I am planing on playing a Wizard7/Fighter3/EldritchKnight10 for my next campaign and I really like this combination. But when I look EK up on the net, all I see is negative comments about the EK. Why is this?
What is so wrong with EK?
Doing this combination I'll get a load of feats, some Wizard specialization powers, a base to hit at 17 on level 20 (3 less than a fighter!), the ability to cast 9th level spells and a very diverse character that I think will be fun to play!
All I see is WIN!
Could someone clarify what is so bad about this combo
I am planing on playing a Wizard7/Fighter3/EldritchKnight10 for my next campaign and I really like this combination. But when I look EK up on the net, all I see is negative comments about the EK. Why is this?
What is so wrong with EK?
Doing this combination I'll get a load of feats, some Wizard specialization powers, a base to hit at 17 on level 20 (3 less than a fighter!), the ability to cast 9th level spells and a very diverse character that I think will be fun to play!
All I see is WIN!
Could someone clarify what is so bad about this combo
First of your math is wrong. Your BAB is 16 not 17. And you will be able to cast 8th level spells, not 9th. Your caster level will be 16 but there are ways around that.
The main problem we see with the EK is the 2 "must" feats, Arcane armor and arcane strike, both spend a precious Swift action, so you'll be unable to use it when you quicken, and the las tier ability of the EK is crap, simply because you will (most likelly) have already spent your swift action for the round, either quicking a spell or using Arcane Strike to deal more damage with your weapon.
There was a pretty good thread comparing the Magus to the EK, but I forgot where I found it. The conclusion seemed to be that the broader spell list, and 9th level spells favored the EK over the Magus, but they were pretty balanced. I wouldn't suggest 3 levels of fighter, casting is really good, get as much of it as you can.
Also at higher levels, you can get shields that don't require a swift to use, and reley on Mirror Image, Displacement, etc, instead of Arcane Armor. So that you can swift a spell crit, a quickened spell, or arcane strike. It's a solid class, if you like hitting things, but also doing cool stuff. If you don't like hitting things, or doing cool stuff, might I suggest the Life Oracle.
There was a pretty good thread comparing the Magus to the EK, but I forgot where I found it. The conclusion seemed to be that the broader spell list, and 9th level spells favored the EK over the Magus, but they were pretty balanced. I wouldn't suggest 3 levels of fighter, casting is really good, get as much of it as you can.
Also at higher levels, you can get shields that don't require a swift to use, and reley on Mirror Image, Displacement, etc, instead of Arcane Armor. So that you can swift a spell crit, a quickened spell, or arcane strike. It's a solid class, if you like hitting things, but also doing cool stuff. If you don't like hitting things, or doing cool stuff, might I suggest the Life Oracle.
The 3 fighter levels is for the 4th attack. It's a choice between 9th level or having more attacks, both are good choices.
That tread you are talking about resumes that the EK is good at casting spells and good at fighting, he is just not good at doing both at the same time. It's not a terrible class, but few people will go for it.
Ups that's true, but sacrifice a level as fighter and I'll get 9th level spells and a BAB same as Bard,Cleric etc. I see no reason for Arcane strike... no more reason than a fighter would need something like it especially if I choose not to cast 9th level spells and advance in Ftr instead. Arcane armor training would depend on a lot. I could go with a low Spell failure at low levels and reaching higher levels magical items could boost my ac a lot with a minimum of Arcane spell failure as well.
Using a scimitar and selecting CRIT feats will make my Critical strike a very dangerous power even with "only" 7th level spells at my disposal. Plus I will have a bonded Item or a familiar as well.
The third fighter level is totally wasted (unless you want Armor Training baldy). Wizard 7/Fighter 3/EK 10 has a BAB of 16. However, Wiz8/Fig2/EK10 has the same BAB AND 9th level spells.
EDIT: I think the main drwbacks of the EK are the already mentioned Swift Action Issue (don't neglect Arcane Strike! It's a pretty good feat!) and the fact that it adds MAD to the otherwise quite focused Wizard class.
I could see myself trying an Elven EK with a Curve Blade just for fun, but that would require a somewhat high point buy (at least 20, better 25) to pull off effectively.
I really do like to hit things and do cool stuff!
Ups that's true, but sacrifice a level as fighter and I'll get 9th level spells and a BAB same as Bard,Cleric etc. I see no reason for Arcane strike... no more reason than a fighter would need something like it especially if I choose not to cast 9th level spells and advance in Ftr instead. Arcane armor training would depend on a lot. I could go with a low Spell failure at low levels and reaching higher levels magical items could boost my ac a lot with a minimum of Arcane spell failure as well.
Actually, if you go Ftr2/Wiz8/EK10, you get +16 BAB, aka 4 attacks/round, plus 17th level casting, aka 9th level spells.
As for Arcane Strike, if you're in melee, you need your damage bonuses. You won't quite have the BAB of a fighter, so every swing needs to count.
True! Thanks Blave!
I am planing on playing a Wizard7/Fighter3/EldritchKnight10 for my next campaign and I really like this combination. But when I look EK up on the net, all I see is negative comments about the EK. Why is this?
What is so wrong with EK?
The majority of complaint revolves around the Swift action.
Arcane Strike Feat = Swift Action
Arcane Armor Training Feat = Swift Action
Quickened Spell = Swift Action
Spell Critical EK Class Feature = Swift Action
So, yeah, problem. You can't cast a Quickened Spell with Arcane Armor Training - you must Still it or risk Arcane Spell Failure. You can't use your top end class ability and Arcane Armor Training. You can't use Arcane Strike on your attacks if you want to use Spell Critical.
There ARE work-arounds, you just have to be aware of them. First, take a few Stilled Spells. Arcane Armor Training is nice but there ARE useful Verbal component only spells. Do everything you can to reduce ASF (Celestial Armor and Heavy Mithril Shield) when you can't use Arcane Armor Training. You won't operate as well as a caster of equal casting level (never mind character level), but you're a lot less squishy and can still lay the hurt. I'd avoid Arcane Strike entirely, as you're feat starved to begin with and the EK qualifies for Weapon Specialization which adds damage and doesn't use Swift actions.
The upshot of all this is you're looking at a very narrow, cookie-cutter build. I'd start as a Wizard, so you can take Combat Casting right away. Save Fighter 1 for 4th level, where you can select Arcane Armor Training as a bonus feat. Thus:
(1)Wizard 1: Combat Casting (planning on melee + spells? Necessary)
(2)Wizard 3: Improved Initiative (yes, you want it)
(4)Fighter 1: Fighter Bonus Feat: Arcane Armor Training
(5)Wizard 4: Still Spell
(6)Wizard 5: Wizard Bonus Feat (Craft Magic Arms, probably)
(7)Eldritch Knight 1: EK Bonus Feat (Weapon Focus?) and one feat of choice
(9)Eldritch Knight 3: Arcane Armor Mastery
(11)Eldritch Knight 5: EK Bonus Feat (Weapon Spec) and one feat of choice.
At this point you're +8 BaB and a 9th level caster. You've got the melee capacity of a Cleric but can cast arcane spells 1 level below a Wizard of equal character level.
Note that now the Magus gets much of this without having all his feats chosen for him. He doesn't need AAT/AAM or Still Spell. However, the Magus is still worse off in the spellcasting department, having 4th level spells.
Another approach would be: Don't take Arcane Armor Training at all.
You won't be very effective in melee before you get your first few EK levels. Until then, just play as a regular Wizard.
By the time your BAB recovers from your Wizard levels (around level 8) you can already have a number of AC enhancers. Bracers of Armor (or all-day-long mage armor), an Amulet of Natural Armor and a Ring of Protection. Add a Mithril Buckler (or Small Shield) or a Wand of Shield and you can have a pretty decent AC without any ASF. And of course you can always use Mirror Image and the like to improve your defense.
Get Craft Wondrous Item as your 5th levl wizard bonus feat so you have access to better bracers and amulets sooner.
Works best with a half-decent Dex score (at least 14) and maybe a feat or two invested in AC (Dodge, Shield Focus, Ironhide).
If allowed, I think Dervish Dance would be a pretty good choice for such an EK.
Another approach would be: Don't take Arcane Armor Training at all.
A valid approach, but it won't come close to the AC of a properly armored EK (armor + enhancement bonus will far outstrip Bracers of Armor for much less gold) and heavily depends on defensive spells (a limited resource) or wants (a money sink). Take Craft Wand as well as Craft Wondrous Item if you go this route. Also, this runs into the problem of "I need 3 rounds of spellcasting to wind up for a fight". But let's face it, a cloak of displacement trumps a lot of AC regardless.
It's true that this approach is more expensive. But personally I find Craft wondrous THAT much more useful than Craft Arms. Sure, your armor, shield and weapon cost less money if you take craft arms, but you still have to pay full price for headbands, belts, cloaks, pearls of power, amulets and so on. I think if you add everythin up, the overall costs of the armorless approach aren't all that much higher than the amored one.
Oh, and funny fact: Bracers of Armor grant an Armor Bonus, NOT an enhancement bonus to armor. So if you have a nice cleric (/oracle/inquisitor) in your group, he can actually cast Magic Vestment on your robe while you wear the bracers.
If you invest at least one feat (most likely dodge) into AC, it will hardly be worse than the armored EK. And since you saved two feats by not getting arcane armor mastery, you might actually pick up Craft Arms anyway. Get a Ring as your bonded Item and you can even geta Ring of Protection at crafting costs without spending a feat.
Wow thanks again Blave! Glad I started this thread!
It's true that this approach is more expensive. But personally I find Craft wondrous THAT much more useful than Craft Arms.
True enough; Craft Wondrous is better than Craft Arms & Armor. Which route you build will determine which you take, though there are still enough feats around to take both - or hopefully your Cleric/Oracle/Inquisitor will take the one you don't and you swap services.
I think if you add everythin up, the overall costs of the armorless approach aren't all that much higher than the amored one.
The armored approach at least takes advantage of the relatively low expense of plain old armor, especially at low levels. Mithril Shirt = 1100gp, Bracers of Armor +4 = 16,000gp. Mithril Shirt +4 = 17,100gp, Bracers of Armor +8 = 64,000gp. Even chopping those prices in half for having your own feats, armor is much cheaper to reach the same AC. Also, some campaigns (like Pathfinder Society) disallow item creation feats for PCs. The 'optimal' armor mix (Celestial Armor + Light Mithril Shield* +5) costs 48,500gp with a 15% ASF. That's +15 AC for the cost of Bracers of Armor +7 (49,000gp).
*Assuming you have a weapon in the other hand, you need a hand to cast unless you're using Still Spell, in which case ASF doesn't matter...carry on!
Oh, and funny fact: Bracers of Armor grant an Armor Bonus, NOT an enhancement bonus to armor. So if you have a nice cleric (/oracle/inquisitor) in your group, he can actually cast Magic Vestment on your robe while you wear the bracers.
Obviously Magic Vestment is an hours/level spell so you can buff with it all day, but it can also be dispelled, you Cleric might prepare other things, you can get caught before it's on, etcetera. Armor is omnipresent, after all (you can even sleep in Celestial Armor, it being considered light armor). And the armored EK can also benefit from Magic Vestment to save money. In fact, the armored EK can benefit from almost everything the non-armored one does - only he probably needs them less. In fact, even without Craft Arms, the armored EK can take Craft Wondrous to benefit from all the savings you mention, and still only spends a small amount on armor (Plain-jane Elven Chain costs 5150gp, or a bit more than making your own Bracers of Armor +3, but offers twice the AC and both benefit from Magic Vestment).
Or you could go Gunslinger instead of fighter. The benefit is of which that firearms are touch attacks in their first range category (or 5 range category's if they're advanced) which in the the low levels means you will stil be able to hit a lot of high armoured foes despite a low BAB. The loss of heavy armour is no loss at all, but you would lose two feats.
Another approach would be: Don't take Arcane Armor Training at all.
Good Advice!
You won't be very effective in melee before you get your first few EK levels. Until then, just play as a regular Wizard.
Not really, with a level or two of fighter at early levels you should be just as effective in melee as a 3/4 Bab class. Before the crossover at level 10, your Bab should average less than half a point lower than a 3/4 Bab class. Mage Armour and Shield should be enough to get you through the first few levels, you'll also have to buff responsibly.
By the time your BAB recovers from your Wizard levels (around level 8) you can already have a number of AC enhancers. Bracers of Armor (or all-day-long mage armor), an Amulet of Natural Armor and a Ring of Protection. Add a Mithril Buckler (or Small Shield) or a Wand of Shield and you can have a pretty decent AC without any ASF. And of course you can always use Mirror Image and the like to improve your defense.
Get Craft Wondrous Item as your 5th levl wizard bonus feat so you have access to better bracers and amulets sooner.Works best with a half-decent Dex score (at least 14) and maybe a feat or two invested in AC (Dodge, Shield Focus, Ironhide).
If allowed, I think Dervish Dance would be a pretty good choice for such an EK.
Rather than relying on spells for AC the whole time, Still Spell is a viable solution once you get 3rd or 4th level spells. You'll enjoy the AC and protection of an EK in full plate, without losing your swift action, and you can hold a weapon in one hand, and a rod or heavy shield in the other hand and still cast. Your spell casting takes a hit, but you'll still keep up with 3/4 casters at mid levels and eventually be able to cast rod-quickened 8th level spells in armour.
Oh, and funny fact: Bracers of Armor grant an Armor Bonus, NOT an enhancement bonus to armor. So if you have a nice cleric (/oracle/inquisitor) in your group, he can actually cast Magic Vestment on your robe while you wear the bracers.
Not exactly. Magic Vestment, and other enhancement bonuses, do not add directly to your AC, rather they increase the AC bonus of the piece of armour they're enhancing.
In this case, if you cast Magic Vestment on your robe, your robe would grant an armour bonus of +X, which would not stack with the armour bonus granted by bracers of armour.See this thread for a more detailed discussion on the matter.
|
The EK hase the same problem as most classes like it. MAD
You can focus on your casting and be good at it, and ok at combat.
Or
You can focus on combat and be good at it, and ok at casting.
Your ability scores and how they incress as you level prevent you from haven To Hit, Damage, HP, and Spell DC. All MAD classes have the same problem. They need to meny high stats to be effective at every thing they have, and are forced to pick what they want to focus on.
This will not show up untill you pass level 7-10. After level 13 it's to late to fix any mistakes. With out remaking the character. Trying to focus on both will end up with you spread to thin.
The EK works very well in specific builds, otherwise it does lose out to some MAD problems. Also, you're not going to be combat effective AND have high DCs on spells, instead, your spells will be non-DC based, thus reducing your need to have a high Int (just get the headbands to get your INT to 19 by the time you need it there). So you focus on buffs and spells that don't allow saving throws.
The swift action economy is a problem, which is why I prefer to use EK in archer builds, as they rely on DEX and don't often need huge armor or the feats to cast in it, and aren't really crit based either...they just plow on the Arcane Strike and hit 7 times. Still Spell is easily an option as mentioned earlier.
I like to go Fighter 1/Wizard 5/EK 10/Wizard +3/Fighter +1 as an actual buildout.
Anyhow, the class is not as bad as the rep it gets, but it does rely quite a bit on how you play it and what you want to specialize in (and how well you build it) to be decent. It's not like the "class in a can" that staying 1-20 in a base Pathfinder class is. (Don't get me wrong, you can mess up any class, but it's easier to just play a class straight up than try to build something like a good Eldritch Knight).
The EK works very well in specific builds, otherwise it does lose out to some MAD problems. Also, you're not going to be combat effective AND have high DCs on spells, instead, your spells will be non-DC based, thus reducing your need to have a high Int (just get the headbands to get your INT to 19 by the time you need it there). So you focus on buffs and spells that don't allow saving throws.
The swift action economy is a problem, which is why I prefer to use EK in archer builds, as they rely on DEX and don't often need huge armor or the feats to cast in it, and aren't really crit based either...they just plow on the Arcane Strike and hit 7 times. Still Spell is easily an option as mentioned earlier.
I like to go Fighter 1/Wizard 5/EK 10/Wizard +3/Fighter +1 as an actual buildout.
Anyhow, the class is not as bad as the rep it gets, but it does rely quite a bit on how you play it and what you want to specialize in (and how well you build it) to be decent. It's not like the "class in a can" that staying 1-20 in a base Pathfinder class is. (Don't get me wrong, you can mess up any class, but it's easier to just play a class straight up than try to build something like a good Eldritch Knight).
Good spell selection is quintessential imo. Heroism is a one that you can run on yourself all day at later levels with a few rods of extend. I also recommend vengeful outrage, which can be used as a buff if you're careful to fight within the restrictions-if you do it's a greater rage essentially, but which still allows you to cast spells at no penalty. And since multiple instances of twilight knife stack, mass twilight knives is a prep-intensive but potentially devastating tactic. Oh and haste is always good, though if possible, try to get another caster to cast it on the party...
I am planing on playing a Wizard7/Fighter3/EldritchKnight10 for my next campaign and I really like this combination. But when I look EK up on the net, all I see is negative comments about the EK. Why is this?
What is so wrong with EK?
Doing this combination I'll get a load of feats, some Wizard specialization powers, a base to hit at 17 on level 20 (3 less than a fighter!), the ability to cast 9th level spells and a very diverse character that I think will be fun to play!
All I see is WIN!
Could someone clarify what is so bad about this combo
Generally the ideal EK combo is Martial Class 1 / Wizard 9 / Eldritch Knight 10, resulting in a +15/+10/+5 BAB and full spellcasting on the wizard side. You basically end up as a wizard with a higher BAB, which can be semi-useful for certain spells, or for making use of certain feats. Alternatively you could go warrior 2 / wizard 8 / EK 10 and get a +16/+11/+6/+1 BAB, but it loses you a another level of spells, which probably isn't worth another attack at +1.
Honestly this option isn't half bad for a wizard who wants to be able to throw down in some sort of terrible situation where they need to be moderately decent warrior types as a backup plan. Honestly, I could see this being for fighting wizards like Gandalf and Eliminster.
The armored approach at least takes advantage of the relatively low expense of plain old armor, especially at low levels. Mithril Shirt = 1100gp, Bracers of Armor +4 = 16,000gp. Mithril Shirt +4 = 17,100gp, Bracers of Armor +8 = 64,000gp. Even chopping those prices in half for having your own feats, armor is much cheaper to reach the same AC. Also, some campaigns (like Pathfinder Society) disallow item creation feats for PCs. The 'optimal' armor mix (Celestial Armor + Light Mithril Shield* +5) costs 48,500gp with a 15% ASF. That's +15 AC for the cost of Bracers of Armor +7 (49,000gp).
You missed my point. I'm well aware that the bracers are WAY more expensive than the armor. But if you have the Craft Wondrous feat, you can save SO much more money than with craft arms.
In the long run, you can save:Amulet of Natural Armor +5 = 25.000
Headband of Vast Intellect +6 = 18.0000
Cloak of Resistance +5 (or minor displacement if you prefer) = 12.000
Belt of Physical Might +6 = 45.000 (or 72.000 if you go for Perfection)
And that's just the "base" equipment without any Haversacks, Pearls of Power, Ioun Stones of other miscellaneous Wondrous Items.
So I'd take Craft Wondrous over Craft arms anytime. Even with an armored EK.
Not really, with a level or two of fighter at early levels you should be just as effective in melee as a 3/4 Bab class. Before the crossover at level 10, your Bab should average less than half a point lower than a 3/4 Bab class. Mage Armour and Shield should be enough to get you through the first few levels, you'll also have to buff responsibly.
Yeah, I kinda messed up the BAB calculation there. But as you said, for the first 6-8 levels, Mage Armor will do a pretty decent job and you can already start to add other AC bonuses.
Rather than relying on spells for AC the whole time, Still Spell is a viable solution once you get 3rd or 4th level spells. You'll enjoy the AC and protection of an EK in full plate, without losing your swift action, and you can hold a weapon in one hand, and a rod or heavy shield in the other hand and still cast.
I'm not a big fan of the idea. If you need to Still pretty much all your spells, your spellcasting will fall behind even more. Sure, it can be done, but I wouldn't try it unless there was another full arcane caster in the group.
Not exactly. Magic Vestment, and other enhancement bonuses, do not add directly to your AC, rather they increase the AC bonus of the piece of armour they're enhancing.
Well, it was worth a try :P
Anyway, it's not that hard for even a pure wizard to get decent AC. About 35-40 could be achieved by level ... I don't know ... 13? 15? If realy want to go into melee and keep upgrading your AC boosting items as you level, you should be fine even without armor. Just be sure to get the least expensive upgrad every time, i.e. don't buy a Ring of Protection +1 (2.000 gp) before you have Mithril Buckler +1 (2.050 gp, but +2 AC).
It's true that this approach is more expensive. But personally I find Craft wondrous THAT much more useful than Craft Arms. Sure, your armor, shield and weapon cost less money if you take craft arms, but you still have to pay full price for headbands, belts, cloaks, pearls of power, amulets and so on. I think if you add everythin up, the overall costs of the armorless approach aren't all that much higher than the amored one.
Oh, and funny fact: Bracers of Armor grant an Armor Bonus, NOT an enhancement bonus to armor. So if you have a nice cleric (/oracle/inquisitor) in your group, he can actually cast Magic Vestment on your robe while you wear the bracers.
If you invest at least one feat (most likely dodge) into AC, it will hardly be worse than the armored EK. And since you saved two feats by not getting arcane armor mastery, you might actually pick up Craft Arms anyway. Get a Ring as your bonded Item and you can even geta Ring of Protection at crafting costs without spending a feat.
Who uses Bracers of Armor? Haramaki are all the rage. 3 gold gives you +1 AC armor with 0% spell failure, 0 ACP, and - max dex. This means there is zero penalty for non-proficiency on casters without Light Armor Proficiency. Have your cake and eat it too. Never need Arcane Armor, but still get cheap AC. It's not like you'd ever afford +6 Bracers anyway. Bonus: Make it Adamantine for DR 1/- and practical indestructibility, as the broken condition would apply penalties to you.
Hey look, you save money AND save a swift action each round. WIN!
It's true that this approach is more expensive. But personally I find Craft wondrous THAT much more useful than Craft Arms. Sure, your armor, shield and weapon cost less money if you take craft arms, but you still have to pay full price for headbands, belts, cloaks, pearls of power, amulets and so on. I think if you add everythin up, the overall costs of the armorless approach aren't all that much higher than the amored one.
Oh, and funny fact: Bracers of Armor grant an Armor Bonus, NOT an enhancement bonus to armor. So if you have a nice cleric (/oracle/inquisitor) in your group, he can actually cast Magic Vestment on your robe while you wear the bracers.
If you invest at least one feat (most likely dodge) into AC, it will hardly be worse than the armored EK. And since you saved two feats by not getting arcane armor mastery, you might actually pick up Craft Arms anyway. Get a Ring as your bonded Item and you can even geta Ring of Protection at crafting costs without spending a feat.
Who uses Bracers of Armor? Haramaki are all the rage. 3 gold gives you +1 AC armor with 0% spell failure, 0 ACP, and - max dex. This means there is zero penalty for non-proficiency on casters without Light Armor Proficiency. Have your cake and eat it too. Never need Arcane Armor, but still get cheap AC. It's not like you'd ever afford +6 Bracers anyway. Bonus: Make it Adamantine for DR 1/- and practical indestructibility, as the broken condition would apply penalties to you.
Hey look, you save money AND save a swift action each round. WIN!
Where are the stats for this haramaki found? Ultimate Combat I presume?
Where are the stats for this haramaki found? Ultimate Combat I presume?It's true that this approach is more expensive. But personally I find Craft wondrous THAT much more useful than Craft Arms. Sure, your armor, shield and weapon cost less money if you take craft arms, but you still have to pay full price for headbands, belts, cloaks, pearls of power, amulets and so on. I think if you add everythin up, the overall costs of the armorless approach aren't all that much higher than the amored one.
Oh, and funny fact: Bracers of Armor grant an Armor Bonus, NOT an enhancement bonus to armor. So if you have a nice cleric (/oracle/inquisitor) in your group, he can actually cast Magic Vestment on your robe while you wear the bracers.
If you invest at least one feat (most likely dodge) into AC, it will hardly be worse than the armored EK. And since you saved two feats by not getting arcane armor mastery, you might actually pick up Craft Arms anyway. Get a Ring as your bonded Item and you can even geta Ring of Protection at crafting costs without spending a feat.
Who uses Bracers of Armor? Haramaki are all the rage. 3 gold gives you +1 AC armor with 0% spell failure, 0 ACP, and - max dex. This means there is zero penalty for non-proficiency on casters without Light Armor Proficiency. Have your cake and eat it too. Never need Arcane Armor, but still get cheap AC. It's not like you'd ever afford +6 Bracers anyway. Bonus: Make it Adamantine for DR 1/- and practical indestructibility, as the broken condition would apply penalties to you.
Hey look, you save money AND save a swift action each round. WIN!
Ultimate Combat, pg 129. Also, on the encumbrance front, the haramaki is a mere 1 lbs. Yet another thing going for it.
You missed my point.
No, I'm in agreement that Craft Wondrous will save you more money. But going with actual armor rather than Bracers of Armor will get you higher AC every time - even if you have Craft Wondrous and don't have Craft Arms, you get more AC for less money. It takes more feats to manage it, of course, so that's the choice you make, but if I'm going to melee I want as much AC as reasonably possible.
Again, if you make your own Bracers of Armor +8, it costs you 32,000gp (market price 64,000gp). For that money you can buy Celestial Armor (22,400gp)...which has +9 AC (and flying, hey bonus). With the leftover 9,600gp you can buy (or make) a lot of stuff. Going the armored route saves you more money, actually, but you still want to take Craft Wondrous over Craft Arms.
And as has been pointed out, Magic Vestment and Mage Armor may not stack (I'm not 100% convinced, but I follow the logic, and there are robes that provide an actual armor bonus with which Magic Vestment should work just fine). I don't consider Mage Armor by itself to be a long term solution, given it caps out at +4 AC, which really isn't enough for a melee character (archer EKs, OTOH, do fine).
Who uses Bracers of Armor? Haramaki are all the rage. 3 gold gives you +1 AC armor with 0% spell failure, 0 ACP, and - max dex. This means there is zero penalty for non-proficiency on casters without Light Armor Proficiency. Have your cake and eat it too. Never need Arcane Armor, but still get cheap AC.
Assuming your GM even allows it, being asian armor and all. Still, if you're going to hang in melee, don't you want as much AC as possible while still being able to cast? Also, not looking like a squishy wizard can be advantageous as well ^_^.
Well going unarmored has the advantage of not needing arcane armor training and mastery. I don't say either approach is vastly superior to the other one.
Armored costs two feats more and might get into trouble with swift actions.
Unarmored costs less feats and has an easier time managing swift actions. It does however cost more gold.
To be honest, I have no idea which approach I would prefer. Probably depends on the party setup, availability of magic items, the campaign and half a dozen other factors.
I think I personally prefer the armorless EK but that's mostly for style reasons. They should be about equal in overall power.
I dunno about Craft wondrous saving you money over Craft Arms/Armor.
Sword +10 = 200,000, 100K with feat. 100k savings.
Shield +10 and Armor +10 = 200k, 100k with savings.
It's a LOT of wondrous items to add up to 400k gross, 200k in savings.
For dribs and drabs at lower level, yeah. But 15+, Arms and Armor OWNS...especially if you want a second weapon.
===Aelryinth
Assuming your GM even allows it, being asian armor and all. Still, if you're going to hang in melee, don't you want as much AC as possible while still being able to cast? Also, not looking like a squishy wizard can be advantageous as well ^_^.Who uses Bracers of Armor? Haramaki are all the rage. 3 gold gives you +1 AC armor with 0% spell failure, 0 ACP, and - max dex. This means there is zero penalty for non-proficiency on casters without Light Armor Proficiency. Have your cake and eat it too. Never need Arcane Armor, but still get cheap AC.
Generally the majority of the defense available to mage-knights is avoidance. Stuff like mirror image, blur, displacement, and greater invisibility. Then relies on stuff like stoneskin, iron body and vampiric touch to soak incoming damage as much as possible for attacks that get through. Using vampiric touch on a coup de grace (use a summoned monster if you need to) can get you a lot of temporary HP, especially if it's maximized (that's upwards to about 120 temporary HP if you coup a summon).
It's usually quite difficult to get the massively high AC to be a frontliner who relies on AC for damage mitigation. Instead, to be an effective mage-knight, you have to remember that you are in fact a mage. If you try and duke it out directly like a Fighter you are going to feel some pain and be less effective. Instead you want to use tons of tricks, various crafted magic items with tons of at-will or charged magic abilities, and so forth.
For example, quickened true-strike 1/round is a good wondrous item investment for a mage-knight who needs to up their accuracy greatly (honestly it's not a terrible investment for martial guys either, at about 90,000 gp). It's a good thing to use prior to a Power Attack, against a foe that has concealment, a foe with a very high AC, or just prior to a combat maneuver (since +20 is nice if you're trying to disarm, sunder, or trip something).
Also, barbarians get a lot of mileage out of avoidance options like cloaks of displacement because their AC tends to be really bad.
Never played that high, I must admit. I can see the value of a +10 weapon, but hardly so for shields and armor. It's not that most of the abilities aren't good but they always seemed a bit too pricey to me.
But then again I usually play casters so what do I know? :D
If you can use 3.5 material, Battle Sorceror lets you cast in Light Armor (which Mithril Breastplate qualifies for).
Monk getting WIS to AC can make going Armor-less a decent option... I believe there is an Ultimate Magic Sorceror variant that uses WIS as the casting stat, which synergizes there.
Paladin can also work as the martial base if you are going to be Lawful anyways.
I don´t think it´s SO MUCH an issue of people not thinking it works at high level (though some people don´t like the idea of having to choose how to deploy Swift Actions, not using all Feats all the time), as that it is painful to get there, and you can just look at the PrC: it fails at Paizo´s stated design goals of not having empty levels, and having unique class abilities - any other Class or PrC for the most part will have many unique class abilities, but Eldritch Knight doesn´t really see anything until it´s ´Capstone´.
Never played that high, I must admit. I can see the value of a +10 weapon, but hardly so for shields and armor. It's not that most of the abilities aren't good but they always seemed a bit too pricey to me.
But then again I usually play casters so what do I know? :D
You know more than you think. The majority of the weapon and armor enhancements are pretty bad, except for the ones that add flat special qualities to them for +X gp (for armors).
Honestly, special abilities like flaming, frost, shocking, and so forth are really bad for the investment of money. The burst weapons are generally worse. The biggest reason is it is that as your level grows, you will assuredly encounter more enemies with energy resistance, and energy resistance 5 is enough to nearly shut down any hope of dealing extra damage with these abilities.
There are only a few special qualities to be added to weapons that are worthwhile. Speed can be a good one for those trying to push attacks like crazy (you can reach up to 9 attacks per round this way dual wielding or using a double weapon) but is most impressive on an amulet of mighty fists (oh look, you just doubled the number of natural attacks).
Holy is also a good one as long as you're fighting evil and such, since it's just a flat +2d6 and counts as good for DR. Merciful is one of the better weapon enhancements because it's a flat bonus to damage against virtually anything that is alive.
Bane is a good enhancement to have on a secondary weapon or even your primary weapon if you choose broad categories such as Undead-bane, Evil Outsider-bane, Magical Beast-bane, etc.
If you are using the psionics rules, the +2 weapon enhancement collision is a fun enhancement. It adds a flat +5 damage to the weapon, which is great for general use and for critical hits. This one is actually worth something.
However, most of the time, I just want a +5 weapon. Anything above and beyond that is gravy, and usually situational. If psionics are allowed, a +5 collision weapon is about as far as I'll usually go, since weapons get inordinately expensive past +5 and flaming ain't cutting the butter. For half the price of a single +10 weapon, you can get a +5 melee weapon and a +5 ranged weapon, which will pierce most DR and increase your damage and hit nicely.
You could use all that saved money to add special abilities to your equipment. I assure you that having something like death ward or freedom of movement for a few rounds per day would be far, far more useful than spending an extra 100,000 gp for a few d6s more damage that isn't even a guaranteed deal.
Fortification is a nice one at high levels, especially considering the number of Crit-triggered effects.
Armor is also the cheapest enhancement.
Brilliant Energy can be nice, given the amount of AC it can bypass... Very expensive to put on a single weapon, but can be useful for Archers who will more often Full Attack, i.e. all their low iteratives where it helps the most, and they can split the enhancements across the bow and arrows (at cost of redundant +1) making it much cheaper. That goes for many enhancements in general, that Archers are flexible in using a wide variety of them.
Vicious is also nice-ish once you´ve maxed out the normal Enhancement bonus, especially if you have DR such as from being a Barbarian. Spell Storing can be awesome too, and is cheap to boot. You can do crazy stuff like have Throwing Lances, letting you do 2 Lance Charge Attacks in one Charge with the Hurling Charge Rage Power.
I haven´t seen anybody play Speed enhancement as if it was anything but a Haste effect applying to an extra attack with a weapon you have Speed applied to (i.e. just 1 extra attack max)... I.e. ´This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell.´ implies it doesn´t ´stack´ with itself via multiple weapons with the Speed enhancement. Your games may vary.
Fortification is a nice one at high levels, especially considering the number of Crit-triggered effects.
Armor is also the cheapest enhancement.Brilliant Energy is also nice, given the amount of AC it can bypass... Especially so for Archers who will more often Full Attack, i.e. all their low iteratives where it helps the most, not to mention they can split the enhancements across the bow and arrows (at cost of redundant +1). That goes for many enhancements in general (not to mention being able to swap out enhancements via different arrows while still benefitting from your ´base´ enhancements from the bow itself)
I haven´t seen anybody play Speed enhancement as if it was anything but a Haste effect applying to an extra attack with a weapon you have Speed applied to (i.e. just 1 extra attack max)... I.e. ´This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell.´ implies it doesn´t ´stack´ with itself via multiple weapons with the Speed enhancement. Your games may vary.
If you don't accept the wording as it is written then speed weapons are worthless, because it is trivially easy to be hasted every encounter at higher levels. Not just an extra attack but full on haste with the +1 to hit, AC, and Reflex, and +30 ft. speed.
The wording is quite clear. You get an extra attack with this weapon. It does not stack with haste and similar effects (such as that cleric spell that allows you to take an extra attack per round).
Thus if you're wielding a speed weapon, you cannot use it to make your extra attack via haste. Thus you cannot be wielding a two handed weapon of speed while hasted and get 2 extra attacks with that weapon. You could, however, wield a speed weapon in one hand an another weapon in your off hand and use your off hand weapon for the extra haste attack and your main hand gets it speed. Alternatively you could dual wield speed weapons to get an extra attack with each while not hasted.
Anything else seems to be stretching the wording further that it goes.
|
There was a pretty good thread comparing the Magus to the EK, but I forgot where I found it. The conclusion seemed to be that the broader spell list, and 9th level spells favored the EK over the Magus, but they were pretty balanced. I wouldn't suggest 3 levels of fighter, casting is really good, get as much of it as you can.
Absolutely take three levels of weapon-master variant fighter -- this gets you Weapon Training which is supercharged by Gloves of Dueling).
Don't sweat not having 9th or even 8th level spells -- the proper way to view EK is as a fighter who trades a bunch of feat slots for spell-casting ability, and lots of it.
Fortification is a nice one at high levels, especially considering the number of Crit-triggered effects.
Fortifucation is pretty much the only armor ability I'd consider. Even then I'm not sure the heavy variant is worth 37.500 gp (price to add it to a +5 armor if you craft yourself).
Brilliant Energy can be nice, given the amount of AC it can bypass... Very expensive to put on a single weapon, but can be useful for Archers who will more often Full Attack, i.e. all their low iteratives where it helps the most, and they can split the enhancements across the bow and arrows (at cost of redundant +1) making it much cheaper. That goes for many enhancements in general, that Archers are flexible in using a wide variety of them.
Brilliant Energy ignores only armor and shield. By the time you can afford it, enemies who actually use equipment for AC will be pretty sparse. This varies by campaign, of course but I don't think it's worth the price. And it can't be added to ranged weapons, so an archer would have to buy brilliant energy ammunition, which would get expensive VERY quickly if you fire like 6+ arrows per round.
Don't get me wrong, I see the point in (almost) all weapon and armor enchantment. I just don't think hey are worth their price.
the proper way to view EK is as a fighter who trades a bunch of feat slots for spell-casting ability, and lots of it.
Correction: This is ONE proper way to view the EK, not THE proper way.
To be honest, I have no idea which approach I would prefer. Probably depends on the party setup, availability of magic items, the campaign and half a dozen other factors.
I think I personally prefer the armorless EK but that's mostly for style reasons. They should be about equal in overall power.
Yeah, it really depends on how you plan on playing it. Want to melee a lot? Armor is probably a good idea. Firing arrows? Obviously no shield, so light armor is probably your economical choice (just AAT and a Mithril shirt). Ray specialist? You don't need to be wearing armor - though carrying the shield is basically free AC, so why not?
What about using a summoner as a base? The class abilities will wind up stagnating, but they get a pretty solid conjurer/transmuter spell list and can cast in light armor and while you get into EK later you lose 1 less BAB getting there.
Not a good idea, in my opinion. The Summoner lives and dies by his class abilities, which will be all but useless. The spell list is not bad, but I think you'll lack the versatility and castings per day to make it worthwhile. This route might be ok-ish if you want a mounted EK (using the Eidolon as mount, obviously), but if you reduce the summoner class only to its spell casting abilities, it becomes very weak very quickly.
I'd rather take a bard/EK. Inspire Courage is a great buff even at only +2 and you get a decent number of Class abilities that don't rely on your class level too much. If you take Arcane Duelist, you can actually get a few very nice feats for free. Oh, and if you can live without the EK-capstone, you could even get the no-ASF-in-medium armor ability the Duelist gets at 10 and walk around in Mithral Full Plate. AND use a Heavy Shield with no ASF (which the summoner can't do either.)
But in general, becoming an EK is not that big of an increase in melee power for any class that already has a 3/4 BAB.
Also don't forget to have magical knack as one of your traits, it will help you with caster level dependant spells (although no with spell level in general), but i think that it's illegal for PFS.
Also someone throwed an idea, can a spellslinger wizard/ gunslinger make a good EK?
I'd take arcane blast over arcane strike....
I like the EK actually.
but then I don't often use meta magic feats like quicken spell....
You don't use the metamagic feat, you use your quicken rod from your efficient quiver if not your glove of storing OR your expensive little gem from the rival guide.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Has anyone thought of doing Bard [Arcane Duelist] 8/Fighter 2/EK 10?
BAB of 18, all 6 levels of bard spells (which are designed for this sort of character), ability to wear mithral medium armor and a heavy shield without spell failure, ability to use their bonded weapon for the somatic components of spells, etc
Of course, this is more "Fighter with casting" than "Casting with fighter." It also still has the problem of Arcane Strike conflicting with the EK capstone.
It also doesn't give you a lot over just playing bard. It gives +3 BAB and the bonus feats (a total of 5, 2 from fighter and 3 from EK).
For fun you can switch out the Fighter levels with Paladin or Ranger. Paladin gives you the +cha to saves and 3 points of will save, while ranger gives you 3 points of reflex save, a favored enemy and a single combat style feat.
As another fun option you can do Sorcerer 6/Monk 1/Fighter 1/EK 10/Sorc +2. Take the Empyreal bloodline as sorcerer (from ultimate magic) to turn sorcerer into a wisdom caster. Now you use your casting stat for AC as well, and have no need for actual armor. Combine this with Dervish Dancer and you can focus on Dex, Con and Wis (the three save stats), leave your off-hand open for casting, and take Crane Style for extra defense if needed. This does stick you with 8th level spells and a BAB of +15, though, so I'm not sure how good it would be. If you did Piranha Strike instead of Dervish and stuck with Unarmed Strikes you could even dump Strength as you would have zero need for any gear except clothing.
Neither of the above are necessarily optimal, just interesting.
I am planing on playing a Wizard7/Fighter3/EldritchKnight10 for my next campaign and I really like this combination. But when I look EK up on the net, all I see is negative comments about the EK. Why is this?
What is so wrong with EK?
Doing this combination I'll get a load of feats, some Wizard specialization powers, a base to hit at 17 on level 20 (3 less than a fighter!), the ability to cast 9th level spells and a very diverse character that I think will be fun to play!
All I see is WIN!
Could someone clarify what is so bad about this combo
I'm currently running a human universalist wizard 3/fighter 1 so I'll share some notes on my experience. I'm happy with my decision to use armor. It's a great time saver when combat starts. Arcane spell failure is a rare occurence, even before you start taking the armor training feats. When you do botch a spell, it's not the end of the world. That said, ASF and casting defensively in the same round is annoying. Avoid that scenario when possible. If my DM allowed them, I definitely would have started with a nice martial reach weapon. Magical Knack is a wonderful trait, even if you only have a single fighter level. I had originally planned on skipping Arcane Strike (eventually picking up Weapon Specialization) but I'm thinking about choosing AS at 5th level. WS is going to be a while. Weapon Focus was a good investment. Reactionary and Magical Knack have been cited as the bread and butter traits for EKs. Heed this wisdom! I chose the Fencer trait instead of Reactionary. I see now that Fencer works better with high Dex reach builds (which my guy isn't).