Mirror, Mirror wrote: Well, you are correct, but my contention is that the EK is NOT a "fighter who casts" but rather a "caster who fights". From that angle, they gain larger HD, full BAB, and 3 free combat feats (possibly a bonus if Weapon Specilization is important for some reason). And they loose 2 levels of spellcasting. That's a hit, but you get lots of survivability and versatility in return. Except that if that in a battle, he's better off just being a caster who casts. They are not "quite capable in melee combat" and the only time they're "hewing down their opponents with steel" is when those opponents are helpless or hideously weak.
And if he's only a caster who casts, you have to start wondering what the class gets that's worth two caster levels.
Mirror, Mirror wrote:
Really? *checks original post*
Sorry, I must have missed your time constraint somewhere.
I was thinking that when I wrote the original post. I just didn't write it. Sorry.
But I still disagree with you. A 20th level wizard can nuke a city. A 10th level wizard depends on the fire getting out of control, all the fire fighters getting all bundled up neat enough for a cloud kill, having spent plenty of gold on backup scrolls, etc.
A Man In Black wrote: Except that if that in a battle, he's better off just being a caster who casts. They are not "quite capable in melee combat" and the only time they're "hewing down their opponents with steel" is when those opponents are helpless or hideously weak.
And if he's only a caster who casts, you have to start wondering what the class gets that's worth two caster levels.
Ray's and Touch spells are pretty good for them. Easily enough Weapon Focus feats to apply to them, and possibly Specilization.
D6 to D10 is avg 2hp/lvl. With full BAB they can qualify for other feats faster and gain multiple attacks. It's not great, to be sure, but it's also not a big cost, either. The cost is just enough to prevent all wizards from taking EK.
And, of course, the aforementioned capstone, which has the potential to be fantastic, depending on the spell you choose.
But a multiclassed character is NOT playing 1st string anyway. They are providing a flanking bonus to the rogue, or assisting the kill with the fighter, or protecting the OTHER wiz from enemies. He gains the versatility to CHOOSE what he wants to do, and what action is most useful. Besides just "cast a spell", of course.
Mirror, Mirror wrote: Ray's and Touch spells are pretty good for them. Easily enough Weapon Focus feats to apply to them, and possibly Specilization.
D6 to D10 is avg 2hp/lvl. With full BAB they can qualify for other feats faster and gain multiple attacks. It's not great, to be sure, but it's also not a big cost, either. The cost is just enough to prevent all wizards from taking EK.
And, of course, the aforementioned capstone, which has the potential to be fantastic, depending on the spell you choose.
Rays such as? Do the math, show me where +1 or +2 to hit is better than having more, more-powerful rays.
What feats?
Where's the reliably-critting, able-to-enter melee EK who isn't just better off standing back and casting the spell he's hoping to land for free? Is 50 damage on a very, very good day worth having a major chance to not cast your spell at all?
Quote: But a multiclassed character is NOT playing 1st string anyway. Bingo. A multiclassed character has the choice to suck at whatever he wants. You get to be cohort-quality at whatever you want to fail at.
Of course, a single-classed character has that choice too, plus the choice to not suck.
Mirror, Mirror wrote: Ray's and Touch spells are pretty good for them. Easily enough Weapon Focus feats to apply to them, and possibly Specilization.
D6 to D10 is avg 2hp/lvl. With full BAB they can qualify for other feats faster and gain multiple attacks. It's not great, to be sure, but it's also not a big cost, either. The cost is just enough to prevent all wizards from taking EK.
And, of course, the aforementioned capstone, which has the potential to be fantastic, depending on the spell you choose.
Rays such as? Do the math, show me where +1 or +2 to hit is better than having more, more-powerful rays.
What feats?
Where's the reliably-critting, able-to-enter melee EK who isn't just better off standing back and casting the spell he's hoping to land for free? Is 50 damage on a very, very good day worth having a major chance to not cast your spell at all?
Quote: But a multiclassed character is NOT playing 1st string anyway. Bingo. A multiclassed character has the choice to suck at whatever he wants. You get to be cohort-quality at whatever you want to fail at.
Of course, a single-classed character has that choice too, plus the choice to not suck.
A Man In Black wrote: Rays such as? Do the math, show me where +1 or +2 to hit is better than having more, more-powerful rays. Now, at early levels that's the margin, sure.
At later levels, though, the differential gets a lot bigger. A Wiz 6/Fighter 1/EK 10 is a 15th-level caster with +14 BAB vs. the 17th-level wizard's +8 BAB. Throw on +2 more with Weapon Focus (Ray) and Greater Weapon Focus (Ray), and his polar ray is a lot more likely to hit.
He also could get, say, Deadly Stroke, so he does double damage with the spell to a flat-footed opponent. Or Improved Critical, so his rays strike a double-damage critical hit more often (which he's confirming a lot more often than the pure wizard), so he can follow up with a second spell using the EK10 Spell Critical class feature.
see wrote: Now, at early levels that's the margin, sure.
At later levels, though, the differential gets a lot bigger. A Wiz 6/Fighter 1/EK 10 is a 15th-level caster with +14 BAB vs. the 17th-level wizard's +8 BAB. Throw on +2 more with Weapon Focus (Ray) and Greater Weapon Focus (Ray), and his polar ray is a lot more likely to hit.
He also could get, say, Deadly Stroke, so he does double damage with the spell to a flat-footed opponent. Or Improved Critical, so his rays strike a double-damage critical hit more often (which he's confirming a lot more often than the pure wizard), so he can follow up with a second spell using the EK10 Spell Critical class feature.
Polar Ray, 15th level caster = 52.5hp avg damage, once. Yikes, errr, huh?
Robert Young wrote: see wrote: Now, at early levels that's the margin, sure.
At later levels, though, the differential gets a lot bigger. A Wiz 6/Fighter 1/EK 10 is a 15th-level caster with +14 BAB vs. the 17th-level wizard's +8 BAB. Throw on +2 more with Weapon Focus (Ray) and Greater Weapon Focus (Ray), and his polar ray is a lot more likely to hit.
He also could get, say, Deadly Stroke, so he does double damage with the spell to a flat-footed opponent. Or Improved Critical, so his rays strike a double-damage critical hit more often (which he's confirming a lot more often than the pure wizard), so he can follow up with a second spell using the EK10 Spell Critical class feature.
Polar Ray, 15th level caster = 52.5hp avg damage, once. Yikes, errr, huh? horribly weak damage, an empowered scorching ray is better. and it uses a 4th level slot. 63 average damage. better than polar ray. and can be done as soon as caster level 11th. much better than polar ray's 8th level slot. and for the same slot price as polar ray, you can instead tack on quicken spell on top of that empowered scorching ray. and deal 63 average damage as a swift action.
A Man In Black wrote: Bingo. A multiclassed character has the choice to suck at whatever he wants. You get to be cohort-quality at whatever you want to fail at.
Of course, a single-classed character has that choice too, plus the choice to not suck.
What is your defenition of "Not sucking"? Does the multiclass character have to be as good at one thing as a single class character? Does a single class character have to be really really good at one thing (and likely conform to one, maybe two builds) to not suck in your eyes? You set the bar way too high.
Unless you switch to 4e, of course. I knew it. MiB is a 4e plant!
Loopy wrote: Unless you switch to 4e, of course. I knew it. MiB is a 4e plant! DUN DUN DUUNNN!!!!
Seriously in a lot of ways he is right. In others he's wrong. It is more desirable to play single classed characters than multiclassed characters I personally like that. That being said a multiclass character can make themselves 100% useful through the entire portion of the game (exploration, combat, and social situations) while a single class character can find himself being useless some if not most of the time. He's probably not going to be good as a dedicated specialist adn I don't want him to be. But he's not going to flounder while the other guy is across the room playing x-box until the boring goes away.
It also makes for much more interesting NPC encounters. The celestial sorceror/paladin/ek I made is a lot more interesting to have to fight and deal with than a pure paladin or sorceror would be.
Shuriken Nekogami wrote: Robert Young wrote: see wrote: Now, at early levels that's the margin, sure.
At later levels, though, the differential gets a lot bigger. A Wiz 6/Fighter 1/EK 10 is a 15th-level caster with +14 BAB vs. the 17th-level wizard's +8 BAB. Throw on +2 more with Weapon Focus (Ray) and Greater Weapon Focus (Ray), and his polar ray is a lot more likely to hit.
He also could get, say, Deadly Stroke, so he does double damage with the spell to a flat-footed opponent. Or Improved Critical, so his rays strike a double-damage critical hit more often (which he's confirming a lot more often than the pure wizard), so he can follow up with a second spell using the EK10 Spell Critical class feature.
Polar Ray, 15th level caster = 52.5hp avg damage, once. Yikes, errr, huh? horribly weak damage, an empowered scorching ray is better. and it uses a 4th level slot. 63 average damage. better than polar ray. and can be done as soon as caster level 11th. much better than polar ray's 8th level slot. and for the same slot price as polar ray, you can instead tack on quicken spell on top of that empowered scorching ray. and deal 63 average damage as a swift action. Let's not forget if you're using non-core, the ever infamous split twinned scorching ray that elicited groans from my table.
More core though, spell storing weapon. Doesn't make 10 EK insanely good, but it does add a bit of a push. It's all a matter of knowing what to put in that bad boy though. Being a main caster, a heightened second level spell if you've got it, or rod-empowered scorching ray will let you dish out some decent damage. Overall though, the Spellblade was the class I found to be much more playable. Not full casting, but with ways to negate armor failure, channeling spells into a weapon etc. made for some excellent turn one single swing damage. I believe combustion was the spell in my sword along with another I used with sudden empower to dish out over 80 damage at level 9 without critting.
There was cheesier stuff you could do at that level to do more, but that was a build that was good, had around 28 AC, and could perform as a tank thanks to knight levels and the spellblade's d8 HD.
I think a gish class would definately be a step in the right direction. The Duskblade, while it did have scaling problems, was still at least a decent try. There are already a boatload of caster-melee classes, why not have PF throw one into the ring?
Perhaps feats that advance caster level / class features to a limited degree (Let's say 2 or 3 levels higher, but limited by your character level) would be a nice solution? It'd probably be a different feat for each class feature, instead of feats that advance all of them at once, of course (I.E. one that gives you an extra d6 of Sneak Attack, if your Rogue level is two below your total character level)
Loopy wrote: What is your defenition of "Not sucking"? Does the multiclass character have to be as good at one thing as a single class character? At least as capable as a single-classed character in at least one level-appropriate problem-solving task. Most likely, a warrior-mage hybrid is going to be at least as capable as either a ranger or paladin at fighting or a cleric or sorcerer at spellcasting, but it could have some third new specialty.
If you're going to hybridize two classes, you need to split them vertically, by giving a FooBar hybrid some of the things of class Foo does and some of the things that class Bar does. This runs into issues when class Foo or class Bar only do one thing, but since this is 3e there really shouldn't be any class that only does one thing.
Quote: Unless you switch to 4e, of course. I knew it. MiB is a 4e plant! Do not even get me started on 4e. I'm just as sharply critical of 4e as I am of 3e. I mostly don't talk about 4e hereabouts because there's not a lot interesting discussion to be had on the subject here.
A Man In Black wrote: Loopy wrote: What is your defenition of "Not sucking"? Does the multiclass character have to be as good at one thing as a single class character? At least as capable as a single-classed character in at least one level-appropriate problem-solving task. Most likely, a warrior-mage hybrid is going to be at least as capable as either a ranger or paladin at fighting or a cleric or sorcerer at spellcasting, but it could have some third new specialty.
If you're going to hybridize two classes, you need to split them vertically, by giving a FooBar hybrid some of the things of class Foo does and some of the things that class Bar does. This runs into issues when class Foo or class Bar only do one thing, but since this is 3e there really shouldn't be any class that only does one thing.
So, if, perhaps the EK started earlier with the mixing of spells and armed combat in an interesting and mechanically significant way, you would see this as an improvement to the prestige class?
TarkXT wrote:
It also makes for much more interesting NPC encounters. The celestial sorceror/paladin/ek I made is a lot more interesting to have to fight and deal with than a pure paladin or sorceror would be.
The only problem is both Sorcerers and Paladins have abilities that improve with taking Paladin or Sorcerer levels which is severely hampered by going Eldritch Knight such that it is basically just an RP decision since it improves nothing that staying Sorcerer or Paladin would.
Loopy wrote: A Man In Black wrote: Loopy wrote: What is your defenition of "Not sucking"? Does the multiclass character have to be as good at one thing as a single class character? At least as capable as a single-classed character in at least one level-appropriate problem-solving task. Most likely, a warrior-mage hybrid is going to be at least as capable as either a ranger or paladin at fighting or a cleric or sorcerer at spellcasting, but it could have some third new specialty.
If you're going to hybridize two classes, you need to split them vertically, by giving a FooBar hybrid some of the things of class Foo does and some of the things that class Bar does. This runs into issues when class Foo or class Bar only do one thing, but since this is 3e there really shouldn't be any class that only does one thing.
So, if, perhaps the EK started earlier with the mixing of spells and armed combat in an interesting and mechanically significant way, you would see this as an improvement to the prestige class? Yes, I believe that is the goal overall, at least for myself.
A Man In Black wrote: Rays such as? Do the math, show me where +1 or +2 to hit is better than having more, more-powerful rays. 6th level spell Disintegrate. If you has 2 more spell levels, you could cast...no ray spell at 7th level. You could metamagic it to...silent? Still?
13th lvl wiz has BAB +6. Assuming dex and wf: ray (to keep things as equal as possible.
Wiz5/Ftr1/EK7 has BAB +10 and +1 from Greater Weapon Focus. That's a total of +5 over the wiz, or +25%.
Avg dmg of disintegrate at CL13: 91. Avg dmg at CL11: 77. Difference=14dmg. Assuming 50% chance to hit, wiz does 45.5, EK does 57.75. Difference=12.25.
Do I need to state my conclusions? Of course. Despite a 14 pt advantage in dmg from caster level, the +25% chance to hit nets a much larger bonus to damage when the attack roll is factored in. Overcoming the deficit, the EK's +25% chance to hit is actually worth 12.25pts of dmg.
As usual, you look at a single aspect of the class (the class abilities) and draw conclusions. How you missed that the better BAB would substantially increase the usefulness of touch and ray spells is beyond me.
BTW, the cat was correct that an empowered scorching ray would be very viable, and at a lower level cost.
A Man In Black wrote: Where's the reliably-critting, able-to-enter melee EK who isn't just better off standing back and casting the spell he's hoping to land for free? Is 50 damage on a very, very good day worth having a major chance to not cast your spell at all? You have ignored my argument that the EK is not a "fighter who casts" but a "caster who fights"? You want that, play a duskblade...
A Man In Black wrote: Bingo. A multiclassed character has the choice to suck at whatever he wants. You get to be cohort-quality at whatever you want to fail at. Your definition of "suck" is highly context dependent, and very much tied to your own personal experience. I play a Warmage, and i love sending the DM links to threads where people rant on how it "sucks". He laughs too. Apparently, we're just laughing fools and are not playing the same game as everyone else.
Because, you see, if we WERE playing the same game, them everyone would know that the party makeup and encounter types dictate who will "suck" and who is great. Saying that the EK is not a powerful a caster or a fighter as a pure character is factual. Saying they "suck" because of that is subjective nonsense.
You might as well say "I think this class is horrible because I prefer to play something else." You add nothing to the discussion.
Mirror, Mirror wrote: A Man In Black wrote: Where's the reliably-critting, able-to-enter melee EK who isn't just better off standing back and casting the spell he's hoping to land for free? Is 50 damage on a very, very good day worth having a major chance to not cast your spell at all? This question still goes unanswered.
Mirror, Mirror wrote: You have ignored my argument that the EK is not a "fighter who casts" but a "caster who fights"? You want that, play a duskblade... I'm sorry, but I don't see a Duskblade in Pathfinder.
Mirror, Mirror wrote: A Man In Black wrote: Bingo. A multiclassed character has the choice to suck at whatever he wants. You get to be cohort-quality at whatever you want to fail at. Your definition of "suck" is highly context dependent, and very much tied to your own personal experience. I play a Warmage, and i love sending the DM links to threads where people rant on... Again, I thought we were discussing Pathfinder, and I do not see a Warmage here. Though the question does need to be asked...if the Eldritch Knight is in such good shape, why are you playing this Warmage instead?
Moro wrote: Again, I thought we were discussing Pathfinder, and I do not see a Warmage here. Though the question does need to be asked...if the Eldritch Knight is in such good shape, why are you playing this Warmage instead? We are, and the Warmage is in a 3.5 game. but it is often panned as a terrible class, which is why the comparison was made. I am critical of the argument itself, not the substance.
But, since you ask, I am actually playing my Warmage somewhat like how I would play a EK. Frankly, I wanted entry into the class at lvl 1, which is why constantly are trying to revitalize the Duskblade or are asking Paizo for a gish base class.
Were Celiph to die and I brought in a new character, and if it were in PF, not 3.5, I may just bring in an EK and play him very much the same.
In any case, the EK has full access to the Wiz/Sor spell list. The Warmage has a very narrowly defined focus. With an EK, I could play a Warmage one day and a Beguiler the next, or some mixture of both. And I would have more hp, better weapon access, better BAB, and fighter feat access.
Mirror, Mirror wrote: Moro wrote: Again, I thought we were discussing Pathfinder, and I do not see a Warmage here. Though the question does need to be asked...if the Eldritch Knight is in such good shape, why are you playing this Warmage instead? We are, and the Warmage is in a 3.5 game. but it is often panned as a terrible class, which is why the comparison was made. I am critical of the argument itself, not the substance.
But, since you ask, I am actually playing my Warmage somewhat like how I would play a EK. Frankly, I wanted entry into the class at lvl 1, which is why constantly are trying to revitalize the Duskblade or are asking Paizo for a gish base class.
Were Celiph to die and I brought in a new character, and if it were in PF, not 3.5, I may just bring in an EK and play him very much the same.
In any case, the EK has full access to the Wiz/Sor spell list. The Warmage has a very narrowly defined focus. With an EK, I could play a Warmage one day and a Beguiler the next, or some mixture of both. And I would have more hp, better weapon access, better BAB, and fighter feat access. Ahh, okay, very good reasons in all.
Moro wrote: Mirror, Mirror wrote: A Man In Black wrote: Where's the reliably-critting, able-to-enter melee EK who isn't just better off standing back and casting the spell he's hoping to land for free? Is 50 damage on a very, very good day worth having a major chance to not cast your spell at all? This question still goes unanswered. Actually, it was answered. I answered it when I stated that the EK is not a "fighter who casts" but a "caster who fights". The question is framed as a straw man. I could come up with specific examples, and those would be ignored or dismissed. I could call up the value of RP and the fun of the player, but that would also be dismissed as irrelevant. I could point out that with certain builds (brilliant energy weapons, for instance) the difficulty to cast a touch spell would be the same, and the spell could just be gravy compared to engaging the enemy in meele and pinning it for the rest of the team, but DPS considerations like MiB's depend on soloing encounters, not teamwork.
So, instead, I say that the premis being used to ask the question is irrelevant to the true strength of the EK. It would be like asking "What spells cast inside an anti-magic spell would be better than pulling out a weapon and attacking the zombie?"
Mirror, Mirror wrote: Moro wrote: Mirror, Mirror wrote: A Man In Black wrote: Where's the reliably-critting, able-to-enter melee EK who isn't just better off standing back and casting the spell he's hoping to land for free? Is 50 damage on a very, very good day worth having a major chance to not cast your spell at all? This question still goes unanswered. Actually, it was answered. I answered it when I stated that the EK is not a "fighter who casts" but a "caster who fights". The question is framed as a straw man. I could come up with specific examples, and those would be ignored or dismissed. I could call up the value of RP and the fun of the player, but that would also be dismissed as irrelevant. I could point out that with certain builds (brilliant energy weapons, for instance) the difficulty to cast a touch spell would be the same, and the spell could just be gravy compared to engaging the enemy in meele and pinning it for the rest of the team, but DPS considerations like MiB's depend on soloing encounters, not teamwork.
So, instead, I say that the premis being used to ask the question is irrelevant to the true strength of the EK. It would be like asking "What spells cast inside an anti-magic spell would be better than pulling out a weapon and attacking the zombie?" Actually, the question is being asked as it pertains to the capstone of the PrC, but as you pointed out, that capstone goes completely against the actual direction that the class takes as a whole.
In other words, the way the penultimate ability of the class is designed leads one to believe that the EK should play differently than it does.
Lurking in this thread and having a quick scan of others like it I think the issue is player expectation rather than the game.
To me a succesful adventuring group complements each other each fulfilling a specific niche, helping each other.
What I see is people wanting to be able to do everything on their own and not be reliant on the help from others.
This game isn't about soloing modules.
I don't expect any of my PCs to be able to solo a mod or be all things. I expect my PC to be good at what he does, with maybe a minor dabble if the character concept needs it, and what he isn't good at the other PCs to excell.
I don't see a problem with multiclassing because I understand that my PC will never be good at everything. I'm happy to play that PC in that niche.
However what I do see when this subject crops up is the usual "I want a Fighter/Wizard" argument. You are taking two classes which are chalk and cheese and wondering why splicing them together is (I hate this phrase...) sub-optimal.
Its all a bit like some vegetarian's wanting bacon. Yep it looks and tastes something like it but it never can be bacon.
Moro wrote: Actually, the question is being asked as it pertains to the capstone of the PrC, but as you pointed out, that capstone goes completely against the actual direction that the class takes as a whole.
In other words, the way the penultimate ability of the class is designed leads one to believe that the EK should play differently than it does.
Agreed, there is not much synergy in the PrC, which I would have prefered them change. I say it's ok, not great. Arcane Archer is probably a better PrC, as is Dragon Disciple.
However, it is still playable, and not nearly so awful as some make it out to be. It is not perfect by any stretch, though.
Well, this is one of main issues with pathfinder. To multiclass or not to multiclass. Theres always going to be some conflict but I do think that to begin Pathfinder found that balance easier. The six new classes I believe tilted the balance back in favor of a single class emphasis.
solo vs niche role
I walk the gray area in this argument. I can't side with the "everyone has a role" mentality because I find it limited and ridiculous to expect one person to fulfill a roll. Oops, he's down, now what? It also doesn't allow character freedom. "Well I guess we can't play because we don't have a cleric or wizard." While I don't want one or two character to be able to do Everything, I would like to be able to play a game with any combination of players no matter what the class's they are.
power vs versatility
If its all about power then I wouldn't have been playing dnd all these years. Now I have no problem with being "Good" at what you do or "efficient" as many of the gamers I play with say, but I've also seen uber powermages pull out a chair and sit for half the game in half the encounters. I think versatility is a must for a good game and especially for "not complete" games. By that I mean, only 3 players or "we don't have a cleric/fighter/wizard today"
prestige classes
Now I think most people have a bad taste in there mouth do to the million prestige classes from 3.5. I feel there is a place for them and only need to make sure the name "PRESTIGE" is emphasized again in prestige classes. I believe pathfinder very clearly limited prestige classes and made a point not to add any new ones for a while. I believe it is now the time to start slowly adding them back. Paizo has done a great job of design, playtesting and implementing classes. I also think staying on top of things with slight rule changes here and there means that very well done prestige classes can be done again.
I fall into the group liking to mulitclass. I like to have a character that can play in a group of 2 other people to 4 other people and still have a viable chance to complete task. I like to be versitle personally but like having people that are really good at a few things. I don't like characters that can do one thing and ONLY one thing.
That all being said. I think paizo has done a great job in making single class characters viable and well put together. I think the new classes make it much harder to multiclass. I would like the pendulum to swing back towards the center.
I am fine with the way Paizo is leaning - give the versatility and specialization choices in the classes themselves instead of a thousand PrCs. The only problem is they left the decrepit and underpowered OGL PrCs.
I would rather see the trend continue that we have seen with the summoner, witch, ....
ie more base classes rather than new prestige classes.
OF course I would rather start play as what I want than wade through levels of X Y or Z to get there.
Loopy wrote: So, if, perhaps the EK started earlier with the mixing of spells and armed combat in an interesting and mechanically significant way, you would see this as an improvement to the prestige class? That would be a start on fixing the class, but you can't just make the class stronger along the same lines, or else you really do overshadow both the warrior and the mage. It becomes necessary to decide on a more specific goal of what the class should do, be it either spellcasting with some sort of martial twist (which is closest to what the class actually does right now) or melee combat with some sort of magical assistance (which is what most people seem to want). At that point you are no longer tweaking the class and you're writing a new one, unfortunately.
I don't blame the PF writers for not fixing the EK; if you just buff it so it's worth taking it's too good. That's a conceptual problem, one you can't fix with tweaks. I do blame them for reprinting it, and I especially blame them for claiming that it's fine for some choices to be traps.
Mirror, Mirror wrote: 6th level spell Disintegrate. If you has 2 more spell levels, you could cast...no ray spell at 7th level. You could metamagic it to...silent? Still? Both of them are better off casting Flesh to Stone, since Disintegrate can miss and they both have a negligible effect on a save.
Quote: As usual, you look at a single aspect of the class (the class abilities) and draw conclusions. How you missed that the better BAB would substantially increase the usefulness of touch and ray spells is beyond me. Oh, I didn't look at just a single aspect of the class abilities. That's how I noticed the shortage of worthwhile rays.
A Man In Black wrote: Both of them are better off casting Flesh to Stone, since Disintegrate can miss and they both have a negligible effect on a save. The issue was RAYS, remember? Arguing the viability of damaging vs save or die spells is quite beyond the scope here.
A Man In Black wrote: Oh, I didn't look at just a single aspect of the class abilities. That's how I noticed the shortage of worthwhile rays. And touch attacks. You have the HP, you can easily have the AC, you have the BAB, might as well get into the thick of it. There are rays and touch spells at every level, many of which never get used without Spectral Hand, which, btw, is a much better spell for a EK than a pure caster for much the same reasons outlined before. Plus metamagic, which is also quite good for the EK (and not so much for the pure caster).
Mirror, Mirror wrote: The issue was RAYS, remember? Arguing the viability of damaging vs save or die spells is quite beyond the scope here. No, the issue was and still is what the EK PRC brings to the table, and I contend that casting Disintegrate more effectively in combat is a useless ability because Disintegrate is of only situational value in combat at best.
Now, you mention touch attacks, so go for it. Explain how the EK uses touch attacks and rays to be as effective overall as a straight caster (and explain how metamagic is more effective for a caster who's two caster levels behind, while you're at it). I see the possibility that I'm wrong, here, but I don't see the worthwhile rays/touch spells to make it work.
A Man In Black wrote: Now, you mention touch attacks, so go for it. Explain how the EK uses touch attacks and rays to be as effective overall as a straight caster (and explain how metamagic is more effective for a caster who's two caster levels behind, while you're at it). I see the possibility that I'm wrong, here, but I don't see the worthwhile rays/touch spells to make it work. Some useful touch spells:
Bestow Curse - Will save, used to disable opponents or critically injure high HD/low CR creatures (like Magical Beasts, animals, etc.)
Poison - Fort save, possible massive damage/weakening opponent with poor fort saves.
Chill Touch - Multiple uses, can be used in tandem with other touches, no save for damage, possible str damage.
Shocking Grasp - No save, ok dmg for a single strike
Touch of Idiocy - No save, ranges from crippling to mildly annoying, useful against enemy casters
And if you want high level spells:
Imprisonment - Will save or be gone
As to the metamagic issue, it's more a case that a pure wizard needs to get the most out of every spell because he has no alternative. Thus, he wants to use the highest level spells possible. A multiclass is already behind, so will be looking more and more at using lower level spells to maximium effect, hence metamagic.
EK's also benefit more from the "Form of the X" type spells, since they have higher base hp's and BAB. Something with multiple attacks and Chill Touch makes that 1st level spell almost look worthwhile.
This, plus rays, are options that pure casters are more likely to shy away from, since they have lower BAB.
Mirror, Mirror wrote: Some useful touch spells:
Bestow Curse - Will save, used to disable opponents or critically injure high HD/low CR creatures (like Magical Beasts, animals, etc.)
Poison - Fort save, possible massive damage/weakening opponent with poor fort saves.
Chill Touch - Multiple uses, can be used in tandem with other touches, no save for damage, possible str damage.
Shocking Grasp - No save, ok dmg for a single strike
Touch of Idiocy - No save, ranges from crippling to mildly annoying, useful against enemy casters
And if you want high level spells:
Imprisonment - Will save or be gone
Slow overshadows Bestow Curse, Poison is not a wizard spell, Chill Touch is a spiked gauntlet with a minor stat damage effect sometimes and generally not worth the action to cast, Shocking Grasp is dead weight by the time you can even take EK levels, Touch of Idiocy generally ranges from mildly annoying to mildly annoying and again is off the radar before you can take EK levels, and Imprisonment is the same level as Dominate Monster and Mass Hold Monster.
Quote: As to the metamagic issue, it's more a case that a pure wizard needs to get the most out of every spell because he has no alternative. Thus, he wants to use the highest level spells possible. A multiclass is already behind, so will be looking more and more at using lower level spells to maximium effect, hence metamagic. That makes no sense. When you metamagic those spells, they cease to be low-level spells. How is having fewer high-level slots an advantage when comes to using metamagic?
Quote: EK's also benefit more from the "Form of the X" type spells, since they have higher base hp's and BAB. Something with multiple attacks and Chill Touch makes that 1st level spell almost look worthwhile. That doesn't make them combat capable, and requires time spent buffing up.
That they are better at something doesn't make them viable unless that thing is worth doing. You listed a bunch of spells an EK is better off not casting, and again described EKs as melee characters when they suck at melee by your own description.
Really late on this conversation, just want to say a few things:
1) The OP's statement about the EK not standing up to a 10th level full fighter or wizard--that shouldn't be the comparison. It should be how the character contributes in a party.
2) I find that if you want to do stuff like arena combat/DPR-lympics, then single classing is usually the way to go for core Pathfinder. I find that in games I have played and run, multiclass characters normally stand up very well as part of a party, and when you end up in parties with unusual make-ups, they become extraordinarily useful because of their unique skillsets and the way they contribute to the group--filling in multiple roles in a party exactly as they should.
Warrior-mage multiclasses are hard to manage WELL, indeed -- because you can't play them exactly like a fighter nor exactly like a wizard. You have to devise your own unique strategies, and make sure your character and build concepts are strong. And as a reference to above, they work best working with a party, not solo (though solo they do have more resources than single class solos).
The only... troublesome warrior-mage multiclass I've seen was a 3.5 Ranger-Wizard (in my "Slay the Immortal" campaign that Lathiira chronicles here)... he really struggled at first with wanting to be a ranged blaster, and realizing his lower spell levels were hindering him, as was his lower BAB for hitting creatures with his bow. But two things happened--
First, he learned to tweak his spell list so he could buff himself and then contribute to the party blasting everything with his bow from a distance. He also learned a lot of support spells that, between those and his ranger abilities, made him absolutely invaluable outside combat (and our sessions have a lot of non-combat action).
Second, Pathfinder happened, and the Arcane Archer stopped sucking. I allowed a slight rebuild so he could level a bit into Arcane Archer, his abilities synchronized a little better. He's a fantastic party member all around.
Same party has a Fighter 1 Sorcerer (Arcane Bloodline) 6 Eldritch Knight 10 who is kicking ass and taking names (the Arcane Bloodline's metamagic abilities really help--he can auto-Still Spell so he can get off his Crit Capstone ability without risking arcane spell failure). Now, I imagine it might be tough mid or low levels to play that build but at least at high levels it's working out great. I admit based on my personal observation only--which comes with its own grain of salt--I don't really get where the gripes about Eldritch Knight are coming from, but I suppose it's a YMMV thing.
Robert Young wrote: see wrote: Now, at early levels that's the margin, sure.
At later levels, though, the differential gets a lot bigger. A Wiz 6/Fighter 1/EK 10 is a 15th-level caster with +14 BAB vs. the 17th-level wizard's +8 BAB. Throw on +2 more with Weapon Focus (Ray) and Greater Weapon Focus (Ray), and his polar ray is a lot more likely to hit.
He also could get, say, Deadly Stroke, so he does double damage with the spell to a flat-footed opponent. Or Improved Critical, so his rays strike a double-damage critical hit more often (which he's confirming a lot more often than the pure wizard), so he can follow up with a second spell using the EK10 Spell Critical class feature.
Polar Ray, 15th level caster = 52.5hp avg damage, once. Yikes, errr, huh? Well, that high-level ray spells suck (energy drain sucks, too; it's just two castings of a 4th level spell glued together) is more properly a spell design/balance issue, not an EK-vs-wizard design/balance issue. Fix the ray spells such that a sane sorcerer/wizard would consider them (or, theoretically, cut back the power of other high-level spells to the power of the rays), and the high-level EK would then shine with his BAB backing them.
A Man In Black wrote: Slow overshadows Bestow Curse, Poison is not a wizard spell, Chill Touch is a spiked gauntlet with a minor stat damage effect sometimes and generally not worth the action to cast, Shocking Grasp is dead weight by the time you can even take EK levels, Touch of Idiocy generally ranges from mildly annoying to mildly annoying and again is off the radar before you can take EK levels, and Imprisonment is the same level as Dominate Monster and Mass Hold Monster. Never really used any of those spells, I see. That you claim Bestow Curse is worse than Slow is just too amusing for words.
Anyway, there are touch seplls and there are rays. EK looses only 2 casting levels and gains a whole bunch. Obviously this is not your play style, which is fine. 5d6, no save, touch attack, is almost as goos as a rogue sneak attack OF THE SAME LEVEL. Chill Touch is NO SAVE + TOUCH ATTACK and can be pre-cast. Hitting must not be very hard for you, because a bunch of touch attacks generally means every strike hits in my book.
Now, I see enemies make their saves all the time, so casting a spell with ANY save generally means a 50% chance of doing nothing that round. YMMV.
Mirror, Mirror wrote: Never really used any of those spells, I see. That you claim Bestow Curse is worse than Slow is just too amusing for words. Slow beats out Bestow Curse in almost every way. Slow = useable at range, multiple selectable targets, no attack roll, staggered condition = no full attacks, move or fight/not both, reduced speed = battlefield control. Slow is awesome! Bestow Curse = touch range, attack roll, 1 opponent, with very nice debuffs. But anything that puts a caster in grapple range loses points. Slow > Bestow Curse.
Bestow Curse has variety, is permanent, and is also more difficult to get rid off. I'm not agreeing one way or the other for which is better, but Bestow Curse can be used against different foes different ways. It can potentually be an instakill or instimmobilization, or make a target no threat, it can take away high level spells and drop D.C.s, make Feats/Class Abilities not usable, or (if DM allows) do something cool, like make everyone in town dislike the target or cause the to cast only inflicts when they try to cure. Both have advantages.
One of the greater things about Bestow Curse is that it can really hit where it hurts. Dropping Saves for later spells, or things like that.
More options is really what I want to see, more options within the base classes....
PF has done a great job with the sorcerer, now they can create new bloodlines, the rogue with different tricks, ect.
It is easier to integrate new into the existing.
I don't see it as a penalty, but rather incentive to play a character through to it's end levels. It prevents cherry picking classes for their "best" features to min/max...I personally like the capstone abilities and I'm glad they added them.
Beckett wrote: Bestow Curse has variety, is permanent, and is also more difficult to get rid off. I'm not agreeing one way or the other for which is better, but Bestow Curse can be used against different foes different ways. It can potentually be an instakill or instimmobilization, or make a target no threat, it can take away high level spells and drop D.C.s, make Feats/Class Abilities not usable, or (if DM allows) do something cool, like make everyone in town dislike the target or cause the to cast only inflicts when they try to cure. Both have advantages.
One of the greater things about Bestow Curse is that it can really hit where it hurts. Dropping Saves for later spells, or things like that.
This. I personally like dropping enemy CON by 6, especially on high HD creatures (like magic beasts and animals). However, chained with another stat-destroyer (like Ray of Enfeeblement) you can potentially get bonus effectiveness (-17 to str will ruin ANY enemies day).
Slow is good. I like slow. Slow is also limited, and can be countered easily with another common spell: Haste. Not everyone prepares Remove Curse, but Haste is a staple.
And moving into grapple with an EK is no big deal. That is something the EK can do (spell-wise) that the Wiz would rather not.
Beckett wrote: One of the greater things about Bestow Curse is that it can really hit where it hurts. Dropping Saves for later spells, or things like that. Slow hits everything where it hurts. Bestow Curse has lots of utility uses, but many/most of them are uses you can use at your leisure, whereas Slow is never a bad thing to cast on enemies who are trying to kill you right now.
While Bestow Curse is a useful spell, it's overshadowed in combat by Slow. In combat, I've never had Slow prepared and thought, "Man, I wish I had Bestow Curse prepared!"
Bestow curse a decent debuff against a BBEG or in general solo opponent. Have a spectral hand handy and your set to go. Slow is a great debuff as well but better with the rabble. And of course you can use a deadly combo of the two for a really good effect.
Frostflame wrote: Bestow curse a decent debuff against a BBEG or in general solo opponent. Have a spectral hand handy and your set to go. Slow is a great debuff as well but better with the rabble. And of course you can use a deadly combo of the two for a really good effect. You can repeat that all you like, but it takes both an attack roll and a save roll to cause one enemy to lose half its actions...or you can use Slow, which has one roll and causes many enemies to lose half their actions.
Repeating "Bestow Curse is decent!" doesn't change the fact that it's not worth specializing your entire character just to use it when there's Slow.
A Man In Black wrote: Repeating "Bestow Curse is decent!" doesn't change the fact that it's not worth specializing your entire character just to use it when there's Slow. So is it decent or not? -6 to a stat and -4 to all d20 rolls are also options, both of which can easily stack with Slow, or any other de-buffs, for that matter.
Because if it IS decent, then is it something wizards would likely cast? I venture your answer there would be "no", since it requires a touch attack. Well, that IS an attack option the EK can use.
Let's not forget that Slow affects a lot more creatures than Bestow Curse does.
Loopy wrote: Let's not forget that Slow affects a lot more creatures than Bestow Curse does. Well, you don't use Bestow Curse against a horde of mooks. You use it against the Summoners Eidolon, or similar big bad meele monster.
A Man In Black wrote: Frostflame wrote: Bestow curse a decent debuff against a BBEG or in general solo opponent. Have a spectral hand handy and your set to go. Slow is a great debuff as well but better with the rabble. And of course you can use a deadly combo of the two for a really good effect. You can repeat that all you like, but it takes both an attack roll and a save roll to cause one enemy to lose half its actions...or you can use Slow, which has one roll and causes many enemies to lose half their actions.
Repeating "Bestow Curse is decent!" doesn't change the fact that it's not worth specializing your entire character just to use it when there's Slow. Lets see Spectral Hand does remove the little obstacle of being touch. And to add another option a 10th level Mystic Theurge can really combine the two BestowCurse/Slow with his SpellSynthesis ability to an even deadlier effect.
Mirror, Mirror wrote: So is it decent or not? -6 to a stat and -4 to all d20 rolls are also options, both of which can easily stack with Slow, or any other de-buffs, for that matter.
Because if it IS decent, then is it something wizards would likely cast? I venture your answer there would be "no", since it requires a touch attack. Well, that IS an attack option the EK can use.
Neither the EK nor the wizard should. A slowed enemy is almost certainly a non-threat, and can be dealt with using non-limited resources (physical attacks, low-level damage spells) at your leisure.
A Man In Black wrote: Mirror, Mirror wrote: So is it decent or not? -6 to a stat and -4 to all d20 rolls are also options, both of which can easily stack with Slow, or any other de-buffs, for that matter.
Because if it IS decent, then is it something wizards would likely cast? I venture your answer there would be "no", since it requires a touch attack. Well, that IS an attack option the EK can use.
Neither the EK nor the wizard should. A slowed enemy is almost certainly a non-threat, and can be dealt with using non-limited resources (physical attacks, low-level damage spells) at your leisure. Slow requires a save as well Bestow Curse, and slow is alot easier to counteract than a curse. However slow is better for multiple monsters while Bestow curse is more favorable for a solo monster encounter.
|
|
