This build is created using this years Tier 1 Gencon boon. Rare but legal.
Is that Samsaran?
Edit: ah okay, sounds about right.
I'm fairly new to PFS, why were SLA's allowed to count as spells in the first FAQ. From what I see they are specifically described as "not spells."The FAQ prior to the most recent one explicitly said they worked, that's why.
More specificially, Paizo had issued some FAQs clarifying other aspects of how SLAs function/count as spells for most all purposes. Along with that, people asked "So how about PrC/Feat qualification?" and Paizo decided to go with "Sure, that works too", with the grammatical nuance of how to interpret requirements of "casting spells" (in plural/indefinite plural sense) which Paizo leaned towards "any single spell (incl. SLA)" qualifying for (as opposed to generalized spell slots, etc). That help?
May I provide my two cents?
The game assumes certain assumptions, for example, in an adventure path or module. Usually, it's that you'll have something resembling the Wizard/Fighter/Cleric/Rouge archetype on hand.
Eldrich Knight fails to function as either a caster or a fighter, due to lower to hit. Meaning that, for that time, he is most likely useless.
Mystic Theurge takes ages to get into, and, while taking three levels in Wizard, you cannot function in your roll as the "Fixer" of problems, since you do not have the spells needed.
Arcane Trickster still functions as the trapfinder, and glass cannon, but not as effectively (Nor as effectively as a Rouge), due to the delayed 1d6, failing to keep up with the exponential HP growth, while also failing to work as effectively as a wizard, while getting outshines by other casters who didn't get a dip.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mystic theurges and similar prestige classes have always been playable. I've seen them succeed time and time again in actual games. They're just not optimal. People tend to think that if it's not optimal, it's useless, which isn't the least bit true.
A third don't care as it doesn't affect them - a third like it, but doesn't really affect them - and a third hate it as it affects them because their characters are now illegal and don't function.
Congratulations on changing the rules to suit the whims of people who were unaffected by the previous rules!!!
In other news, Paizo Publishing has proposed a bill to Congress that would make it illegal for people to use electricity because the Amish don't like it.
Unless you are using the previous ruling, you remain unaffected by it. Period.
Why does an SLA qualify and not an Extraordinary? Because an Extraordinary isn't magical.
What about Supernatural? Nope, doesn't mimic a spell.
With the previous ruling, using an SLA allowed you to craft magical items, take prestige classes, use magical feats (like Arcane Strike) etc. The only time a SLA wasn't a spell, seemed to be in the 'dispel/counter' option for readied actions. You can't ready an action to dispel/counter a spell like ability because they weren't spells, but likewise, you can't use a spell like ability to dispel/counter a spell either.
Option A removes fun, flavorful, but not super powerful abilities from the game.
Option B keeps the fun, flavorful but not super powerful abilities in the game.
Camp 1 is unaffected by either option. Camp 2 doesn't use Option B but likes Option A however their characters won't really be affected by either ruling. Camp 3 likes Option B and uses Option B because it's fun.
Let's go with Option A and make the people who play with the option, upset, the people who don't play with the option, mildly appreciative, and remove magical options from the none casters
You know, I was perfectly happy with the FAQ-reverse, but the more of your posts I read the less I like it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, it has stunted casting progression at most of its levelsAnd an EK at many levels CAN'T carry its weight. For a good portion of its prgression it both has ub-3/4 BaB and stunted spellcasting. It is teh wort of both worlds for many levels.Really? ** spoiler omitted **What? Compared to a magus, this is not even remotely true. Compared to wizard, well duh.
Now as far as to-hit goes. Polymorph + haste + greater/heroism + greater invisibility and so on can really add up to a lot of to-hit bonuses.
But you are also a wizard. High levels you can do all sort of nonsenese. Like make a snow-cone of this creature and then magic jar into it. Add magic items and now you have 49 strength instead of the regular strength.
SO: +19str + 16 BAB + 4 greater heroism + 1 haste + 5 magic amulet - 5 PA - 8 size = +32
Without PA it is +37 and you depend on strength and arcane strike for damage.
So assuming you're okay with only having 14 Hit Dice and dying at 0 HP, spending 100 gp per HP to repair any damage dealt to you, take over the right body in the first place (since Magic Jar determines who you possess randomly), and not being able to fit...anywhere, you can achieve the attack bonus of an unbuffed 20th level Magus (+15 BaB, +12 Dex, +5 weapon).
Gratz?
Edit: Oh, sorry, we're assuming Power Attack, so +28 on the Magus until you factor in Haste (+1) and Arcane Accuracy (at least 5, likely +8 or more).
Edit 2: And I forgot Greater Spell Access, so toss +4 from Greater Heroism on there too.
Edit 3: And an extra +3 to-hit against a lot of things because of Shocking Grasp.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
My only problem is from a mechanics standpoint there is no reason to not allow the SLA rules. They aren't mechanically superior to other options available (they are better than their non-early entry equivalents obviously). Whenever this issue is brought up the other side of the argument almost always falls into 'I just don't like it.' or 'It FEELS cheesy.'Of course there is. Some races benefit form it while others do not, that is an imbalance.
Wait, so it's imbalanced for a magical race with inborn magical abilities capable of casting spells simply because they were born... to be better or faster at certain areas of magic than other, non-magical, races?
Well then, the real world is imbalanced cause them damned chimpanzees aren't using a proper point buy. They are clearly stronger and more agile than I am (probably have high HP too). It's easier for them to get Power Attack than me.
Paizo please nerf Chimpanzees.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am conflicted on this FAQ, which is why I've waited a little bit before commenting on it.
On the one hand the idea that you have a single SLA and that gives the same caster level and qualification options as a full caster always struck me as a little unreasonable. It meant that some class options and races were massively better than others - in my experience the vast majority of Mystic Theurges were either a race with a 2nd level SLA, a cleric with the trickery domain for the copycat SLA and so on. From that angle I'm happy that the new FAQ exists.
On the other hand I liked the result of the old FAQ. Gnomes should be able to learn Arcane Strike. Master dwarven smiths should have a better crafting option available than 'Master Craftsman'. Theurges and Tricksters should both get a little help for meeting their prerequisites. Leaving the loophole in the rules allowed me to fix several problems in the game itself at a minor cost without having to add ever more houserules - for example a SLA allowed me to make my Dr. Frankenstein Alchemist miniboss with Craft Construct even though alchemists don't qualify for crafting feats.
The previous SLA ruling created a lot of mess and was fairly counterintuitive, but it allowed for build options and character concepts that are otherwise hard to get off the ground. Ideally I'd still like Paizo to keep the SLA ruling as it is now, but also go back and actually properly resolve the problems the old FAQ fixed. For starters by easing the requirements for the hybrid classes and adding a viable crafting option for non-caster crafters.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That show your personal preference and it is fine, other people did't like it for several reasons (particularly I dislike when a rule makes no sense, I hate "fixes" that don't actually address the real problem directly, and I dislike the imbalance between races that the FAQ created.)
I would still consider the arbitrary racial restrictions of SLA early access to be preferable to having no workable options for certain prestige classes and such. As far as addressing the real issues at play, I think you will continually find yourself disappointed (I know I do)... So hold out for something you know will never happen, or accept the half compromise because it is better than nothing is how I look at it. I accept the half assed compromise, but now even that has been taken away with seemingly no intention of fixing the core problem. It's a step backward I think.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
-A lot of good stuff-
I think this largely mirrors my thoughts on the issue. Using SLAs as a work-around for getting into prestige classes and qualifying for feats was far from an ideal solution, but at least it was a solution.
And an EK at many levels CAN'T carry its weight. For a good portion of its prgression it both has ub-3/4 BaB and stunted spellcasting. It is teh wort of both worlds for many levels.** spoiler omitted **Yes, really. 3/4 BaB carries with it certain assumptions. The main one of which is that you have a way to boost your to-hit beyond 3/4 BaB.
So any level that the EK has lesser than OR equal to 3/4 BaB, he is sub-3/4 BaB in total hit bonuses.
Bard has 3/4 BaB, plus spells and Inspire Courage (or that Archaeologist's Luck thing).
Inquisitor has 3/4 BaB, plus spells and Bane. And Judgement (or Favored Target).
Alchemist has 3/4 BaB plus Extracts and Mutagen. Plus attacking Touch AC with Bombs.
Magus has 3/4 BaB and spells. Granted he doesn't have a (non optional) way to boost accuracy, but he does get a free extra attack and a hefty damage boost with Spell Combat, which is a fair trade.
Hunter has 3/4 BaB, plus spells and a free Flank buddy who ives him an extra round's worth of attacks.
Investigator has 3/4 BaB, plus Extracts and Studied Combat.
Leaving EK and the Rogue as the only odd men out on supposed martial classes who don't have a way to boost their to-hit to full BaB and beyond.
This is why 3.5 version of Arcane Strike was cool.
Untyped bonus to +x hit/ (xd4 dam) based on spell slot level used (free action, meaning you can dump multiple spells for boost to hit/dam, but only last 1 rd)Sure, unless you were EK, Bard, Duskblade etc you likely didn't have the spell slots to sacrifice.
But it makes EK actually decent.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That show your personal preference and it is fine, other people did't like it for several reasons (particularly I dislike when a rule makes no sense, I hate "fixes" that don't actually address the real problem directly, and I dislike the imbalance between races that the FAQ created.)I would still consider the arbitrary racial restrictions of SLA early access to be preferable to having no workable options for certain prestige classes and such. As far as addressing the real issues at play, I think you will continually find yourself disappointed (I know I do)... So hold out for something you know will never happen, or accept the half compromise because it is better than nothing is how I look at it. I accept the half assed compromise, but now even that has been taken away with seemingly no intention of fixing the core problem. It's a step backward I think.
Indeed. The idea that we should abandon the flawed but functional fix in the vague hope that one day Paizo will release some kind of comprehensive perfect solution is classic example of making the perfect the enemy of the good.
If there was some sort of comprehensive fix incoming, why not retain the current rules until that fix is published?
^And they should have said something about whether they intended to fix the problems that the old FAQ bandaged.
Contributor
|
I have a question for a lot of posters in the thread. Not to sound snarky, but a lot of people are saying "they did it because PFS players didn't like us having fun" and "they're doing it because they hate martials/gnomes/alchemists". I wasn't aware that the Design Team had made a statement about their reasons for making the change. If they have, could someone post a link? I'm curious to see what they've said.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
My only problem is from a mechanics standpoint there is no reason to not allow the SLA rules. They aren't mechanically superior to other options available (they are better than their non-early entry equivalents obviously). Whenever this issue is brought up the other side of the argument almost always falls into 'I just don't like it.' or 'It FEELS cheesy.'Of course there is. Some races benefit form it while others do not, that is an imbalance.Wait, so it's imbalanced for a magical race with inborn magical abilities capable of casting spells simply because they were born... to be better or faster at certain areas of magic than other, non-magical, races?
Well then, the real world is imbalanced cause them damned chimpanzees aren't using a proper point buy. They are clearly stronger and more agile than I am (probably have high HP too). It's easier for them to get Power Attack than me.
Paizo please nerf Chimpanzees.
They did, PF chimps are not nearly as strong as RL ones.
|
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The APG Prestige Classes are generally much better than the Core Prestige Classes (which are legacies of 3rd/3.5).
Actually, two of those are legacy as well - the Horizon Walker and DwarvenStalwart Defender, which was stripped of its racial prerequisite the same way arcane archer was. Also, the Chronicler is new to Pathfinder.
I have a question for a lot of posters in the thread. Not to sound snarky, but a lot of people are saying "they did it because PFS players didn't like us having fun" and "they're doing it because they hate martials/gnomes/alchemists". I wasn't aware that the Design Team had made a statement about their reasons for making the change. If they have, could someone post a link? I'm curious to see what they've said.
As far as I know they have not. But by combining several FAQs and new options you can easily gain the impression that it is on purpose that martial classes get less buffs AND more nerfs than the casters.
Destroying crane wing and taking arcane strike, grasping strike etc. away from martials was an unnecessary and undeserved nerf. And that's just to name the main offenders.
At the same time the strongest caster choices remain unchanged.
And even if some caster builds were inconvenienced by this FAQ it was not the strong ones but just the interesting ones.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just a couple of random thoughts, not hugely related to most of the discussions that have been going on here.
MT/AT PrC's should get viable Base Classes to replace them (sort of like how the Magus kicks the EK to the kerb in almost every respect as a fighter/wizard hybrid). I'm sure people would moan about something
Like the narrowing of play options that this creates? There are ~30 base classes (depending on how you count). For any given prestige class that's meant to have a multi-class entry, there's going to be easily 100 different class combos that can be used to qualify. (This is a good thing) That's without considering the multiplicative effect all the archetypes that are available for each class. Replacing all the possible ways that people can use those class combos to get into those prestige classes will require several classes, each with dozens of archetypes. Just to get to where the prestige class system already starts at. This is not only a waste of designer time, but it will alienate players who don't want hundreds of over-specialized base classes trying to replace the modular multi-class & prestige class system that already exists.
As for the magus in particular, it's a very good class. And it does play like a particular subset of fighter / wizards. But it's also a narrow class, and there's not really all that much variety in the useful characters that people can make with the class. Certainly no where near the variability of the fighter or the wizard, let alone the variations that can be made from an EK build. To say nothing of it in no way addressing any Eldritch Knight concepts that are not Wizards, not Fighters, or are neither.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And finessable spears.
I know, right?! (Seriously, though, finessable spears.)
|
Well fortunately in my home game I'm free to ignore the SLA reversal.
If I was playing in PFS and I had a character that just got smacked by this, I would be quite unhappy.
I guess it is a good thing I don't play a lot of PFS.
I am curious what prompted this reversal.
Of course I would really would rather the design team 'fix' alchemists so they can craft magic items, specifically so they can craft Alchemical Golems ~ it just makes sense that an alchemist created the darn things.
Just my 2 cents.
John
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Spellcraft. Key "Craft" feats to Spellcraft instead of CL.
(I don't know who came up with this idea, but it's pretty golden.)
Well, when you promise that something will be removed if the power level is off, then the only logical reason it'd get removed is for 'feeling cheesy". The fact that it wasn't too strong in any circumstance is meaningless in the face of cheddar.
Paizo is honest and straight forward like that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Finesseable speeeeaaaarrrrsss~!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My guess, by the way, is, that this new rulings has nothing whatsoever to to do with the power level of certain prestige classes. Classes that basically only were published for this game to satisfy 3.5 backward compatibility in 2009. I believe that Paizo don't really care much about these classes that basically are just legacy, and I think rightly so. There are tons of options now that were not available then, and I think the game wouldn't be poorer if these legacy classes wouldn't even exist. And if they don't satisfy the need for power gamers to be at the top "tier", then I just don't care.
I think the real reason the ruling got reversed is that is easily can have any number of unforeseen side effects in other parts of the game, and probably would wreak havoc on something they have in current development that we don't even know about, and thus, it had to go. Besides the fact that—considering consistency of the rules—the old FAQ ruling simply made no sense.
The non-announcement of the change is puzzling indeed, though.
|
Spellcraft. Key "Craft" feats to Spellcraft instead of CL.
A spellcraft check already bypasses every additional crafting requirement besides the caster level to take the feat. I guess it could make sense to have spellcraft bypass every requirement in item creation but I could also easily see this being too strong for a single skill.
Arcane Trickster still functions as the trapfinder, and glass cannon, but not as effectively (Nor as effectively as a Rouge), due to the delayed 1d6, failing to keep up with the exponential HP growth, while also failing to work as effectively as a wizard, while getting outshines by other casters who didn't get a dip.
Uh what?
AT stomps rogue into the ground. Heck go scount/AT to get acid-splash touch-attack sneak attacks every round. Is AT good? Pfffffff idk, but it is certainly better than a rogue.
So assuming you're okay with only having 14 Hit Dice and dying at 0 HP, spending 100 gp per HP to repair any damage dealt to you, take over the right body in the first place (since Magic Jar determines who you possess randomly), and not being able to fit...anywhere, you can achieve the attack bonus of an unbuffed 20th level Magus (+15 BaB, +12 Dex, +5 weapon).
Gratz?
Edit: Oh, sorry, we're assuming Power Attack, so +28 on the Magus until you factor in Haste (+1) and Arcane Accuracy (at least 5, likely +8 or more).
Edit 2: And I forgot Greater Spell Access, so toss +4 from Greater Heroism on there too.
Edit 3: And an extra +3 to-hit against a lot of things because of Shocking Grasp.
Neat. But your magus is also three spell levels behind the EK and has a worse list.
Oh don't get me wrong I love magi (campaign is 26 point buy which means some extra con/cha).
Keep that dex stuff away from me. I have enough pool points to use Arcane strike every round, so at level 15 I already have a +12 to-hit from attributes. The magus fits better in super high-op groups like the one my magus is in. In the other groups I play in, people would call my EK op. Heck they already call my aegis OP.
|
|
Arcane Trickster still functions as the trapfinder, and glass cannon, but not as effectively (Nor as effectively as a Rouge), due to the delayed 1d6, failing to keep up with the exponential HP growth, while also failing to work as effectively as a wizard, while getting outshines by other casters who didn't get a dip.Uh what?
AT stomps rogue into the ground. Heck go scount/AT to get acid-splash touch-attack sneak attacks every round. Is AT good? Pfffffff idk, but it is certainly better than a rogue.
Not really. A single class rogue with the elf FCB and minor/major magic rogue talents does a better job of touch sneak attacks than the AT. Especially if they are an undergound chemist to get sneak attack on splash weapons too. And they can take the bomber talent as well to get sneak attack on a bomb.
And they will have a higher BAB with those touch attacks, and a higher caster level on chill touch.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Spellcraft. Key "Craft" feats to Spellcraft instead of CL.A spellcraft check already bypasses every additional crafting requirement besides the caster level to take the feat. I guess it could make sense to have spellcraft bypass every requirement in item creation but I could also easily see this being too strong for a single skill.
Perception and Diplomacy say "Hi!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arcane Trickster still functions as the trapfinder, and glass cannon, but not as effectively (Nor as effectively as a Rouge), due to the delayed 1d6, failing to keep up with the exponential HP growth, while also failing to work as effectively as a wizard, while getting outshines by other casters who didn't get a dip.Uh what?
AT stomps rogue into the ground. Heck go scount/AT to get acid-splash touch-attack sneak attacks every round. Is AT good? Pfffffff idk, but it is certainly better than a rogue.
How do you charge and cast at the same time?
Touch attack, single attack... I'd rather full attack with daggers. And that is saying something!
|
Contributor
|
Swashbuckler/ Daring Champion does it. Spears are a bad weapon for them, but it's the best was to get your Aiel/Zulu on.And finessable spears.I know, right?! (Seriously, though, finessable spears.)
I already had to staple swashbuckler levels onto Sasha Nevah (although she makes a fine swashbuckler/ranger/Red Mantis Assassin). I'm getting tired of having to splash every time I want to use Dex.
So mad.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
When I'm in charge, Dex will determine all attack rolls! Join my tyrannical legion, and together we will end the Strength-based hegemony of old! And replace it with a Dexterity-based hegemony. Of new, presumably. At least until the Guided Hand rebellion...
*sigh* Nobody appreciates how hard it is for tyrants.
EDIT: Forgot to tyrannize.
Arcane Trickster still functions as the trapfinder, and glass cannon, but not as effectively (Nor as effectively as a Rouge), due to the delayed 1d6, failing to keep up with the exponential HP growth, while also failing to work as effectively as a wizard, while getting outshines by other casters who didn't get a dip.Uh what?
AT stomps rogue into the ground. Heck go scount/AT to get acid-splash touch-attack sneak attacks every round. Is AT good? Pfffffff idk, but it is certainly better than a rogue.
How do you charge and cast at the same time?
Touch attack, single attack... I'd rather full attack with daggers. And that is saying something!
Skirmisher man. Move 10+ feet, auto sneak attack. You're a caster and that is your cantrip. Not bad. (Which you totally will never get so ignore that idea :P)
Let's look through AT.
R3/W3/AT10/W4
Alright that nets you 10 BAB, 17 CL, 9th level spells, 7d6 sneak attack.
Oh look in-class access to greater invisibility. Yes please.
You're a bad wizard, but that is still vastly better than a rogue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We use some of the Eldritch Knight abilities as a Magus Arcana, and Mythic Abilities (same list for both).
Maybe that can help :3
I just looked up Critical Strike and Opportune Strike -- they sound nice until you get to the part that says "The magus can use this ability once per day" (in both cases). These are traps.
Eldritch Knight's Spell Critical works "whenever an eldritch knight successfully confirms a critical hit". That is nice. Even with the old SLA ruling, it comes online no earlier than Magus Critical Strike (although earlier than Opportune Strike).
I think that Magus is more interesting than Eldritch Knight, and more generally powerful (certainly with the new SLA ruling until you get to really high levels, and even with the old SLA ruling until you get to moderately high levels), but those two Magus Arcana to approximate Eldritch Knight's Critical Strike are traps, not substitutes.
EDIT: If I wanted to make a non-trap way to replicate Eldritch Knight's Critical Strike, I would do it this way.
Arcane Trickster still functions as the trapfinder, and glass cannon, but not as effectively (Nor as effectively as a Rouge), due to the delayed 1d6, failing to keep up with the exponential HP growth, while also failing to work as effectively as a wizard, while getting outshines by other casters who didn't get a dip.Uh what?
AT stomps rogue into the ground. Heck go scount/AT to get acid-splash touch-attack sneak attacks every round. Is AT good? Pfffffff idk, but it is certainly better than a rogue.
How do you charge and cast at the same time?
Touch attack, single attack... I'd rather full attack with daggers. And that is saying something!
Skirmisher man. Move 10+ feet, auto sneak attack. You're a caster and that is your cantrip. Not bad. (Which you totally will never get so ignore that idea :P)
Let's look through AT.
R3/W3/AT10/W4Alright that nets you 10 BAB, 17 CL, 9th level spells, 7d6 sneak attack.
Oh look in-class access to greater invisibility. Yes please.
You're a bad wizard, but that is still vastly better than a rogue.
Don't you need 8 levels of Rogue to get Skirmisher?
Sometimes I have the feeling that some people believe themselves heroes when they mention "power gamers" in a contemptuous way.And if they don't satisfy the need for power gamers to be at the top "tier", then I just don't care.
Not at all.
|
|
Don't you need 8 levels of Rogue to get Skirmisher?Arcane Trickster still functions as the trapfinder, and glass cannon, but not as effectively (Nor as effectively as a Rouge), due to the delayed 1d6, failing to keep up with the exponential HP growth, while also failing to work as effectively as a wizard, while getting outshines by other casters who didn't get a dip.Uh what?
AT stomps rogue into the ground. Heck go scount/AT to get acid-splash touch-attack sneak attacks every round. Is AT good? Pfffffff idk, but it is certainly better than a rogue.
How do you charge and cast at the same time?
Touch attack, single attack... I'd rather full attack with daggers. And that is saying something!
Skirmisher man. Move 10+ feet, auto sneak attack. You're a caster and that is your cantrip. Not bad. (Which you totally will never get so ignore that idea :P)
Let's look through AT.
R3/W3/AT10/W4Alright that nets you 10 BAB, 17 CL, 9th level spells, 7d6 sneak attack.
Oh look in-class access to greater invisibility. Yes please.
You're a bad wizard, but that is still vastly better than a rogue.
Yes you do. Scout is actually doing nothing for this build as Scouts Charge doesn't even kick in until 4th level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So assuming you're okay with only having 14 Hit Dice and dying at 0 HP, spending 100 gp per HP to repair any damage dealt to you, take over the right body in the first place (since Magic Jar determines who you possess randomly), and not being able to fit...anywhere, you can achieve the attack bonus of an unbuffed 20th level Magus (+15 BaB, +12 Dex, +5 weapon).
Gratz?
Edit: Oh, sorry, we're assuming Power Attack, so +28 on the Magus until you factor in Haste (+1) and Arcane Accuracy (at least 5, likely +8 or more).
Edit 2: And I forgot Greater Spell Access, so toss +4 from Greater Heroism on there too.
Edit 3: And an extra +3 to-hit against a lot of things because of Shocking Grasp.
Neat. But your magus is also three spell levels behind the EK and has a worse list.
Oh don't get me wrong I love magi (campaign is 26 point buy which means some extra con/cha).
Keep that dex stuff away from me. I have enough pool points to use Arcane strike every round, so at level 15 I already have a +12 to-hit from attributes. The magus fits better in super high-op groups like the one my magus is in. In the other groups I play in, people would call my EK op. Heck they already call my aegis OP.
Which has exactly nothing to do with the price of rice in China considering you were speaking of attack bonus, which is what our whole conversation was about.
The Eldritch Knight is a sub par fighter, and a sub par Wizard. When your goal is to be a good fighter, it doesn't really matter if you're a better Wizard than the guy not trying to be a Wizard if he's a better fighter than you by a looooooot.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see how keeping a non-sensical rule that overvalues Aasimar makes Prestige Classes better.
Fix Prestige Classes, don't do something that makes no sense in terms of in-game universe or in terms of out-of-game logic to try and power them up.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see how keeping a non-sensical rule that overvalues Aasimar makes Prestige Classes better.
Fix Prestige Classes, don't do something that makes no sense in terms of in-game universe or in terms of out-of-game logic to try and power them up.
Would have been nice if they had. They did not, and took away the bandaid anyway.
Which has exactly nothing to do with the price of rice in China considering you were speaking of attack bonus, which is what our whole conversation was about.
The Eldritch Knight is a sub par fighter, and a sub par Wizard. When your goal is to be a good fighter, it doesn't really matter if you're a better Wizard than the guy not trying to be a Wizard if he's a better fighter than you by a looooooot.
It is kind of interesting that people forget that as an EK you can either cast worse than a wizard or you can fight worse than a fighter, that's all action economy allows outside of really high level meta magic. Not only that, but you are light on feats so you can't specialize, which is a huge disadvantage in this game.