And I screwed up something on my build. I thought the EK lost 2 caster levels for some reason, but he only loses 1. It cast as a 17th lvl caster, so it gets those lvl 9 spells.
MIB, you asked about another level appropriate encounter where the EK would want to melee and be able to do.
A party fighting 4 16th level mages, all with suitable buff spells up and running (mirror image, displacement, shield, mage armor, etc..).
The EK moves next to the mages (taking any AoOs from their minions, if any), to have as many as possible in a 10' radius of himself. He casts Wall of Stone around them and himself, and to finish it off, he uses his free action to activate his contingency spell (Antimagic field).
The EK is now trapped with the mages in an area where magic does not work, so the mages are likely down to AC 13 (assuming dex 15), while the EK probably has chainmail, a buckler and his dex for AC 20.
The EK has +16/+11/+6/+1 (this is straight BAB without weapons focus etc..), while the mages have +10/+5.
I suspect that the EK will be able to take out the mages quite easily.
Does this meet the requirement for a level appropriate encounter where the EK chooses to melee and not only survives more than one round, but is likely to be successful?
If you are going for CR 20 its 4 17th level mages but that is beside the point. Do you often face an encounter with 4 equal level mages and no other support? This is me asking, because honestly i would never put that kind of encounter in front of my players nor have i played something like it. Just seems like an outlier in terms of encounters. Its also assuming none of these 17th level mages have a disjunction handy to get rid of the anti magic field.
But i do agree when he can finally cast it, anti-magic field is a great trick up the EK's sleeve.
I still dont think it proves the EK is 'competant in combat' though. My own standard is that it should be willing and able to enter combat with melee minded foes. It doesnt have to take them down all by itself, but it should be able to survive combat for a few rounds, and do a reasonable portion of the enemy's hitpoints in damage before it would hypothetically be taken down.
I dont think anyone disputes that an EK can take down an equal level straight mage if magic is somehow excluded, thats pretty much a given. The premise I am looking at is that, in exchange for his couple caster levels the EK is 'pretty good at casting' and 'pretty good in combat'. It is that which i would like to look at.
The Stone Giant Elder with Sorceror levels is actually recommended in the SRD as an advancement option for a Stone Giant Elder. That is not something half baked, that's in the Bestiary as an option, despite the fact that the Stone Giant has no inherent Cha bonus. I think it fair to look at something like a lower CR Outsider advanced, something that has some competence in casting or spell like abilities, and some competence in melee. And yes, I consider Dragons outliers, as they are frequently at the top end of the bell curve, in terms of melee, due to number of attacks, and as servicable casters. I agree that if the EK is meleeing a CR14 or so plus Melee challenge, she is likely to be rendered into a negative hp paste pretty quickly, even with mirror image, stoneskin or any other Wizard buffs.
Dragons are outliers, but they are also classic and virtually ever present. It is/was after all dungeons and dragons.
But you do not test a variable against that same variable, that is a poorly formed test. If you want to evaluate if mixed casting/combat is viable you don't compare it to something with the same flaw. The stone giant sorceror is just silly, yes the bestiary suggests it, but there are lots of things that are not 'ideal' in the books, that doesnt make them a proper choice.
If you want to look at an advanced lower level monster i'd be willing to have a look at it, just make sure the way you are advancing it makes sense against what the monster does originally.
As for the ek not being able to melee a CR 14 melee enemy, that is a serious problem in the class. If it is supposed to be 'pretty good' at combat, it needs to be able to at least survive a few rounds of combat with an enemy that is 6 levels lower then it. If it cant do that, it's not a viable class, and the only time it is useful is when you can park an antimagic field over some enemy casters and keep them there.
Can't disjunction from inside the anti-magic field.
Catching four mages all in the same anti magic field however is problematic.
If you are going for CR 20 its 4 17th level mages but that is beside the point. Do you often face an encounter with 4 equal level mages and no other support? This is me asking, because honestly i would never put that kind of encounter in front of my players nor have i played something like it. Just seems like an outlier in terms of encounters. Its also assuming none of these 17th level mages have a disjunction handy to get rid of the anti magic field.
That is why I mentioned taking AoOs by the mages minions. I was assuming that the EK would have mirror image up to help absorb any hits, but that the spell would be lost when the antimagic field went up. I wasn't seeing the party take on just 4 mages, but also their mages. I would not matter much if these were 20th level mages, the attack sequence would work equally well against any level mages. Actually, my math on the BABs was based on a 20th level EK and 20th level mages.
And, as Abraham spalding mentioned, the mages would not be able to cast disjunction from inside the antimagic field.
But i do agree when he can finally cast it, anti-magic field is a great trick up the EK's sleeve.
It is a nice combination for an EK, being able to neutralize magic and then melee the heavily magic dependent opponents.
I still dont think it proves the EK is 'competant in combat' though. My own standard is that it should be willing and able to enter combat with melee minded foes. It doesnt have to take them down all by itself, but it should be able to survive combat for a few rounds, and do a reasonable portion of the enemy's hitpoints in damage before it would hypothetically be taken down.
But that is not what was being asked, nor what others are saying should be the tactics of an EK. Spells vs melee, melee vs spells.
But, I will come up with a few other examples of where the EK can competently melee opponents.
I dont think anyone disputes that an EK can take down an equal level straight mage if magic is somehow excluded, thats pretty much a given. The premise I am looking at is that, in exchange for his couple caster levels the EK is 'pretty good at casting' and 'pretty good in combat'. It is that which i would like to look at.
I am not sure what you are looking for. In my example I showed how an EK could effectively use his spells to neutralize spell casters and then effectively use his melee skills to take them out.
Also, an EK can also be effective with a ranged weapon, he is not limited to only spells and melee.
Catching four mages all in the same anti magic field however is problematic.
Oh, I agree that catching all 4 would be difficult, but you would be able to catch at least one and would have a fair chance of catching more, depending on the map set-up.
And catching one was all that was needed for the EK to pass MiB's test of taking on in melee a CR appropriate opponent. Or at least my understanding of MiB's test request.
Man .... this thread. lol
Well, someone already posted up the "capable" melee-type spells, actually, the spells that make the EK superior. Displacement - what fighter can get a 50% miss chance? Haste - extra attack and damage, but also, layered with Displacement - mirror image. Not only 50% miss chance, but a "hit" just gets wasted in an image on top of it ... my god!!! It's amazing.
Combined with the 39 AC someone else posted up - those are solid tactics - even taking Haste out of it, displacement and mirror image would kick melee-butt!!!
Then the stoneskin and energy resistance (for the black dragon challenge) have much longer durations and are easy to say "have been on" for a while already. Hell - at the caster level we're talking about, even the others are likely to be "on" already, too.
One more nice whammy, though - Contingency spell. Put ... I don't know - some spell - whatever you like, and it's going to be one more defensive thing that's instantly up and working with condition of "a black dragon closing to melee with me" or along those lines (again - to match the challenge).
Oh!!! One more thought - since the build can get 9th level spells ... what would be a dream for a melee-wielding person that can auto-cast on crits w/a high crit weapon ... oh, yeah. Time Stop!
Pfft! "not capable in melee" .... sheesh!
Someone also mentioned the "how many rounds of pre-buff" as well, and IMO, 2-3, even 4 is more than fair. In 90% of the encounter situations that high up - it's all about the PC's being more active in the situation (ie: they know they're looking for X, but X isn't generally aware). I'd give them a PC edge of at least that much (so 2-4 spells "up" before combat starts is fair, IMO) - if the baddies know about the PC's, though - they tend to get as much themselves - depends on the scenario, though. Mostly it's PC's stomping in somewhere suddenly - so no pre-round buffs for the baddies (except what they have for gear, etc already up and working).
EK becomes devastating in melee on account of the things that work purely in a defensive stance for a mage working out to be a whole layer of protection that most melee types can only dream about and envy.
Plus, if the EK really wants to boost up "to hit" there's that Tenser's Transformation (it'll end other spell use up to that point, however most spells can be up and working at that point and he's just melee-nutty and can still use wands, etc for more uses of his lower level spells if needed - like if he runs out of mirror image - he can use a wand or something and get it going again).
I really think that insistence upon EK's as "useless" in melee is insane. They will DOMINATE melee in a way that other melee-types can't really approach. Sure - DRP *might* be less, but then EK's at the level we're talking about here have that "cast a spell when you crit" working for them.
So ... equip the EK with a scimitar, enchanted like a mo-fo (especially with Keen) and watch the melee damage couple instantly with additional spell damage from their crits. With displacement and mirror image working in tandem, watch whatever is trying to melee them whiff terribly, and when they do manage to hit - only hit a false target. Meanwhile, the EK's full attacking with a high-crit threat weapon that cast his spells as a free action as he crits.
Doing some quick comparisons of the gish I posted, with Haste, Stoneskin, and Shield spells up trading full attacks with the Elder Black Dragon (CR16). I know its dumb to trade full attacks with a dragon, just using this for melee comparison. I am assuming no criticals, even though I am using a falchion with improved critical and staggering, and roughly half my hits will be crit threats:
EK AC 41 HP 217
Dragon AC 38, HP 297
Dragon Averages 62.1 DPR, reduced by 30.05/round from stoneskin to 32.05. Stoneskin will last 5 rounds, at which time Ek will have taken 160.25 damage. A 6th round will bring the total damage to 222.35, my EK will drop.
The EK Averages 44.1 DPR with power attack, and 51.3 without it, so I will not be using it. In the 6 rounds I gave the dragon, I will have done 307.8 average damage. The dragon drops.
On round 6, whoever won the initiative will on average win.
edit: I corrected my math, was .05 off for all my hit values.
I'm coming late to the conversation, so sorry if I'm moving the goalposts here, but the Dragon is a gifted spell caster too, if the Eldritch Knight can buff with those spells, so can the dragon. It has Mage armour Caster level 11, so it is safe to assume its AC will be 42 before the fight begins, as well as blur to cast when it expects a brawl, which will make it more difficult to hit again.
I found something that made me think of this thread. I think I'll let the Professer explain.
This doesn't seem valid to me.he uses his free action to activate his contingency spell (Antimagic field).
How so? Contingency can be set to any condition that the caster desires. Speaking a few words is a free action. So, if the contingency is set to the words "oh snap", then as free action, the caster says the words and the spell that the contingency is holding is activated.
Also the wall of stone spell gives a save if you are enclosing people in it.
Than you leave a 5' wide entrance behind you. If they are all in reach of your weapons, then it would be highly unlikely that they would be able to get by you.
Beyond the rest of the inherent problems with the scenario of course
What are you seeing as the inherent problems with the scenario?
I am not following the statement....
he uses his free action to activate his contingency spell (antimagic field)....
Not sure which part you aren't following.
I was attempting to say that when the contingency spell was cast days ago, the spell that was cast with it was antimagic field.
Contingency can be set to any condition that the caster desires. Speaking a few words is a free action. So, if the contingency is set to the words "oh snap", then as free action, the caster says the words and the spell that the contingency is holding is activated.
I'm coming late to the conversation, so sorry if I'm moving the goalposts here, but the Dragon is a gifted spell caster too, if the Eldritch Knight can buff with those spells, so can the dragon. It has Mage armour Caster level 11, so it is safe to assume its AC will be 42 before the fight begins, as well as blur to cast when it expects a brawl, which will make it more difficult to hit again.
Yes, I fully agree, the dragon in this situation is dumb. I also forgot he has power attack. It still doesn't change the fact that the EK can both survive and deal damage in melee with limitted use of resources, the complaint that was voiced by MiB and a few others. The EK also does not have the best buffs on, displacement would prevent more damage than stone skin for instance.
The other spell in question can not be the contingent spell it does not meet the requirements.....
Could you explain that please?
To be able to have a 6th level spell as a contingent spell, the caster needs to be an 18th level caster. A 20th level EK could be a 19th level caster with the right trait, or an 18th level caster straight up (1 level fighter, 1st level EK)
It it will make it easier, the EK will have wall of stone in the contingency. Activates the contingency as a free action and then casts antimagic field.
The other spell in question can not be the contingent spell it does not meet the requirements.....Could you explain that please?
To be able to have a 6th level spell as a contingent spell, the caster needs to be an 18th level caster. A 20th level EK could be a 19th level caster with the right trait, or an 18th level caster straight up (1 level fighter, 1st level EK)
It it will make it easier, the EK will have wall of stone in the contingency. Activates the contingency as a free action and then casts antimagic field.
A lot of Gish are 17th caster level, including the one I built, to get up to 16BAB. It gets me an extra 3 damage with power attack, access to greater weapon spec, and an extra iterative attack.
The +22 is wrong. Assuming your going for the 16 bab/17 CL build, this is only +20 with GMW. With the aweful 17 BAB/14 CL, your also STILL at +20. If you went with a BAB 17/CL 15 build and added the orange ioun stone, you would get +21. No practiced spell caster...remember?
As for spells that have minute duration being ¨already on¨...yeah if your DM rolls that way...sure...whatever. But the only spells that are considered always on are the hour durations ones...and even then, only when your high enough level...even then encounters while resting can negate that. 10 min/level gives you 360 minutes at level 20 if your doing the caster heavy build and using a 30k item and extending the spell. 170 otherwise. You know, most dungeons take more time then that to explore. With 1 min/level spells, yeah even more unlikely...and this is at level 20 folks...last I checked, playing level 20 characters is a rather small part of the game. At level 13, before you can afford to waste 30k for 1 CL and have meta rods, your looking at a measly 110 minutes. And even then, your looking at small portions of...
You're right on the BAB. 2 points isn't going to break the EK however, with all the other variables to boost this base. I wasn't talking levels below 16. The claim was that a level 20 EK can't reliably melee with an ancient black dragon and I claim it can. Not sure why you're citing level 13 in this case. I find it untrue that 1 min./level spells dont' run past one battle often, as in the last 2 high level campaign I ran/played, it was quite common. And even if they went off, there are scrolls, wands, etc. to put them back on. The average battle lasts 24-30 seconds… a 19 minute duration Fly spell lasts a long time in-game.
The problem with ongoing debates on gish or any other mixed role characters basically comes down to this, and this thread really hasn't been any different than all of the other "gish" threads. Really it's almost like a Star Trek episode generator, the results are that predictable.
Actually we have hit slightly different ground. At least for my purposes I have redefined what 'good enough' at melee is. That is at least one step in a different direction. We have also almost all agreed that the EK sucks for low level games, and that because most games stop somewhere in mid levels it doesnt server a purpose in those games. It only comes into it's own in higher levels. That is again at least from my experience something slightly different.
What you have on one side are the CharOp gods who've figured out all the minmax options to get 110 percent of potential of a character who consists of six stats and a set of class levels and toys. On the other side you prettty much have everyone else.
I am glad you are brushed up on your hyperbole. I am certainly an optimizer, but I am not a char-op god. There is such a thing as a middle ground you know.
In the world of the Charops, the gish IS a lose class, in the world of Pathfinder Charops, the prestige classes are almost all lose lose, because in the world of the Charops, the monsters are minmaxed and if you're not the god of combat, you're the fodder beneath his boots.
In the world of the Charops roleplaying considerations don't matter because the roleplayers are all dead in the first round of combat. while the Charopers will steamroll thier opposition in 3 rounds or less.
There is no reconciliation between the two points because both sides are playing vastly different games. Just agree to disagree and move on.
It is possible to have roleplay considerations and be concerned about a class' overall performance. What the sane optimizers are concerned with is contribution from each member of the party. In this case, the concern is that the EK cant do anything as well as another class (or do soemthing else better), so having one in your party means your party's overall performance is not going to be the same as a party of the same number of people. This creates a headache for a DM who using the rules as written cant easily put the right level of challenge in front of his party.
That is an optimizer's concern, how something measures up against appropriate CR so that encounters are not harder or easier then they should be.
The funny thing is your little rant is completely out of place. This is not a case of roleplayers vs optimizers, it is actually a case of people who like the EK vs people who think multiclassed casters is not going to work with just what the EK has to offer. Most of the discussion revolved around versatility of the EK vs overall effectiveness as a party member in combat.
On one side you have people who think that with the proper spell usage and tactics the EK can perform admirably at higher levels, on the other side you have people who believe it will have trouble surviving combat against appriopriate level opponents. Both sides of THIS argument are talking mechanics, not roleplay. So please direct your high horse elsewhere.
Fact is still that the EK in a fight with mainly casters can cast anti-magic field and roll around the battlefield slaughtering mages. Truly, no other character in pure core can do what they just did.
I agree its something that the EK does well, but it is untrue that no other character in pure core can do that. A dragon disciple can do so just as easily, and one might even argue a straight Abysal Sorceror would be able to do it as well.
Doing some quick comparisons of the gish I posted, with Haste, Stoneskin, and Shield spells up trading full attacks with the Elder Black Dragon (CR16). I know its dumb to trade full attacks with a dragon, just using this for melee comparison. I am assuming no criticals, even though I am using a falchion with improved critical and staggering, and roughly half my hits will be crit threats:
EK AC 41 HP 217
Dragon AC 38, HP 297Dragon Averages 62.1 DPR, reduced by 30.05/round from stoneskin to 32.05. Stoneskin will last 5 rounds, at which time Ek will have taken 160.25 damage. A 6th round will bring the total damage to 222.35, my EK will drop.
The EK Averages 44.1 DPR with power attack, and 51.3 without it, so I will not be using it. In the 6 rounds I gave the dragon, I will have done 307.8 average damage. The dragon drops.
On round 6, whoever won the initiative will on average win.
edit: I corrected my math, was .05 off for all my hit values.
Could you please post your EK's full attack while hasted and power attacking(IE something like 25/25/20/15/10 2d4+X 15-20 crit +4 to confirm)? Not that I dont trust your math but i would like to do it for myself. I also want to look at it against a dragon with mage armor cast.
Could you please post your EK's full attack while hasted and power attacking(IE something like 25/25/20/15/10 2d4+X 15-20 crit +4 to confirm)? Not that I dont trust your math but i would like to do it for myself. I also want to look at it against a dragon with mage armor cast.Doing some quick comparisons of the gish I posted, with Haste, Stoneskin, and Shield spells up trading full attacks with the Elder Black Dragon (CR16). I know its dumb to trade full attacks with a dragon, just using this for melee comparison. I am assuming no criticals, even though I am using a falchion with improved critical and staggering, and roughly half my hits will be crit threats:
EK AC 41 HP 217
Dragon AC 38, HP 297Dragon Averages 62.1 DPR, reduced by 30.05/round from stoneskin to 32.05. Stoneskin will last 5 rounds, at which time Ek will have taken 160.25 damage. A 6th round will bring the total damage to 222.35, my EK will drop.
The EK Averages 44.1 DPR with power attack, and 51.3 without it, so I will not be using it. In the 6 rounds I gave the dragon, I will have done 307.8 average damage. The dragon drops.
On round 6, whoever won the initiative will on average win.
edit: I corrected my math, was .05 off for all my hit values.
Here ya go. For the full stat block I put it further up. Haste grants the extra +1 to hit and AC
EK hit w/ PA: 25/25/20/15/10 15-20 crit +4 confirm w/ staggared condition
Damage = 42 (2d4 +9 str + 5 weapon + 4 arcane strike + 4 weapon spec +15 PA)
EK hit w/o PA 30/30/25/20/15 15-20 crit +4 confirm w/ staggared condition
Damage = 27 (2d4 +9 str + 5 weapon + 4 arcane strike + 4 weapon spec)
EK AC = 41
since PA is less damage from the to hit loss, here are the numbers I get for each attack, without including crits:
Dragon AC 38 w/ PA
25/25/20/15/10 @ 42 damage
.4/.4/.2/.05/.05
16.8/16.8/6.3/2.1/2.1 Average damage/attack = 44.1 DPR
Dragon AC 38:
30/30/25/20/15 @ 27 damage
.65/.65/.4/.15/.05 %chance to hit
17.55/17.55/10.8/4.05/1.35 Average damage/attack = 51.3 DPR
Dragon AC 42
30/30/25/20/15 @ 27 damage
.45/.45/.2/.05/.05 %chance to hit
12.15/12.15/5.4/1.35/1.35 Average damage/attack = 32.4 DPR
Honestly, with those numbers to hit I would add greater heroism for annother +4 to hit and damage.
Dragon attacks back:
32/31/31/29/29/29
39/18/18/9.5/9.5/23 average damage
.6/.55/.55/.45/.45/.45 % chance to hit
23.4/9.9/9.9/4.275/4.275/10.35 Avg damge = 62.1 DPR, 32.05 after stoneskin.
On average rougly 3 attacks will hit, each doing ~10 damage to the stone skin. Stone skin will last 5 rounds at that rate.
Dragon Power Attacking:
26/25/25/23/23/23
57/30/30/15.5/15.5/41 average damage
.3/.25/.25/.15/.15/.15 % chance to hit
17.1/7.5/7.5/2.325/2.325/6.15 Avg damge = 42.9 DPR - power attacking is worse for him too.
so what it looks like to me is that when buffed the EK can stand up reasonably well to the dragon when sufficiently buffed. Its a hard fight but not impossible. Which seems right to me for a dragon at challenge rating (as others have said usually dragons are at the upper end of the monster power bell curve).
So at least at the upper end of levels the EK fullfills, when buffed, its sword mage role. So then it becomes a question of group style, how much does your group play at high levels, and how often do you have a chance to buff (i have found this is largely dm dependant).
Does that seem a reasonable conclusion to you?
MistWalker
sorry your post made it sound like the contingency was to cast the anti-magic your next post says wall of stone.
I was in a hurry and didn't re-read contingency before I said wall of stone. I apologize for that. You are correct in that wall of stone likely would not be able to be the companion spell in a contingency spell.
Going back to my first set up, where antimagic field is the companion spell when contingency is cast. Why are you saying that this is not possible? It is a 6th level spell (the maximum level for contigency) and if cast by a 20th level EK, who is also an 18th level caster, I fail to see where it is violating the rules or is a problem.
The other spell in question can not be the contingent spell it does not meet the requirements....
Could you please expand on why you believe that is so?
So at least at the upper end of levels the EK fullfills, when buffed, its sword mage role. So then it becomes a question of group style, how much does your group play at high levels, and how often do you have a chance to buff (i have found this is largely dm dependant).
Does that seem a reasonable conclusion to you?
It does seem to be reasonable to me, and I believe it is what several have been says in this thread.
Now, I also think that it also applies to lower level EKs as well, depending on the build and preferences of the player.
a 1st level EK likely has weapon focus and specialization going for them. They can cast displacement on themselves for a 50% miss chance, which when added to mirror image makes them a hard target to hit.
MistWalker
sorry your post made it sound like the contingency was to cast the anti-magic your next post says wall of stone.I was in a hurry and didn't re-read contingency before I said wall of stone. I apologize for that. You are correct in that wall of stone likely would not be able to be the companion spell in a contingency spell.
Going back to my first set up, where antimagic field is the companion spell when contingency is cast. Why are you saying that this is not possible? It is a 6th level spell (the maximum level for contigency) and if cast by a 20th level EK, who is also an 18th level caster, I fail to see where it is violating the rules or is a problem.
The other spell in question can not be the contingent spell it does not meet the requirements....Could you please expand on why you believe that is so?
Perhaps because many EK builds assume an 17th level caster, not an 18th. 18th is possible, but loses out on a BAB and damage, as I posted earlier.
So at least at the upper end of levels the EK fullfills, when buffed, its sword mage role. So then it becomes a question of group style, how much does your group play at high levels, and how often do you have a chance to buff (i have found this is largely dm dependant).
Does that seem a reasonable conclusion to you?
It does seem to be reasonable to me, and I believe it is what several have been says in this thread.
Now, I also think that it also applies to lower level EKs as well, depending on the build and preferences of the player.
a 1st level EK likely has weapon focus and specialization going for them. They can cast displacement on themselves for a 50% miss chance, which when added to mirror image makes them a hard target to hit.
Weapon spec is a no go. They have too few fighter levels. At 7th lvl, their BAB is worse than 3/4, and stays that way until lvl 9. They don't have arcane armor mastery yet, so they are limitted to light armors. To top it off, they have lost 2 caster levels already, which is huge at that level. Being down 3 caster levels at 20 is much easier to handle than 2 at 7.
And by low levels, most people seem to be refering to ~1-6 or maybe 1-8. Before the player takes EK, they have no buisness being in melee, having 5 of their first 6 levels being wizard. That is why low level gish are not viable with EK.
Its not until lvl 9 that the EK can really start to get going, and that is too late for most people.
Its not until lvl 9 that the EK can really start to get going, and that is too late for most people.
This is my biggest problem with the EK, the rest is all just fine tuning as far as I'm concerned. The only time I will ever play an EK again will be if I have a character die in a campaign that is already 12th+ levels, and I get the chance to bring in a new character.
Even then, I'm prepared to spend until at least 14-15th level before coming into my own.
Anti-magic field does not meet the requirements for contingency.
Anti-magic field is not a spell that affects your person, it is an area of effect spell centered on you. In other words the target of the anti-magic field spell is not you. The target has to be you....
It looks like we have a disagreement on the semantics then.
If a spell can target a single creature, then that spell can have a target of you. As well, if the range is personal, would that not also indicate that "you: are the only target possible?
To me, if a spell affects you (and antimagic field does affect you, as none of your magic works either), is of 6th level or lower, it can is applicable for contingency.
By your logic, then no cure spells can be the companion spell, nor heal, fly, displacement, etc.. as their target is not "you".
Perhaps because many EK builds assume an 17th level caster, not an 18th. 18th is possible, but loses out on a BAB and damage, as I posted earlier.
Are traits allowed in most campaigns?
For and EK (or any other multi-classed caster) would not Magical Knack be a highly desirable trait?
Yes, you are right, it does depend a lot on player preferences for their EKs. I tend to favor buckler and one handed weapons for my EKs, others I know prefer two-handed weapons for their EKs.
You know - most of those spells suggested to 'buff' the EK have been low level spells - and here we are using them to survive combat with a dragon ... are these spells somehow ignored in the low-mid level range when people are playing EK's? Although Displacement comes later on, mirror image and blur serve a very similar function against (I'd imagine you're not facing ancient dragons in those low-mid levels) even lower threat challenges, no?
Why is there insistence that the EK's useless or unable to contribute? If he buffs as above, then rushes the front line, he's 1 more target that is potentially drawing off fire from your usual heavies. With the blur - potential to miss outright, and with the mirror image, he's a monster-action soaking character ... how is that not contributing to the groups survival is he makes himself a large target and moves in to draw fire off of everyone else? He can do it safely, and it plays into his combat capabilities ... what's missing here?
Weapon spec is a no go. They have too few fighter levels.
You are correct for most EK builds. I was thinking of the current EK in our group who became a 4th level fighter before going the EK route.
You know - most of those spells suggested to 'buff' the EK have been low level spells - and here we are using them to survive combat with a dragon ... are these spells somehow ignored in the low-mid level range when people are playing EK's?
Displacement and Mirror Image are staple spells for me when I think of and EK. Both can be cast from day 1 of becoming an EK.
Like you, I am not sure why a lot of people only believe that EKs come into their own at high levels when I see them being useful at lower levels.
Weapon spec is a no go. They have too few fighter levels.You are correct for most EK builds. I was thinking of the current EK in our group who became a 4th level fighter before going the EK route.
That would put him at lvl 10 for his first EK level, as it has a 3rd lvl spell requirement. That is hardly low levels.
You know - most of those spells suggested to 'buff' the EK have been low level spells - and here we are using them to survive combat with a dragon ... are these spells somehow ignored in the low-mid level range when people are playing EK's? Although Displacement comes later on, mirror image and blur serve a very similar function against (I'd imagine you're not facing ancient dragons in those low-mid levels) even lower threat challenges, no?
Why is there insistence that the EK's useless or unable to contribute? If he buffs as above, then rushes the front line, he's 1 more target that is potentially drawing off fire from your usual heavies. With the blur - potential to miss outright, and with the mirror image, he's a monster-action soaking character ... how is that not contributing to the groups survival is he makes himself a large target and moves in to draw fire off of everyone else? He can do it safely, and it plays into his combat capabilities ... what's missing here?
Before he takes at least a couple levels of EK he still has the buffs sure, but he doesnt have the HP if he actually gets hit, he also isn't going to hit anything with his bellow 3/4 bab so his offense will be from spells, and you generally dont want to be in combat when casting spells untill higher levels where there is less risk of failing the concentration check.
You know - most of those spells suggested to 'buff' the EK have been low level spells - and here we are using them to survive combat with a dragon ... are these spells somehow ignored in the low-mid level range when people are playing EK's? Although Displacement comes later on, mirror image and blur serve a very similar function against (I'd imagine you're not facing ancient dragons in those low-mid levels) even lower threat challenges, no?
Why is there insistence that the EK's useless or unable to contribute? If he buffs as above, then rushes the front line, he's 1 more target that is potentially drawing off fire from your usual heavies. With the blur - potential to miss outright, and with the mirror image, he's a monster-action soaking character ... how is that not contributing to the groups survival is he makes himself a large target and moves in to draw fire off of everyone else? He can do it safely, and it plays into his combat capabilities ... what's missing here?
They work. The problem is that he doesn't have either the damage output or AC to really survive. As I said, its not until lvl 9 that he catches up to 3/4 BAB classes. Lower than that, he is lagging behind. He also doesn't get unhindered spellcasting from medium armor until lvl 9. His HP doesn't catch up with the d8 hit die until lvl 12, so he is squishy if he does get hit. To increase his damage, he qualifies for arcane strike and power attack at low levels, but they are both less useful in his hands than other characters. Arcane strike does start to make up for it at 6th level, but you lose don't get +3 until 2 levels later than a bard.
How is this? EK stacks with fighter levels for qualifying for pre-req's. ALL EK's can get wpn spec.Weapon spec is a no go. They have too few fighter levels.You are correct for most EK builds. I was thinking of the current EK in our group who became a 4th level fighter before going the EK route.
Context MM Context :)
I was responding to him saying that a lvl 1 EK can have weapon spec. At that point, most EK only have 1 lvl of fighter and 1 lvl of EK, so a feat needing 4 fighter levels is a no go.
so what it looks like to me is that when buffed the EK can stand up reasonably well to the dragon when sufficiently buffed. Its a hard fight but not impossible. Which seems right to me for a dragon at challenge rating (as others have said usually dragons are at the upper end of the monster power bell curve).
So at least at the upper end of levels the EK fullfills, when buffed, its sword mage role. So then it becomes a question of group style, how much does your group play at high levels, and how often do you have a chance to buff (i have found this is largely dm dependant).
Does that seem a reasonable conclusion to you?
Certainly it does to me; the EK has many options, but when it comes down to it this is what he can do and do well.
What matters, I find, is spell selection. Kolokotoni, I was working on the build we discussed, comparing an EK to a Psychic Warrior of the same level. Now while the EK is not a complete pushover at any level if he has a buff or two, the PsyWar kicks his ass in melee - not because psionics are broken, but because his powers synergise much better with melee combat - he has many and better buffs to use. In the EK build, on the other hand, the most valuable feat he could take was not Power Attack but Quicken Spell.
What I think would make a good addition to Paizo would be some gish-focussed spells.
I think part of the question at lower level is how you go about getting into the class and why.
For example I think the thought that "It just doesn't look gish" at lower levels is a bit misleading... what does a "gish" in training look like? Well either a wizard or fighter depending on how he leans. It's like saying, "A dragon disciple/shadowdancer/assassin doesn't look any different at lower levels!" of course they don't -- they aren't there yet.
However back to what I was saying.
How we enter also tells us what "type" of Gish we want. After all like the cleric there isn't just "one" Gish... there are multiples. We could have the "tougher more martially competent wizard" which is minimizing caster level lost, just looking for a bit more on the side. We could have the "Fighter that can cast some spells" who will probably "give up" a spell level to prepare all his spells with still spell so that he can still wear the heaviest armor he wants -- he'll buff when possible but isn't afraid to let lose with the occasional spell that will change the battlefield, basically keeping his magic a surprise, this guy has several subsets of his own based on how he wants to do battle "normally" -- anything from ranged combat, to two handed, to AC focused, to mounted.
My personal favorite would be the "mainly wizard" gish that simply uses the EK class to enhance his options as opposed to replacing them:
If you choose to start wizard and enter in on minimum requirements you can take 5 wizard 1 fighter at 6th level. You aren't really behind here so it's not until 7th level that things start looking backwards -- you're still rather even with other wizards. If you decide to go wizard 6/ fighter 1 before entering you're still close enough for most purposes. After a level in EK your BAB will be +5 (as opposed to +6 for a medium BAB) so you aren't so far behind there. Your HP isn't quite what you want yet (it's an average of 4d7 technically) but by the next level you have 4th level spells, your BAB is coming along nicely and your HP balance is coming inline. You could easily be doing rays at this point and the feat choices for doing so would complement a ranged fighting build too.
What has to be decided though off the bat is "What Gish are you?" Otherwise you really can't discuss the pros and cons of what you are doing. The groundwork has to be understood before any meaningful discussion can take place.