Again, I don't know what you mean by tiers. Please explain it if you're going to keep using the term.
I didn't say it won't unbalance the game. What I said is that it's not a foregone conclusion that it will, which is what you've claimed despite not using the weapon.
And while I haven't developed my EK to higher levels yet, there are people who have who do feel the EK isn't magical enough. Whether or not they'd use the Spellslinger, they have redesigned EKs themselves. I'm pretty sure the guy I'm thinking about has been interviewed on this site before. Yeah, Dawnforgedcast. I'm looking at their video about it on YouTube now as I write this. They went in a different direction than I did, but they definitely feel the EK can be improved. Regardless, just because you feel a class doesn't need adjusting, in general, or need the Spellslinger specifically doesn't mean others agree. It's your opinion, not a fact.
You realize there's a simple solution to this argument: use your tier 3 EK and play with the weapon. Play test it and tell us how it handles. I'm sure your opinion won't change, but at least it will be backed by experience instead of bias. And who knows, your opinion might change. But even if it doesn't, you would at least be in a position to tell me what is too much and what is not.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
Again, I don't know what you mean by tiers. Please explain it if you're going to keep using the term.
I didn't say it won't unbalance the game. What I said is that it's not a foregone conclusion that it will, which is what you've claimed despite not using the weapon.
And while I haven't developed my EK to higher levels yet, there are people who have who do feel the EK isn't magical enough. Whether or not they'd use the Spellslinger, they have redesigned EKs themselves. I'm pretty sure the guy I'm thinking about has been interviewed on this site before. Yeah, Dawnforgedcast. I'm looking at their video about it on YouTube now as I write this. They went in a different direction than I did, but they definitely feel the EK can be improved. Regardless, just because you feel a class doesn't need adjusting, in general, or need the Spellslinger specifically doesn't mean others agree. It's your opinion, not a fact.
You realize there's a simple solution to this argument: use your tier 3 EK and play with the weapon. Play test it and tell us how it handles. I'm sure your opinion won't change, but at least it will be backed by experience instead of bias. And who knows, your opinion might change. But even if it doesn't, you would at least be in a position to tell me what is too much and what is not.
I can’t with 100% accuracy speak for the other poster, but typically tier 1 is 1-5, 2 is 6-10, 3 is 11-15 and 4 is 16-20.
Or you could also say that 1-4, 5-10, 11-16, 17-20 as most classes get something powerful at 5, 11, and 17.
I don’t agree that not using something invalidates any statement about how it will affect the game.
I’ve never used an item that gives my character a 29 Dex the way Belt of Storm Giant Strength gives 29 strength, but I know it would pretty much break the game.
You mention dawnforgedcast but don’t talk about anything they changed, how about a link to the video?
If they are saying in their EKs hands that would unbalance things, I believe them without them needing to try it. I have homebrewed enough stuff that I can theorycraft something, think about how it would work and know if it is too powerful or not without using it for 10 sessions let alone 1.
Thanks for an explanation about tiers. I hope it's the same or close enough to what Pigeon keeps talking about.
You don't have to agree. It's ok to have differing opinions. That said, we're not talking about some item that gives 29 dex. We're talking about my specific homebrew item. I never said any and all items have to be tried before you can claim they're too powerful. You've consistently been acting as if I'm making all or nothing statements even though I haven't. Of course there are instances where we can know an item would unbalance a game without it being tried. I simply don't think this is one of them. In fact, I tried to design it with limitations to avoid it being something like that. That's why I say the weapon needs to be tried, so that it can be said whether or not the limitations are strong enough.
Anyway, Pigeon didn't say "I THINK it will unbalance the game." They said "It WILL unbalance the game." I'm not going to let an opinion stated as a fact slide by me without commenting, especially when it's a negative opinion about me or something of mine. Don't want to try the weapon? Fine. Want to continue thinking it will unbalance the game? Do you. But as long as it's an opinion stated as a fact, as long as it comes from a position of bias rather than experience, I'm going to keep pointing that aspect out.
I've chosen my words carefully, allowing the possibility that the Spellslinger might actually unbalance the game as suggested, but I maintain the caveat that it would need to be tried out to know one way or the other. Pigeon makes no such caveat, but the reason they give for their being so sure isn't that they tried the weapon. It isn't that they tried something similar (at least then we could have a discussion about their experience and if the Spellslinger is similar enough that it could be predicted to have the same effect). No, their reason was "I trust Wizards to get it right", and since Wizards doesn't even trust themselves to get it right 100%, that doesn't hold much weight.
i didn't describe what Dawnforgedcast did with their EK because it's irrelevant to my point. I only brought it up because Pigeon questioned my position based off my inexperience, that since I don't have a late game EK, I can't really claim that it needs improving and, on the flip side, since they have played with a late game EK, they know that it does not. I mentioned dfc simply as an example of players experienced with late game EKs who DO feel that the subclass needs improvement, therefore not thinking the class is fine the way it is is not an opinion only an inexperienced person would hold. I've already stated that the video did not go in the same direction I went, only that it seeks to improve the EK as they see it. If you really want to watch it, just go to YouTube and search for "Eldritch Knight Reforged".
Lastly, I know the weapon is powerful. I do not believe the weapon is soooo powerful that it will unbalance the game. And I especially don't think simply having more spell slots would do that, which is what Pigeon specifically said (you yourself haven't made that specific claim despite your obvious support for them). After all, I believe there are official items that give one or two or three spell slots (the Pearl of power is official isn't it?).
If you or anyone else want to have a discussion about the ITEM and what you think could or should be changed to make it more tenable to you, we can do that. We might not agree, and I'll probably not change a thing but we can have an open discussion about it which could lead who knows where. But if the only things forthcoming are more ideas like "wizards is perfect" or "you're too inexperienced to know anything" or even simply moving the goalposts to include all or nothing statements I'm not even making, then you're not looking for a discussion and I won't have much to say to you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
Thanks for an explanation about tiers. I hope it's the same or close enough to what Pigeon keeps talking about.
You don't have to agree. It's ok to have differing opinions. That said, we're not talking about some item that gives 29 dex. We're talking about my specific homebrew item. I never said any and all items have to be tried before you can claim they're too powerful. You've consistently been acting as if I'm making all or nothing statements even though I haven't. Of course there are instances where we can know an item would unbalance a game without it being tried. I simply don't think this is one of them. In fact, I tried to design it with limitations to avoid it being something like that. That's why I say the weapon needs to be tried, so that it can be said whether or not the limitations are strong enough.
Anyway, Pigeon didn't say "I THINK it will unbalance the game." They said "It WILL unbalance the game." I'm not going to let an opinion stated as a fact slide by me without commenting, especially when it's a negative opinion about me or something of mine. Don't want to try the weapon? Fine. Want to continue thinking it will unbalance the game? Do you. But as long as it's an opinion stated as a fact, as long as it comes from a position of bias rather than experience, I'm going to keep pointing that aspect out.
I've chosen my words carefully, allowing the possibility that the Spellslinger might actually unbalance the game as suggested, but I maintain the caveat that it would need to be tried out to know one way or the other. Pigeon makes no such caveat, but the reason they give for their being so sure isn't that they tried the weapon. It isn't that they tried something similar (at least then we could have a discussion about their experience and if the Spellslinger is similar enough that it could be predicted to have the same effect). No, their reason was "I trust Wizards to get it right", and since Wizards doesn't even trust themselves to get it right 100%, that doesn't hold much weight.
i didn't describe what Dawnforgedcast did with their EK because it's irrelevant to my point. I only brought it up because Pigeon questioned my position based off my inexperience, that since I don't have a late game EK, I can't really claim that it needs improving and, on the flip side, since they have played with a late game EK, they know that it does not. I mentioned dfc simply as an example of players experienced with late game EKs who DO feel that the subclass needs improvement, therefore not thinking the class is fine the way it is is not an opinion only an inexperienced person would hold. I've already stated that the video did not go in the same direction I went, only that it seeks to improve the EK as they see it. If you really want to watch it, just go to YouTube and search for "Eldritch Knight Reforged".
Lastly, I know the weapon is powerful. I do not believe the weapon is soooo powerful that it will unbalance the game. And I especially don't think simply having more spell slots would do that, which is what Pigeon specifically said (you yourself haven't made that specific claim despite your obvious support for them). After all, I believe there are official items that give one or two or three spell slots (the Pearl of power is official isn't it?).
If you or anyone else want to have a discussion about the ITEM and what you think could or should be changed to make it more tenable to you, we can do that. We might not agree, and I'll probably not change a thing but we can have an open discussion about it which could lead who knows where. But if the only things forthcoming are more ideas like "wizards is perfect" or "you're too inexperienced to know anything" or even simply moving the goalposts to include all or nothing statements I'm not even making, then you're not looking for a discussion and I won't have much to say to you.
I don't think anyone has leveled an accusation of inexperience at you, nor do I take any of the comments as an insult against you or the item. I think Pigeon has simply indicated that in his EKs hands, it would unbalance the game. He has the absolute right, knowing his character and what the item does, to make that claim. No one claimed Wizards is perfect, just an opinion that they made the EK a certain way and they feel that it’s a solid build.
as for changes to the item, I’ve already given my thoughts on it.
You know, you have continuously misread or misinterpreted things I've written this entire discussion. And my going into detail every time you do so hasn't seemed to deter that. It doesn't seem to do anything but make me frustrated. So I will simply say this:
Yes, it has been implied that I can't have an accurate opinion about the late game EK without playing with the late game EK. I could quote it, but I'm not sure it would make a difference. Just know that such a statement has been made.
I never said I was insulted or that insults were made. I said negative opinions were stated as fact. There's a difference.
I have had to say "I didn't say ___/I never said ____" so many times in response to you. It seems to me that we've had and will continue to have a disconnect over my words that I simply can't predict, that I think I've said something clearly and you still read it as something else. And since I don't know what to do about it, I'm going to TRY to just leave it alone.
Pigeon has the right to think my weapon will unbalance the game. I have always said they can have that opinion. Similarly, I have the right to point out when an opinion is stated as fact or when an opinion shows bias as opposed to personal experience. We have all kinds of rights in this discussion and I haven't tried to take away any of them from anyone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
Tier 1 is 1-4, 2 is 5-10, 3 is 11-16, and 4 is 17-20. I think that’s listed above the xp chart in the PHB. Don’t get we wrong, I’m not saying don’t use an item or tweak anything at all, I’m just saying to be careful with items that change limitations to classes because it could ruin your fun by having an OP character. Just some insight from my play at the higher levels that although an EK isn’t a great caster, they are an amazing class. They are absolutely fighters to the core with a smattering or casting which is great. I have a Paladin/1 sorcerer/6 who’s a caster that can melee and it’s quite a different style, fun in its own way. Enjoy playing for sure, just realize a small tweak can significantly change a class and unbalance things. Could make things unfun for you or other players that you outshine their roles.
I realize most of this thread has been dedicated to Eldritch Knight as a fighter, but is it a better option as an archery based fighter than the Arcane Archer (which just seems pretty blah)? Considering doing a 5 levels or Eldritch knight and maybe pick up two of Ranger just to get Hunter's mark on my spell list. I lose one level of spellslot progression for the EK but it lets me take defense for my fighter fighting style and then archery for my ranger fighting style and get extra damage on every attack I make against a target.
It is a little bit MAD but I think just leaving wisdom at the minimum for multiclass isn't too bad. Make Dexterity highest followed by Intelligence. Curious if others have tried this with the EK in particular.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I realize most of this thread has been dedicated to Eldritch Knight as a fighter, but is it a better option as an archery based fighter than the Arcane Archer (which just seems pretty blah)? Considering doing a 5 levels or Eldritch knight and maybe pick up two of Ranger just to get Hunter's mark on my spell list. I lose one level of spellslot progression for the EK but it lets me take defense for my fighter fighting style and then archery for my ranger fighting style and get extra damage on every attack I make against a target.
It is a little bit MAD but I think just leaving wisdom at the minimum for multiclass isn't too bad. Make Dexterity highest followed by Intelligence. Curious if others have tried this with the EK in particular.
I haven't tried it myself, but you're essentially trading fourth level spells and an Ability Score Improvement/Feat for a plus 1 to AC and Hunter's mark. Personally, I'd rather keep the spells and improvement option, and then just choose archery as my fighting style for my fighter, but what you're suggesting isn't a bad idea at all. Both the defense fighting style and Hunter's Mark are going to earn their due by the time you reach higher levels.
As long as you're not going any further into the ranger class, you don't really need to worry about Wis too much other than getting the required 13 ability points so you can multiclass. You'd get two spells and one spell slot by taking ranger levels, and only two spells on the list of first level ranger spells involve making the enemy save against them. Hunter's Mark lands automatically, and the other spells, beside Ensnaring Strike and Hail of Thorns, aren't spells that do damage or require a save (I think).
Using Standard Array or Point Buy should allow you to get a 13 or higher in Dex, Int, AND Wis pretty painlessly, not to mention your racial bonus if you pick a race that helps with those abilities. And if you're rolling your ability scores, you just have to hope your rolls aren't terrible. Strength or Cha will probably end up being your dump stat, but as an archer, you don't really need either to fight with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
I realize most of this thread has been dedicated to Eldritch Knight as a fighter, but is it a better option as an archery based fighter than the Arcane Archer (which just seems pretty blah)? Considering doing a 5 levels or Eldritch knight and maybe pick up two of Ranger just to get Hunter's mark on my spell list. I lose one level of spellslot progression for the EK but it lets me take defense for my fighter fighting style and then archery for my ranger fighting style and get extra damage on every attack I make against a target.
It is a little bit MAD but I think just leaving wisdom at the minimum for multiclass isn't too bad. Make Dexterity highest followed by Intelligence. Curious if others have tried this with the EK in particular.
Eh...I'd suggest sticking to single classing. Hunter's Mark and 1 more AC isn't worth delaying access to your ASIs, War Magic, Indomitable, Eldritch Strike and Extra Attack 2 by two levels.
I wouldn't say EK is better than Arcane Archer, just different. Eldritch Knights have a slow start when it comes to subclass features and gain slots so slowly that your spellcasting is mostly going to be for defense, utility and support. By the time you get 2nd level spells you'll already have Extra Attack and full spellcasters will already have 4th level spells. The small damage increase of casting damage spells isn't worth it compared to saving your limited slots for spells like Shield, Absorb Elements, Mirror Image, Misty Step or Levitate, which can save you from a lot of damage.
As far as cantrips go, Frostbite can provide support to party members and Shocking Grasp gives you a high risk/high reward way to "disengage" an enemy. Ray of Frost can be handy for kiting. Chill Touch is great if you ever have to fight a monster that can regenerate. Blade Ward will help if you need to stall enemies, like holding a choke point. Once you hit 7th level you can still get a shot in after using a cantrip.
Eldritch Strike is a gamechanger since it lets you greatly increase the effectiveness of saving throw spells. You can use it to make sure a specific spell lands, but you can also use it to increase the duration of spells that allow a saving throw every turn. For example, you could attack 3 different creatures, Action Surge and cast Slow, then keep attacking those same 3 creatures on future rounds to make it less likely that they'll succeed on the save. If you each creature has a 50% chance to make their save, you'd normally only affect half of the creatures and the spell would only last an average of 1 turn. With Eldritch Strike, Slow would last an average of 3 turns before wearing off and it'll stick on a higher number of targets too. As a bonus, Slow makes it easier for you to land future attacks and keep Eldritch Strike going. Other good spells to combine with Eldritch Strike include Blindness/Deafness, Earthbind, and Levitate.
Arcane Archers are much more front-loaded. Bursting Arrow is a free 2d6 damage to your target and every creature within 10 feet of it, no save. This can be a big area if you target a Large creature. Grasping Arrow deals a free 2d6 poison damage and reduces the creature's speed by 10 feet; again, no save. The first time they move on each turn, that's another free 2d6 slashing damage, even if they're not moving willingly. That's easy damage if you have a Warlock in the party with Repelling Blast, a Way of the Open Hand or Way of the Four Elements Monk, someone that's good at grappling or shoving, a Druid with Thorn Whip, or an arcane caster with Lightning Lure or Thunderwave.
At 7th level your arrows are magical, you can redirect a missed shot to another enemy, and you can pick up another Arcane Shot. Shadow Arrow will effectively blind its target if it fails its save, which sets up an easy combo with Sharpshooter and Action Surge. Use Shadow Arrow on your first attack; if it works, use Action Surge to get another Attack action and use Sharpshooter on all your attacks. If you miss one and there happens to be another enemy nearby, no problem - just redirect the shot. Anyone that can attack from more than 5 feet away also benefits from advantage that round. Seeking Arrow and Piercing Arrow can also be useful in the right situations.
While 2 uses of Arcane Shot might not seem that much, it's the same number of slots Warlocks get for half of their career, and they recover with a short rest, so you can expect at least 4-6 uses daily unless your DM is extremely stingy for some reason. Eldritch Knights are stuck with 2-3 slots from levels 3-6 and 6-7 slots from levels 7-12, and more than half of those slots are 1st level, which in my opinion are weaker than Arcane Shot options, so you can see Arcane Shot is actually quite competitive compared to EK spellcasting. By the time EKs get 3rd level spells and another big bump in spell slots, Ever-Ready Shot is right around the corner for Arcane Archers, which lets them use their shots more aggressively since they'll always have 1 use available when going into battle. Also, Arcane Shots don't use up your action so you're not sacrificing any attacks like an Eldritch Knight does when casting spell. You're essentially casting a spell-like effect for free. Arcane Shots also aren't subject to Counterspell, Dispel Magic, and don't suffer from any of the drawbacks of readying a spell (casting up front + using up concentration.)
Both subclasses have compelling options in their toolkit. Which one's "better" largely depends on play style, personal preference and what the rest of the party looks like. Some people can't stand having 2 uses of something at a time, while others feel the number of slots EKs have is way too low.
I played a EK til 7th or 8th level and it was ok. I had all of the problems mentioned already. I would recommend a couple levels of wizard for anyone interested in playing one. Either abjuration school or war magic. I think a EK 11/War Mage 9 would be a fairly strong combo and decently fulfill the 'Gish' fantasy.
As a single classed character a EK is just a fighter that can cast Shield or Absorb Elements every so often. They can't even use ritual magic without taking a feat and spell components (remember spells with V,S require one free hand and spells with V,S,M require two) will prevent them from being anything other than a duelist.
I played a EK til 7th or 8th level and it was ok. I had all of the problems mentioned already. I would recommend a couple levels of wizard for anyone interested in playing one. Either abjuration school or war magic. I think a EK 11/War Mage 9 would be a fairly strong combo and decently fulfill the 'Gish' fantasy.
Might as well just go full Bladesinger.
As a single classed character a EK is just a fighter that can cast Shield or Absorb Elements every so often. They can't even use ritual magic without taking a feat and spell components (remember spells with V,S require one free hand and spells with V,S,M require two) will prevent them from being anything other than a duelist.
Not really. A spell that has both M and S components still only requires one hand; you can use the same hand that's holding the material component to perform the somatic component. Anyone using a two-handed weapon (melee or ranged) automatically has a hand available.
If you're using sword and shield, the War Caster feat lets you cast spells with no M component easily - that includes all offensive cantrips, shield and absorb elements. But even without the feat you can just drop your weapon, cast the spell and pick it back up. If your DM forbids that for whatever reason you can put the weapon away normally and draw it next turn.
Speaking of Ruby of the Warmage, where does everyone stand on EKs using a focus?
Originally, I was of the opinion that they couldn't use one as no focus was mentioned for them in their specific features, and also because an Arcane Focus is defined as only being available to Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Wizards.
But now I'm of the opinion that a generic spellcasting focus, one that isn't defined as Arcane, Holy, or Druidic, would allow any spellcaster to use it. Like Ruby of the Warmage.
in the absence of anything specific or official, I know it's up for debate (I tweeted at Jeremy Crawford and got no response), and that the respective DM makes the decision. I just want some other opinions on the subject.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
I played a EK til 7th or 8th level and it was ok. I had all of the problems mentioned already. I would recommend a couple levels of wizard for anyone interested in playing one. Either abjuration school or war magic. I think a EK 11/War Mage 9 would be a fairly strong combo and decently fulfill the 'Gish' fantasy.
Might as well just go full Bladesinger.
Going full Bladesinger is never a bad idea if you wanted to be more spellcaster than fighter. For me a EK 11/War Mage 9 would be a nice mix. Heavy armor, three attacks a round, and some decent high level spells to combine with Eldritch Strike. Now that is the EK build for me.
Your right about the components. I feel like they went through a couple iterations of that rule. And War Caster is always a good option.
Speaking of Ruby of the Warmage, where does everyone stand on EKs using a focus?
Originally, I was of the opinion that they couldn't use one as no focus was mentioned for them in their specific features, and also because an Arcane Focus is defined as only being available to Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Wizards.
But now I'm of the opinion that a generic spellcasting focus, one that isn't defined as Arcane, Holy, or Druidic, would allow any spellcaster to use it. Like Ruby of the Warmage.
in the absence of anything specific or official, I know it's up for debate (I tweeted at Jeremy Crawford and got no response), and that the respective DM makes the decision. I just want some other opinions on the subject.
In my previous game, the DM ruled that my EK's main weapon (my character's mother's rapier) was in itself an arcane focus. And even if it wasn't, I'm sure I would've used a component pouch and then eventually War Caster. And this was before Xanathar's gave us the Ruby of the War Mage.
And I have no issue with component pouches and Warcaster. I know all about it and had planned to do just that. I originally talked my DM out of allowing my weapon to be used as a focus because, at the time, I didn't think EK's could use them. So I'm aware and I'm not asking for people's opinions as a justification for a decision or an alternative action to component pouches. I just want to know where others stand on the topic.
Oh yeah, and Ruby of the War Mage isn't the only generic spellcasting focus out there. Basically, any focus that isn't labeled as arcane, druidic, or holy, and doesn't have specific casters as requirements could arguably be used by EKs, ATs, or even just others with the Magic Initiate feat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
And I have no issue with component pouches and Warcaster. I know all about it and had planned to do just that. I originally talked my DM out of allowing my weapon to be used as a focus because, at the time, I didn't think EK's could use them. So I'm aware and I'm not asking for people's opinions as a justification for a decision or an alternative action to component pouches. I just want to know where others stand on the topic.
Oh yeah, and Ruby of the War Mage isn't the only generic spellcasting focus out there. Basically, any focus that isn't labeled as arcane, druidic, or holy, and doesn't have specific casters as requirements could arguably be used by EKs, ATs, or even just others with the Magic Initiate feat.
Personally, I think your reasoning is sound. After all, just about anything can be a focus if it's designed to be that way. Also, DMs can easily house-rule that EK weapons can become foci.
IN FACT! One could say that the weapons you bind to yourself via Weapon Bond could become your foci. Much like the warlock's Improved Pact Weapon invocation for those who utilize the Pact of the Blade.
That's a good point. After all, there are a number of spells where magic is sent forth via a weapon. It's not much of a leap to consider them to be used as foci from that standpoint.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
The PHB even has a description of a warrior sending a bolt of lightning out of the sword. Sure, its fluff for inspiring a possible character design, but as a DM I certainly would allow it since it fits with the niche the EK kind of lives in.
Anyway, my big problem with the EK is that it doesn't really have the Spellslots to really play around as its concept is supposed to go for. The Arcane Trickster works well because it has spellslots that work pretty well as panic buttons when something inevitably goes wrong for them. It works and can lead to awesome, if not amusing moments. I find the EK does much better augmenting their defenses then actually using their magic to attack which while functional, its not exactly what I call fun.
The PHB even has a description of a warrior sending a bolt of lightning out of the sword. Sure, its fluff for inspiring a possible character design, but as a DM I certainly would allow it since it fits with the niche the EK kind of lives in.
Anyway, my big problem with the EK is that it doesn't really have the Spellslots to really play around as its concept is supposed to go for. The Arcane Trickster works well because it has spellslots that work pretty well as panic buttons when something inevitably goes wrong for them. It works and can lead to awesome, if not amusing moments. I find the EK does much better augmenting their defenses then actually using their magic to attack which while functional, its not exactly what I call fun.
While I do agree that the EK needs more spell slots, I don't get what you mean in the comparison to the AT. Can you explain it a bit more? I mean they have the same number of spell slots and almost the same number of spells (they do have the same number of spells if you count Weapon Bond as equal to a cantrip), so I don't see how one has more to play around with than the other.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
The PHB even has a description of a warrior sending a bolt of lightning out of the sword. Sure, its fluff for inspiring a possible character design, but as a DM I certainly would allow it since it fits with the niche the EK kind of lives in.
Anyway, my big problem with the EK is that it doesn't really have the Spellslots to really play around as its concept is supposed to go for. The Arcane Trickster works well because it has spellslots that work pretty well as panic buttons when something inevitably goes wrong for them. It works and can lead to awesome, if not amusing moments. I find the EK does much better augmenting their defenses then actually using their magic to attack which while functional, its not exactly what I call fun.
While I do agree that the EK needs more spell slots, I don't get what you mean in the comparison to the AT. Can you explain it a bit more? I mean they have the same number of spell slots and almost the same number of spells (they do have the same number of spells if you count Weapon Bond as equal to a cantrip), so I don't see how one has more to play around with than the other.
And besides, speaking from experience, an Eldritch Knight's spell slots are mostly there for an occasional Shield to block a high attack roll or a clutch Absorb Elements to reduce elemental damage and use that element to bolster your next strike. basically, for defensive reactions. That, and other utility uses like Expeditious Retreat, Mage Armor, and Magic Weapon, or crowd control with spells like Thunderwave or Burning Hands.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Again, I don't know what you mean by tiers. Please explain it if you're going to keep using the term.
I didn't say it won't unbalance the game. What I said is that it's not a foregone conclusion that it will, which is what you've claimed despite not using the weapon.
And while I haven't developed my EK to higher levels yet, there are people who have who do feel the EK isn't magical enough. Whether or not they'd use the Spellslinger, they have redesigned EKs themselves. I'm pretty sure the guy I'm thinking about has been interviewed on this site before. Yeah, Dawnforgedcast. I'm looking at their video about it on YouTube now as I write this. They went in a different direction than I did, but they definitely feel the EK can be improved. Regardless, just because you feel a class doesn't need adjusting, in general, or need the Spellslinger specifically doesn't mean others agree. It's your opinion, not a fact.
You realize there's a simple solution to this argument: use your tier 3 EK and play with the weapon. Play test it and tell us how it handles. I'm sure your opinion won't change, but at least it will be backed by experience instead of bias. And who knows, your opinion might change. But even if it doesn't, you would at least be in a position to tell me what is too much and what is not.
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
I hope to jump into the game with both feet.
I can’t with 100% accuracy speak for the other poster, but typically tier 1 is 1-5, 2 is 6-10, 3 is 11-15 and 4 is 16-20.
Or you could also say that 1-4, 5-10, 11-16, 17-20 as most classes get something powerful at 5, 11, and 17.
I don’t agree that not using something invalidates any statement about how it will affect the game.
I’ve never used an item that gives my character a 29 Dex the way Belt of Storm Giant Strength gives 29 strength, but I know it would pretty much break the game.
You mention dawnforgedcast but don’t talk about anything they changed, how about a link to the video?
If they are saying in their EKs hands that would unbalance things, I believe them without them needing to try it. I have homebrewed enough stuff that I can theorycraft something, think about how it would work and know if it is too powerful or not without using it for 10 sessions let alone 1.
Thanks for an explanation about tiers. I hope it's the same or close enough to what Pigeon keeps talking about.
You don't have to agree. It's ok to have differing opinions. That said, we're not talking about some item that gives 29 dex. We're talking about my specific homebrew item. I never said any and all items have to be tried before you can claim they're too powerful. You've consistently been acting as if I'm making all or nothing statements even though I haven't. Of course there are instances where we can know an item would unbalance a game without it being tried. I simply don't think this is one of them. In fact, I tried to design it with limitations to avoid it being something like that. That's why I say the weapon needs to be tried, so that it can be said whether or not the limitations are strong enough.
Anyway, Pigeon didn't say "I THINK it will unbalance the game." They said "It WILL unbalance the game." I'm not going to let an opinion stated as a fact slide by me without commenting, especially when it's a negative opinion about me or something of mine. Don't want to try the weapon? Fine. Want to continue thinking it will unbalance the game? Do you. But as long as it's an opinion stated as a fact, as long as it comes from a position of bias rather than experience, I'm going to keep pointing that aspect out.
I've chosen my words carefully, allowing the possibility that the Spellslinger might actually unbalance the game as suggested, but I maintain the caveat that it would need to be tried out to know one way or the other. Pigeon makes no such caveat, but the reason they give for their being so sure isn't that they tried the weapon. It isn't that they tried something similar (at least then we could have a discussion about their experience and if the Spellslinger is similar enough that it could be predicted to have the same effect). No, their reason was "I trust Wizards to get it right", and since Wizards doesn't even trust themselves to get it right 100%, that doesn't hold much weight.
i didn't describe what Dawnforgedcast did with their EK because it's irrelevant to my point. I only brought it up because Pigeon questioned my position based off my inexperience, that since I don't have a late game EK, I can't really claim that it needs improving and, on the flip side, since they have played with a late game EK, they know that it does not. I mentioned dfc simply as an example of players experienced with late game EKs who DO feel that the subclass needs improvement, therefore not thinking the class is fine the way it is is not an opinion only an inexperienced person would hold. I've already stated that the video did not go in the same direction I went, only that it seeks to improve the EK as they see it. If you really want to watch it, just go to YouTube and search for "Eldritch Knight Reforged".
Lastly, I know the weapon is powerful. I do not believe the weapon is soooo powerful that it will unbalance the game. And I especially don't think simply having more spell slots would do that, which is what Pigeon specifically said (you yourself haven't made that specific claim despite your obvious support for them). After all, I believe there are official items that give one or two or three spell slots (the Pearl of power is official isn't it?).
If you or anyone else want to have a discussion about the ITEM and what you think could or should be changed to make it more tenable to you, we can do that. We might not agree, and I'll probably not change a thing but we can have an open discussion about it which could lead who knows where. But if the only things forthcoming are more ideas like "wizards is perfect" or "you're too inexperienced to know anything" or even simply moving the goalposts to include all or nothing statements I'm not even making, then you're not looking for a discussion and I won't have much to say to you.
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
I hope to jump into the game with both feet.
I don't think anyone has leveled an accusation of inexperience at you, nor do I take any of the comments as an insult against you or the item. I think Pigeon has simply indicated that in his EKs hands, it would unbalance the game. He has the absolute right, knowing his character and what the item does, to make that claim. No one claimed Wizards is perfect, just an opinion that they made the EK a certain way and they feel that it’s a solid build.
as for changes to the item, I’ve already given my thoughts on it.
You know, you have continuously misread or misinterpreted things I've written this entire discussion. And my going into detail every time you do so hasn't seemed to deter that. It doesn't seem to do anything but make me frustrated. So I will simply say this:
Yes, it has been implied that I can't have an accurate opinion about the late game EK without playing with the late game EK. I could quote it, but I'm not sure it would make a difference. Just know that such a statement has been made.
I never said I was insulted or that insults were made. I said negative opinions were stated as fact. There's a difference.
I have had to say "I didn't say ___/I never said ____" so many times in response to you. It seems to me that we've had and will continue to have a disconnect over my words that I simply can't predict, that I think I've said something clearly and you still read it as something else. And since I don't know what to do about it, I'm going to TRY to just leave it alone.
Pigeon has the right to think my weapon will unbalance the game. I have always said they can have that opinion. Similarly, I have the right to point out when an opinion is stated as fact or when an opinion shows bias as opposed to personal experience. We have all kinds of rights in this discussion and I haven't tried to take away any of them from anyone.
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
I hope to jump into the game with both feet.
Tier 1 is 1-4, 2 is 5-10, 3 is 11-16, and 4 is 17-20. I think that’s listed above the xp chart in the PHB. Don’t get we wrong, I’m not saying don’t use an item or tweak anything at all, I’m just saying to be careful with items that change limitations to classes because it could ruin your fun by having an OP character. Just some insight from my play at the higher levels that although an EK isn’t a great caster, they are an amazing class. They are absolutely fighters to the core with a smattering or casting which is great. I have a Paladin/1 sorcerer/6 who’s a caster that can melee and it’s quite a different style, fun in its own way. Enjoy playing for sure, just realize a small tweak can significantly change a class and unbalance things. Could make things unfun for you or other players that you outshine their roles.
I realize most of this thread has been dedicated to Eldritch Knight as a fighter, but is it a better option as an archery based fighter than the Arcane Archer (which just seems pretty blah)? Considering doing a 5 levels or Eldritch knight and maybe pick up two of Ranger just to get Hunter's mark on my spell list. I lose one level of spellslot progression for the EK but it lets me take defense for my fighter fighting style and then archery for my ranger fighting style and get extra damage on every attack I make against a target.
It is a little bit MAD but I think just leaving wisdom at the minimum for multiclass isn't too bad. Make Dexterity highest followed by Intelligence. Curious if others have tried this with the EK in particular.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I haven't tried it myself, but you're essentially trading fourth level spells and an Ability Score Improvement/Feat for a plus 1 to AC and Hunter's mark. Personally, I'd rather keep the spells and improvement option, and then just choose archery as my fighting style for my fighter, but what you're suggesting isn't a bad idea at all. Both the defense fighting style and Hunter's Mark are going to earn their due by the time you reach higher levels.
As long as you're not going any further into the ranger class, you don't really need to worry about Wis too much other than getting the required 13 ability points so you can multiclass. You'd get two spells and one spell slot by taking ranger levels, and only two spells on the list of first level ranger spells involve making the enemy save against them. Hunter's Mark lands automatically, and the other spells, beside Ensnaring Strike and Hail of Thorns, aren't spells that do damage or require a save (I think).
Using Standard Array or Point Buy should allow you to get a 13 or higher in Dex, Int, AND Wis pretty painlessly, not to mention your racial bonus if you pick a race that helps with those abilities. And if you're rolling your ability scores, you just have to hope your rolls aren't terrible. Strength or Cha will probably end up being your dump stat, but as an archer, you don't really need either to fight with.
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
I hope to jump into the game with both feet.
Eh...I'd suggest sticking to single classing. Hunter's Mark and 1 more AC isn't worth delaying access to your ASIs, War Magic, Indomitable, Eldritch Strike and Extra Attack 2 by two levels.
I wouldn't say EK is better than Arcane Archer, just different. Eldritch Knights have a slow start when it comes to subclass features and gain slots so slowly that your spellcasting is mostly going to be for defense, utility and support. By the time you get 2nd level spells you'll already have Extra Attack and full spellcasters will already have 4th level spells. The small damage increase of casting damage spells isn't worth it compared to saving your limited slots for spells like Shield, Absorb Elements, Mirror Image, Misty Step or Levitate, which can save you from a lot of damage.
As far as cantrips go, Frostbite can provide support to party members and Shocking Grasp gives you a high risk/high reward way to "disengage" an enemy. Ray of Frost can be handy for kiting. Chill Touch is great if you ever have to fight a monster that can regenerate. Blade Ward will help if you need to stall enemies, like holding a choke point. Once you hit 7th level you can still get a shot in after using a cantrip.
Eldritch Strike is a gamechanger since it lets you greatly increase the effectiveness of saving throw spells. You can use it to make sure a specific spell lands, but you can also use it to increase the duration of spells that allow a saving throw every turn. For example, you could attack 3 different creatures, Action Surge and cast Slow, then keep attacking those same 3 creatures on future rounds to make it less likely that they'll succeed on the save. If you each creature has a 50% chance to make their save, you'd normally only affect half of the creatures and the spell would only last an average of 1 turn. With Eldritch Strike, Slow would last an average of 3 turns before wearing off and it'll stick on a higher number of targets too. As a bonus, Slow makes it easier for you to land future attacks and keep Eldritch Strike going. Other good spells to combine with Eldritch Strike include Blindness/Deafness, Earthbind, and Levitate.
Arcane Archers are much more front-loaded. Bursting Arrow is a free 2d6 damage to your target and every creature within 10 feet of it, no save. This can be a big area if you target a Large creature. Grasping Arrow deals a free 2d6 poison damage and reduces the creature's speed by 10 feet; again, no save. The first time they move on each turn, that's another free 2d6 slashing damage, even if they're not moving willingly. That's easy damage if you have a Warlock in the party with Repelling Blast, a Way of the Open Hand or Way of the Four Elements Monk, someone that's good at grappling or shoving, a Druid with Thorn Whip, or an arcane caster with Lightning Lure or Thunderwave.
At 7th level your arrows are magical, you can redirect a missed shot to another enemy, and you can pick up another Arcane Shot. Shadow Arrow will effectively blind its target if it fails its save, which sets up an easy combo with Sharpshooter and Action Surge. Use Shadow Arrow on your first attack; if it works, use Action Surge to get another Attack action and use Sharpshooter on all your attacks. If you miss one and there happens to be another enemy nearby, no problem - just redirect the shot. Anyone that can attack from more than 5 feet away also benefits from advantage that round. Seeking Arrow and Piercing Arrow can also be useful in the right situations.
While 2 uses of Arcane Shot might not seem that much, it's the same number of slots Warlocks get for half of their career, and they recover with a short rest, so you can expect at least 4-6 uses daily unless your DM is extremely stingy for some reason. Eldritch Knights are stuck with 2-3 slots from levels 3-6 and 6-7 slots from levels 7-12, and more than half of those slots are 1st level, which in my opinion are weaker than Arcane Shot options, so you can see Arcane Shot is actually quite competitive compared to EK spellcasting. By the time EKs get 3rd level spells and another big bump in spell slots, Ever-Ready Shot is right around the corner for Arcane Archers, which lets them use their shots more aggressively since they'll always have 1 use available when going into battle. Also, Arcane Shots don't use up your action so you're not sacrificing any attacks like an Eldritch Knight does when casting spell. You're essentially casting a spell-like effect for free. Arcane Shots also aren't subject to Counterspell, Dispel Magic, and don't suffer from any of the drawbacks of readying a spell (casting up front + using up concentration.)
Both subclasses have compelling options in their toolkit. Which one's "better" largely depends on play style, personal preference and what the rest of the party looks like. Some people can't stand having 2 uses of something at a time, while others feel the number of slots EKs have is way too low.
I played a EK til 7th or 8th level and it was ok. I had all of the problems mentioned already. I would recommend a couple levels of wizard for anyone interested in playing one. Either abjuration school or war magic. I think a EK 11/War Mage 9 would be a fairly strong combo and decently fulfill the 'Gish' fantasy.
As a single classed character a EK is just a fighter that can cast Shield or Absorb Elements every so often. They can't even use ritual magic without taking a feat and spell components (remember spells with V,S require one free hand and spells with V,S,M require two) will prevent them from being anything other than a duelist.
Current Characters I am playing: Dr Konstantin van Wulf | Taegen Willowrun | Mad Magnar
Check out my homebrew: Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Feats
Might as well just go full Bladesinger.
Not really. A spell that has both M and S components still only requires one hand; you can use the same hand that's holding the material component to perform the somatic component. Anyone using a two-handed weapon (melee or ranged) automatically has a hand available.
If you're using sword and shield, the War Caster feat lets you cast spells with no M component easily - that includes all offensive cantrips, shield and absorb elements. But even without the feat you can just drop your weapon, cast the spell and pick it back up. If your DM forbids that for whatever reason you can put the weapon away normally and draw it next turn.
If your DM is really nice they'll let you get a hold of a Ruby of the War Mage.
Speaking of Ruby of the Warmage, where does everyone stand on EKs using a focus?
Originally, I was of the opinion that they couldn't use one as no focus was mentioned for them in their specific features, and also because an Arcane Focus is defined as only being available to Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Wizards.
But now I'm of the opinion that a generic spellcasting focus, one that isn't defined as Arcane, Holy, or Druidic, would allow any spellcaster to use it. Like Ruby of the Warmage.
in the absence of anything specific or official, I know it's up for debate (I tweeted at Jeremy Crawford and got no response), and that the respective DM makes the decision. I just want some other opinions on the subject.
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
I hope to jump into the game with both feet.
Going full Bladesinger is never a bad idea if you wanted to be more spellcaster than fighter. For me a EK 11/War Mage 9 would be a nice mix. Heavy armor, three attacks a round, and some decent high level spells to combine with Eldritch Strike. Now that is the EK build for me.
Your right about the components. I feel like they went through a couple iterations of that rule. And War Caster is always a good option.
Current Characters I am playing: Dr Konstantin van Wulf | Taegen Willowrun | Mad Magnar
Check out my homebrew: Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Feats
In my previous game, the DM ruled that my EK's main weapon (my character's mother's rapier) was in itself an arcane focus. And even if it wasn't, I'm sure I would've used a component pouch and then eventually War Caster. And this was before Xanathar's gave us the Ruby of the War Mage.
Mother's rapier is cool.
And I have no issue with component pouches and Warcaster. I know all about it and had planned to do just that. I originally talked my DM out of allowing my weapon to be used as a focus because, at the time, I didn't think EK's could use them. So I'm aware and I'm not asking for people's opinions as a justification for a decision or an alternative action to component pouches. I just want to know where others stand on the topic.
Oh yeah, and Ruby of the War Mage isn't the only generic spellcasting focus out there. Basically, any focus that isn't labeled as arcane, druidic, or holy, and doesn't have specific casters as requirements could arguably be used by EKs, ATs, or even just others with the Magic Initiate feat.
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
I hope to jump into the game with both feet.
Personally, I think your reasoning is sound. After all, just about anything can be a focus if it's designed to be that way. Also, DMs can easily house-rule that EK weapons can become foci.
IN FACT! One could say that the weapons you bind to yourself via Weapon Bond could become your foci. Much like the warlock's Improved Pact Weapon invocation for those who utilize the Pact of the Blade.
That's a good point. After all, there are a number of spells where magic is sent forth via a weapon. It's not much of a leap to consider them to be used as foci from that standpoint.
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
I hope to jump into the game with both feet.
The PHB even has a description of a warrior sending a bolt of lightning out of the sword. Sure, its fluff for inspiring a possible character design, but as a DM I certainly would allow it since it fits with the niche the EK kind of lives in.
Anyway, my big problem with the EK is that it doesn't really have the Spellslots to really play around as its concept is supposed to go for. The Arcane Trickster works well because it has spellslots that work pretty well as panic buttons when something inevitably goes wrong for them. It works and can lead to awesome, if not amusing moments. I find the EK does much better augmenting their defenses then actually using their magic to attack which while functional, its not exactly what I call fun.
While I do agree that the EK needs more spell slots, I don't get what you mean in the comparison to the AT. Can you explain it a bit more? I mean they have the same number of spell slots and almost the same number of spells (they do have the same number of spells if you count Weapon Bond as equal to a cantrip), so I don't see how one has more to play around with than the other.
A long time fantasy fan with very little DnD experience.
I hope to jump into the game with both feet.
And besides, speaking from experience, an Eldritch Knight's spell slots are mostly there for an occasional Shield to block a high attack roll or a clutch Absorb Elements to reduce elemental damage and use that element to bolster your next strike. basically, for defensive reactions. That, and other utility uses like Expeditious Retreat, Mage Armor, and Magic Weapon, or crowd control with spells like Thunderwave or Burning Hands.