight: Sorry, I didn't hear you. I was too busy casting awesome spells like Mirror Image, Blink, Greater Magic Weapon and Greater Invisibility.
I think that the new EK needs a few class features to go in parallel with the other two classes, perhaps a fusion with the spellsword (Complete Warrior page 79-80)?15th level Fighter: Look at me! I have a +4 to my AC from my Armor Mastery ability!
15th level Eldritch Knight: Sorry, I didn't hear you. I was too busy casting awesome spells like Mirror Image, Blink, Greater Magic Weapon and Greater Invisibility.
What build you suppose? Fig X / Wiz Y / EK Z. And which race? Because the maximum lvl is 10 for the EK and a bad configuration of class lvls will cause a lot of trouble with the XP.
A Wiz 5 / Fig 1 / EK 9 (it's the minimal lvl req) will have a 20% Xp (or 40% if you don't have as prefered class a Fig, Wiz or EK) penalize if you continue lvling.
PD: I'd rather Bestow Curse.
A Wiz 5 / Fig 1 / EK 9 (it's the minimal lvl req) will have a 20% Xp (or 40% if you don't have as prefered class a Fig, Wiz or EK) penalize if you continue lvling.
Hi guille!
XP penalties do not exist anymore under Pathfinder RPG - no problem there. Also Prestige classes never invoked XP penalties.
A Wiz 5 / Fig 1 / EK 9 (it's the minimal lvl req) will have a 20% Xp (or 40% if you don't have as prefered class a Fig, Wiz or EK) penalize if you continue lvling.Hi guille!
XP penalties do not exist anymore under Pathfinder RPG - no problem there. Also Prestige classes never invoked XP penalties.
Ok, that change everything, thank you for the info.
Where in the Beta release is that statement?
So, keep in mind the theme in Pathfinder designs--streamline classes that seem redundant or attempts to patch another class. Let's be frank--this is the classic Gish. Why are you playing a Gish? To swing a sword and cast spells, in the best combination possible. This has been done with the Jade Phoenix Mage (Book of Nine Swords), Spellsword( Complete Warrior), Bladesinger (Complete Warrior), Abjurant Champion (Complete Mage), and Duskblade (PHPII--the full attempt at Gish). Eldritch Knight should nix the need for most of these. It's not going to be a full Wizard, because big spells are their purview. It won't have full BaB, because the spells should help nix that (looking for iterative attacks? Haste.). It SHOULD, however, offer novel ways to integrate both aspects.
These are some of the most central abilities:
1) Armor penalty reduction OR bonuses to magical armor spells
2) Boost to physical abilities by sacrificing spells
3) Channeling spells through your weapon
4) Swift casting of standard spells in special circumstances.
My opinion? Ditch the bonus feat, leave the level lost, and replace the feat with the ability to channel spells through your blade. Add in one or two of the abilities above at higher levels. You don't get the fighter or wizard bonuses, but you do get some nice perks that leave you the master of mixing magic and spells. The bonuses far outweigh the loss of BaB or caster progression.
|
If you're going to look at this build-wise, it's my opinion that the Eldritch Knight has always been best at one of two "builds":
1.) Ranged Touch/Rays caster - Focusing on Dex plus Int/Cha (depending on which class you start with), gives you a great AC and ranged attack bonus to overcome touch ACs. This may not seem like much as some touch ACs are low, but this typ of attack is one that will never diminish in usefulness.
2.) Self-Buffer - Focusing on Str or Dex while using spells that increase your effectiveness in combat, whether it's damage-dealt or survivablility.
Both builds have two great things in common: most spells you use either have no save, being a ranged attack or cast on yourself, and many are not stopped by SR. This way you don't have to worry so much about ability trade-offs are you only need your Int/Cha to be high enough to cast the spells you want. You can focus on your other ability scores without so much of the worries appearing in posts above.
Hi guille!
XP penalties do not exist anymore under Pathfinder RPG - no problem there.
Ok, that change everything, thank you for the info.
Where in the Beta release is that statement?
Sure thing!
The Beta doesn't explicitly state this, since they are avoiding the habit of mentioning rules that don't exist anymore (would add confusion to newcomers). It was verified on the boards by Jason - and *may* have been explicit in the Alpha. The best thing I can point you to is the "Favored Class" sidebar at the end of races, which defines the benefits that Favored class *does* give.
Take care!
Eldritch Knight is plenty powerful the way it is.
My opinion, is that like Bard and Monk, it's not immediately obvious how to play one. Most players play the class badly, and therefore most people think that that have to be that way.
Eldritch Knight does lose out on Spell DCs, and caster levels, compared to a straight wizard. So don't get into the Cone of Cold duel, if you're an Eldritch Knight.
Likewise, Eldritch Knight doesn't do the same damage as a straight fighter. One less attack (usually), fewer feats, fewer HPs, etc.
BUT, when used synergistically, the Eldritch Knight doesn't have either problem. Why? because the Eldritch Knight casts spells on himself and his allies, and can equal either one.
Ex) Best 3rd level EK spells are Haste, and Greater Magic Weapon. With those, the EK is back to where the strsight fighter is. False Life for the missing hit points, and now you're set.
Ex) Don't take Cone of Cold at all as a 5th level spell. Take Overland Flight. Now, you've got a guy with a magic greatsword and Power Attack, and he's more mobile than the opposition. Wall of Fire? Go over the top. Pit Trap? who cares? If you used those bonus feats for Spring Attack, you'll be relatively immune to foes without reach.
Ex) The EK is in good shape vs. the Ogre Mage, because his See Invis spell noticed it, and he used the surprise round to cast resist cold. The straight fighter had more hit points last round, but not any more.
So, and this is based on play experience, an Eldritch Knight is a very versatile character, who is great fun to play. But, it's a whole new day in how you play one. See it as a chance to learn a new side of the game.
I wouldn't change a thing.
I don't really think it's a valid complaint that this PrC doesn't result in as much power as a pure prep arcane caster. This class is extremely effective, it just requires that you have a firm grip on how arcanists work (spell failure, armor class, saves, spells to take, etc.). Not only that, you will be extremely happy to have one of these in epic play.
Though, I think Arcane Strike brought a lot to this class, and now that's gone. And no, the Pathfinder version doesn't count, because its awful (sorry guys, but it's true).
Speaking of 3.5, Eldritch Knight served largely as a filler class for "gish" builds. There's nothing particularly wrong with that as long as people actually use the class, as opposed to Arcane Archer, Dragon Disciple, Shadowdancer, and Hierophant which just sucked up the page count.
I don't see anything wrong with this class, and I Dmed for two Eds already. What we did was to raise the HD to d8, but the new d10 is even better.
Less power than straight fighter, less spell power than straight wizard, but a very versatile class. I think that all the classes that fuse together concepts lose some power in trade for versatility. Warrior-mage, thief-mage, cleric-mage, everything. No need to give more power to it.
|
Eldritch Knight is a case where a bit of 3.5 "Complete XXX" mixing goes a long way. Don't like to have your EK shoot a bow for a mere 1d8+4 or fire a regular wand, which basically negates the usefulness of your combat feat?
Well, take two-weapon fighting and dual wand wielder (complete arcane I think), and you now have a totally different animal. Add Craft Wand to your repertoire to save yourself some money, and take Agile Manoeuvre from PRPG to resist incoming grapples and such... take the complete arcane "mage killing" feats, and perhaps the PRPG "let's whack the casting mage even if he's casting defensively" feat, and boom... good EK on deck Sir! :)
|
|
It seems to me that what people might like an Eldritch Knight to be is someone that can get into combat, survive and do some combo weapon-and-magic damage. However, surviving means not getting hit, and yet that's hard to achieve as it is (and it's hard to achieve for fighters as well, often enough at higher levels, which is another issue that needs fixing). I don't think that the 3.5 core Eldritch Knight can do that and nor can the PFRPG version, so far as I can see.
Even Gandalf managed the odd bit of sword-smiting...
|
|
Not getting hit is hard for the Eldritch Knight???
Isn't there a relatively low level "invisibility, swift" spell in the Spell Compendium? I think "fly, swift" is there too...
Not getting hit is not a problem when you can blink out of existence at the end of your turn...
Being in melee for rounds, doing damage and not getting hit (well, not too often). As for the spell compendium, that's not all core and it's not PFRPG, which were the two things I was talking about, if you look back at my post.
Eldritch Knight is a PrC that can take advantage of a great amount of previous 3.5 material. Simple things like the twilight enhancement, greater mage armor, and the old Arcane Strike feat go a long way with the character concept.
If we wanted to improve Eldritch Knight to be as effective as we want it to be in core, we would have to do so very carefully, or it can get out of hand when non-core material is introduced.
|
|
If we wanted to improve Eldritch Knight to be as effective as we want it to be in core, we would have to do so very carefully, or it can get out of hand when non-core material is introduced.
On the other hand, they should hardly design a class that requires the use of non-core, out-of-print material to be worth playing...
The EK is good even without all the non-core stuff being thrown around. your attacks are better than an arcane casters, you have more hit points, better save throws, several extra bonus feats, and you are still a better caster than the bard! You give up 2~3 caster levels depending on build and everything else just adds on. With just core spells you can still do anything another wizard would do for damage (however you'll probably be most effective at sniping with ranged touch or melee touch spells) and can still rely on a few good defensive spells to see you through: Blink, displacement, mirror image, and stoneskin. You don't need them all up if you decide to get arcane armor training and mastery, and if you're offensive spells aren't cutting it you can always still do a fair job of going toe to toe like a fighter does (better becuase you bring your own buffs!).
Which isn't a bad thing if you don't have leprosy. Again it depends on what you are going for, and the spells still hold up. I think it's safe to say that if they are taking EK they aren't so interested in optimizing anyways, if they are why did they give up 2 caster levels?
The whole exercise for pathfinder is not making each build optimized, it's making things effective, balanced, and fun. Is this class effective for a fighting wizard? Will someone take this everytime becuase it's just that much better than anything else? Can fun be had with this class?
It doesn't need to be the top of the top people that's not what we are here for.
Eldritch Knight and Mystic Theurge might be good solutions to the problems of "casters are too powerful", I guess, taken as a voluntary nerf....
I guess we'll just have to accept we have different opinions on the matter. Eldritch Knight and Mystic Theurge are powerful classes, but in different ways. A fighter who can cast mirror image is a powerful foe, and few characters can match the versatility of a mystic theurge.
Eldritch Knight and Mystic Theurge might be good solutions to the problems of "casters are too powerful", I guess, taken as a voluntary nerf....
Or if you want to.. you know role play instead of power game?
If someone wants to play a character that is decent in melee and casts spells then this is the 'core only' way to do it.
If you consider the wizard is the king of the classes and the fighter is somewhere near the lower end of the classes any time you mix the two it's going to compare well to the fighter and poorly to the wizard.
Eldritch Knight and Mystic Theurge might be good solutions to the problems of "casters are too powerful", I guess, taken as a voluntary nerf....
Again, I don't know why you keep thinking of it as "an Eldritch Knight is a lousy wizard" rather than "an Eldritch Knight is an improved fighter/paladin". My only change would be requiring 2nd-level spells instead of 3rd-level spells and having a minimum BAB requirement (of +4, say).
|
|
I don't think of it as an improved meleer because most of the investment, as the class stands, is in caster; perhaps with your preferred change it wouldn't be so clearly a caster, but we're discussing the class as it is written. And even if the fighter is significantly better than the 3.5 one, you could still make combo classes that were worse than either; mystic theurge is one and I think that Eldritch Knight probably would be too, if fighter is improved, unless we really want the Eldritch Knight to be buff crazyness. And whilst I agree with people that don't like the flavour of the Weaboo Fightan Magic of ToB for fixing the standard meleer, a mage/fighter combo PrC might not be a bad place to have some of that added in to sweeten the deal.
Dennis, my comment wasn't about powergaming -- which I don't, incidentally, do at all, myself -- it's just a comment about game design (in this case it's an ironic comment about design being fixed by player actions, which is one of the things groups have to do to salvage games, something we've always had to do in fact, but at the design level you'd rather fix it before it came to that, particularly if you were doing a playtest). So even without arguing Stormwind out for the millionth time on the internet, when we're talking about design and there's maybe a class that will depower the character after going for it, I don't think that at the design level one would say "well, no need to worry, players will take it for 'roleplaying reasons'" even though that might turn out to be the case in practice when the rules are released. Obviously, some issues will persist and they'll hopefully be ameliorated by how groups play the game, but I don't think that's the right design approach in a game like 3.5, that's so rules-heavy. We can argue whether that's the right way to design a game at all, but as PFRPG is a 3.5 successor and supposed to be compatible, it's not much of a choice for Paizo. Additionally, it's supposed to be fixing some of the problems with 3.5, so much as it can without breaking compatibility, so I don't think that "the proper roleplayers will sort it out for Great Win" is much of an answer during the design/playtest phase...
I'm a gish fan, and I'd say that EK is actually a pretty good class as a second fighter/wizard PrC. I prefer fighter (or factotum) 1/wizard 5/knight phantom 10/eldritch knight 4. BAB +17 and 9th level spells. Add in practiced spellcaster (wizard) and you're casting as a 20th level wizard.
I've mostly used the BAB for ranged touch attacks like energy substituted scorching rays. But I do generally carry a greatsword or two for those times when you're forced into melee.
My only gripe about the EK is that you need five wizard levels which isn't very gishy when you need the melee the most (levels 3-6). I've thought of making a base class of it with average or full BAB (actually the +17 would be perfect), d6 HD, full wizard spellcasting with a three-level lag in spells per day, all martial weapon proficiencies, and heavy armored casting. That way you're an effective fighter at low levels and an effective wizard at high levels, though not as powerful as a pure wizard.
Anyway, I think the EK here is a nice update of it, although I still think armored casting (light) should be the level 1 ability.
I don't think of it as an improved meleer because most of the investment, as the class stands, is in caster; perhaps with your preferred change it wouldn't be so clearly a caster, but we're discussing the class as it is written.
Even so, as written you can use Dragon Disciple as a lead-in. For instance: Paladin 2/Bard 4/Dragon Disciple 4/Eldritch Knight 10. I'd put that guy up against a pure paladin any day of the week. Likewise for a Fighter 2/Sorcerer 4/Dragon Disciple 4/Eldritch Knight 10.
Comparing a Ftr 1/Sor/Pathfinder EK/Sor to a pure UA Battle Sorcerer, the EK is somewhat weaker in spell power, and somewhat stronger a meleeist.
|
|
I don't think of it as an improved meleer because most of the investment, as the class stands, is in caster; perhaps with your preferred change it wouldn't be so clearly a caster, but we're discussing the class as it is written.Even so, as written you can use Dragon Disciple as a lead-in. For instance: Paladin 2/Bard 4/Dragon Disciple 4/Eldritch Knight 10. I'd put that guy up against a pure paladin any day of the week. Likewise for a Fighter 2/Sorcerer 4/Dragon Disciple 4/Eldritch Knight 10.
If you're considering the levels required to make the PrC, then it looks like a caster to me. Of course, you can take other classes as well, but comparing side-by-side then with anything becomes harder because you expand the field to all combinations of all classes. I was talking about the conventional base class lead-in, which will be wizard (although it could be sorcerer and could, of course, be bard as you write).
When you say that you'd put up a 20th level four-component character build with two levels in Paladin against a 20th-level paladin-only character, I am not sure what that's supposed to prove about any of the four constituents of the build you mention, although it does of course demonstrate that you believe that you can multiclass to be better than a paladin; I doubt that many people would disagree with that (although rather than using it in a conversation about the strength of those of those build constituents, they might instead use it in a conversation about whether the paladin was too weak, except that introducing a four-component 20th level character to compare to is always likely to turn a lot of people off, perhaps even amongst the people that ever even play close to 20th level).
[..lots of good stuff snipped..]
When you say that you'd put up a 20th level four-component character build with two levels in Paladin against a 20th-level paladin-only character, I am not sure what that's supposed to prove about any of the four constituents of the build you mention [..]
My point is that it's hard to prove a class is underpowered (or a "trap", to use a term I really hate).
To demonstrate that a class is overpowered is easy enough; you describe a character that uses that class and then point out what makes that character overpowered. That's what mathematicians call a "constructive proof".
However, if you claim that a class is underpowered, you essentially need to show that there's no possible character that can benefit from using that class. That's a much more difficult problem. For instance, I can't prove that the Arcane Archer is a terrible class by saying that a Wizard 12/Arcane Archer 8 is much worse than a Wizard 20.
But on the other hand, it's certainly fair to say something more specific like: "Why isn't there a class suitable for an 8th level character who wants to mix melee fighting and magic in equal proportions, but who doesn't want to be a Dragon Disciple?"
|
|
I don't agree that you have to show that there's no possible benefit. I mean, spiked chain tripper can make fighters viable, but I don't think that alters the fact that fighter is too weak, even though you can find a use for it. Whatever it means to be 'too weak' -- and we can obviously still disagree about that -- I don't think that it means "in all circumstances worse than picking any other class" or some milder version therof (such as "can't be incorporated into workable build"). It's easier with base classes as we compare them to each other and to first order ignore multiclass combos but as PrCs require at least one multiclassing, we have to consider multiclasssing. I'd still stick to the 'obvious' entries from base classes, though, simply because otherwise you'd never really be able to decide whether PrCs were too weak. If the ability to make that decision is lost, then the method by which the decisions must be made is probably suspect, I'd say, because it's a decision we'd have to be able to make.
Note: These comments are based on a Fighter/Wizard EK, using strictly core rules. I haven't spent much time playing characters over 15th- 16th level, so most of these comments are focused on 1st -15th level play.
All of the buff then melee ideas really start to fall apart when you view the EK as part of an adventuring group. First off, almost all of the enhancement options mentioned are available from a cleric, (especially a travel domain cleric) or through relatively cheep potions or items. The fighter will already use many of these enhancements, so also using them will not give you an edge, just allow you to not fall further behind. As a player with all those wizard levels, you will also be expected to use some of your resources to buff other party members.
There are a few great "self-only" spells that make a real difference - Mirror Image is amazing for a fighter. Most of the low level buff spells often fail to stack with other options at mid-to-high level play- Bulls strength is a good example.
Attack bonus... Can anyone think of any other spell then Heroism (and Greater heroism)? True Strike, and Invisibility are great if you only want to attack once every second or third round, and Improved Invisibility is a fantastic spell. But that's really about it. Haste gives a +1, and an additional attack, but by the time you can use it often, you probably won't want to stick around for the opponents full attack - because it is going to auto-hit you every time.
Which brings us to armor class. At about 15th level, your going to really have to go crazy to get your AC above a 22, or 26 with a shield spell. The fighter is walking around with a 37, or 32 without shield. The idea that a blink spell, or even displacement makes up for this does not work in my play experience.
And let's not forget damage. Is there a single wizard spell to up your weapon damage? Magic weapon gives a modest bonus (unless your weapon is already magic), Enlarge Person? The reach is great, but your AC is going to drop into the teens. Same with Rage.
The Beast/Giant/Dragon Shape spells offer some interesting options, but do very little for your AC, and the enhancement bonuses don't stack with items, or spells like Bulls Strength. Your spell casting becomes limited, and Natural spell only works with Wild Shape.
In my opinion, the solution to the EK's problems can be solved with two simple abilities:
- A +1/level armor rating (max: +10 at 10th level) This does not stack with armor bonuses from other sources, and is not subject to enhancements from other sources such as magic vestment. It allows the EK to wear the equivalent of +2 Full plate at around 16th level.
- Ability to deliver touch spells with a weapon attack (basically as if it was a natural attack.)
I think these relatively minor abilities would allow the EK to be effective and fun in melee combat, without being as good as the core classes. It would allow the EK to function as a fighter/magic-user, not just a guy with good aim for touch spells.
|
|
Wear a +5 Mithral Breastplate of Twilight and carry an animated shield +5. There. AC problem solved. If not solved yet, look into rings of protection, amulets of natural armor, ioun stones or the damn dodge feat.
EKs fill a great role in the current tapestry of player builds. Stop trying to "fix" things and be honest with yourselves: you're just trying to "power up" things.
Also, get that concept in your mind: all classes are not created equal. And there's good reasons for that. Anything else would lead to a "no class" system where every PC starts the same. Sorry, if I want that, go play Oblivion or Fable, but keep these concepts out of D&D, as cool as they may be elsewhere. D&D is not built for "solo" games for "equal strength PCs".
You think wizards are all powerful at high level? sorry. Not without their muscle (i.e. fighters/monsters) acting as meat shield... and obviously those who make this statement have not met MY LITTLE FRIEND! [introducing poison crossbow and/or poison in dumbledore's food and/or a thousand of other things such as fighters actually disarming the weak wizard out of his stupid wand/staff and/or hello there halfling grappler gang!]
I think you make my point perfectly P-Dragon - Why not just get Twilight armor, and an Animated shield?
Because Twilight does not exist in Pathfinder, and Animated still subjects the user to spell failure. The other options, rings, amulets, etc. were already included, and still the poor EK's AC is about 10 lower then the fighter, who also has those items. This means that a monster about equal in CR auto-hits on almost every attack. Where does this leave you in a combat? When you look at the details, those "get this item..." "or cast this spell..." ideas really don't make the EK worth having in melee.
"EKs fill a great role in the current tapestry of player builds." I agree that they should, but the reality is that they end up having good aim with ray spells and the magic of a sidekick. They can't melee with a real opponent because they have almost the same defenses as a low level wizard. Open up the beta, and take a look at page 293 - Table 12-6 Monster statistics by CR. Put an EK up against a opponent equal higher in CR and see what you can do to effect it? Most of those creatures will hit every time, and kill you in a round or two.
Once again, NOT TRYING TO MAKE IT AS POWERFUL AS A WIZARD OR FIGHTER. But there seems to be a demand for a Fighter/arcane caster who can at least contribute something to melee, and I don't think we are quite there yet.
I seriously considered what there was in core to offer Eldritch Knight. I have to agree it's sort of lacking. AC will tend to be low, and to hit bonus will suffer a lot (fighters will have about +5 more to hit by 12th level and 5-6 more AC).
Here's an idea I've been mulling around. Note that if you follow the fighter's progression assuming entry with Wizard 5/Fighter 1 you'll see the pattern.
1: Channel 1/day (as for spellsword)
2: 10% ignore arcane spell failure
3: Channel 2/day
4: Weapon training (as fighters)
5: Channel 3/day
6: 20% ignore arcane spell failure
7: Channel 4/day
8: Weapon training
9: Channel 5/day
10: Spell critical
Same casting progression, saves and all that.
In the grand scheme of things, I don't think Diverse Training offers much. I can't find anything that has prerequisites of raw wizard or sorceror levels, and I have mixed feelings on access to fighter-only feats.
If we wanted to go a very spellsword direction...
Change the requirements to include Weapon Focus (any martial weapon)
1: Channel 1/day, weapon specialization
2: 10% ignore arcane spell failure
3: Channel 2/day
4: Weapon training
5: Channel 3/day
6: 20% ignore arcane spell failure
7: Channel 4/day
8: Weapon training
9: Channel 5/day
10: Spell critical
[u]Weapon Specialization[/u]: Gain Weapon Specialization with the martial weapon you chose with Weapon Focus, channeling can only be performed with this type of weapon.
I seriously considered what there was in core to offer Eldritch Knight. I have to agree it's sort of lacking. AC will tend to be low, and to hit bonus will suffer a lot (fighters will have about +5 more to hit by 12th level and 5-6 more AC).
Here's an idea I've been mulling around. Note that if you follow the fighter's progression assuming entry with Wizard 5/Fighter 1 you'll see the pattern.
1: Channel 1/day (as for spellsword)
2: 10% ignore arcane spell failure
3: Channel 2/day
4: Weapon training (as fighters)
5: Channel 3/day
6: 20% ignore arcane spell failure
7: Channel 4/day
8: Weapon training
9: Channel 5/day
10: Spell criticalSame casting progression, saves and all that.
In the grand scheme of things, I don't think Diverse Training offers much. I can't find anything that has prerequisites of raw wizard or sorceror levels, and I have mixed feelings on access to fighter-only feats.
If we wanted to go a very spellsword direction...
Change the requirements to include Weapon Focus (any martial weapon)
1: Channel 1/day, weapon specialization
2: 10% ignore arcane spell failure
3: Channel 2/day
4: Weapon training
5: Channel 3/day
6: 20% ignore arcane spell failure
7: Channel 4/day
8: Weapon training
9: Channel 5/day
10: Spell critical[u]Weapon Specialization[/u]: Gain Weapon Specialization with the martial weapon you chose with Weapon Focus, channeling can only be performed with this type of weapon.
This is a great idea, and the requirement of Weapon focus is fine.