Fellow DMs, how strictly do you adhere to the spell selection for EK and AT? Personally, I'd let players select any Wizard spells. Is that over powered some how?
I generally stick to the limitations given in the PHB, however if the player can give me a legitimate reason why they might know a certain spell, i.e. They find the spellbook of a defeated wizard and are able overtime to learn the spell from the book and add it to their skill set then, then i would consider letting them have something different but maybe throw in some checks during the learning process to make things more fun.
As for the classes being OP i think it depends on the campaign and the context, in a high magic campaign i would say these two classes are necessary otherwise the poor rogue and fighter will be left in the dust by everyone else and have very little to add in more magically based fights other than having to make lots of saving throws against spell effects.
Its all a subject of context, if a DM thinks that his campaign isnt right for these classes then dont let your characters play them, if the campaign fits or the characters backstory meshes well with it i see no reason not to let them take the class and give them some utility and freedom they didnt have before.
A single class AT or EK will be behind the curve on spell progression as they only get new spell slots every 3 levels. Factor in that their spell attack and spell save key off of intelligence, an EK or AT built on standard array or point buy isn't likely to have as high of an intelligence score as most casters would have with their casting stat. This means that your spell attack bonus and spell saves will be lower (or your melee skills will be lower than other fighters or rogues because of a suppressed strength or dexterity score compared to them, or you'll be unable to take as many hits with a lower constitution score). Even though rogue and fighter get more ASIs than other classes, that lower casting stat isn't as likely to increase because of the demands of other score increases, and particularly if feats are available.
The additional limitation on the schools that they can choose from means that they have to really consider their spells. Often, the spells selected are focused more on utility or effects that don't make a spell attack or force a spell save. Additionally, they are able to select from any school of magic at certain levels, and those choices become very important to consider because they are so limited in number.
High rolled stats, multiclassing, and fully unlocked wizard spell lists all negate some of the built in restraints that help balance these subclasses (multiclassing does it at a cost of slowing your progression along the fighter path and limiting the top end power level of the character). Before playing with any of those toggles, I'd at least create a character, level by level, and see what choices you'd make at each level. Just work on the mechanics and enough of the personality to inform the choices you'd make. Repeat the process with a wizard with similar intent to see when your spells would come online with a full caster, just for comparison. Then repeat the process by removing the restraint placed on the class to see what would change. This will give you some idea of how your homebrew will affect the character and being able to compare it to another character will help you understand what it might mean for the other players.
I guess I just wish that Transmutation spells were available to the EK and AT. Rather than offensive spells, they should benefit from buffs like Jump or Expeditious Retreat.
Why do you want the ET or AK to have those powers?
...I mean, as a player, I know why you would want more power - because more power is better the less power. You'd want the ability to have more spells for the same reason you'd rather have an extra +1 to AC (or even better, an extra +2 to AC! or even better, a +3! And a +5 weapon!).
But as a designer, I don't see why it would make a more fun game for ET or AK to have the same flexibility as a Wizard. In-game choices matter because they're always tradeoffs - you have to think about whether as a player you would rather have this or that, weigh the advantages/disadvantages of each. Limitations and disadvantages are a crucial part of making tradeoffs meaningful.
They should be able to choose those spells the levels that they can select any wizard spell. It's at the opportunity cost of selecting another spell with those limited selections, but it can be done.
I wouldn't say they would have the same flexibility as a wizard. They have more limited resources, they don't have a spell book, they can't cast as rituals etc.
This is what I would like: At third level you can pick 3 spells from any school, two of which must come from abjuration or transmutation. At 8th, 14th, and 20th level you may pick an Evocation spells.
This is why: Fighters fight better than anyone, they train to use their physicality as a weapon. Transmutation magic would be the DnD equivalent of performance enhancing drugs. Instead of making EK watered down wizards in heavy armor, let's make them more like transmuted Super Soliders.
The War Wizard makes more sense to me than the EK. If you have Evocation Magic, why do you need a sword? Why wouldn't an EK just become a Wizard? Transmutation Magic however just let's them do what they do better. They can run longer and faster, they can jump higher, and they can fight in any environment. Transmutation makes fighter better at fighting, which I believe makes more sense than just being able to cast Fireball less often than a wizard.
The War Wizard makes more sense to me than the EK. If you have Evocation Magic, why do you need a sword? Why wouldn't an EK just become a Wizard? Transmutation Magic however just let's them do what they do better. They can run longer and faster, they can jump higher, and they can fight in any environment. Transmutation makes fighter better at fighting, which I believe makes more sense than just being able to cast Fireball less often than a wizard.
You have the ability to choose those transmutation spells at 3rd level (1 of the 3 spells), 8th level, 14th level, and 20th level. As for Fireball, consider that it's a 3rd level spell. That means that you won't get it until 13th level unless you multi class. It'll have a dexterity save. Let's say you went high elf with a 14 in dex, a 13 in constitution and a 15 in intelligence. You'll have 16, 13, 16 in those stats after racials giving you a +3 dex, +1 con, and +3 int. Let's say that you do +2 dex at 4 and 6 to get your melee (and AC) maxed at 20. Your HP will be 11 at 1, 18 at 2, 25 at 3, 32 at 4, 39 at 5, and 46 at 6. If you point buy instead of standard array, you can steal the 2 points from the 10 to make your con 14 instead with a +2 mod and adding 1 HP at each level. That would give you 52 HP.
Do you forgo more constitution at this point to improve your casting ability? Do you go for something like warcaster to allow you to cast spells while going sword and board plus the advantage on constitution saves (which you are proficient in, thanks fighter!)? Do you go for something like tough to give your HP a boost? Your AC is probably reasonable, particularly if you went defense fighting style and sword and board. Just with Leather Armor, you'd be 11+5+1+2=19. Studded Leather armor gives you 20. Magical Armor could boost you more. Maybe something like Defensive Dualist would need to be picked up so that you had something to augment the Shield spell? Magic Initiate (Cleric) to add Shield of Faith? If you need to do anything like that to increase your survivability, you would still be sitting at +6 to attack and 14 spell save DC. Sticking with standard array, level 7 would give you 53, lets go tough for our ASI at 8. HP would be 60 from the level, plus 16 from tough =76. That's a little better.
Level 9 gives 85 HP, level 10 gives 94, level 11 gives 103, level 12 brings us to 112 and an ASI. Warcaster or Int +2? Let's say Int+2 to get that to 18 and the +4 mod. We're now rocking a +8 to hit and a 16 spell save DC. Our melee to hit bonus is +9. As of level 11, we can make 3 attacks with the Attack Action for 3d8+15 or potentially booming blade for 1d8+5 melee attack + 2d8 booming blade rider + potential 3d8 if they move + the 1d8+5 from war magic. Level 13 gives us 121 HP and we can finally cast fireball with a 17 spell save DC (dex) for 8d6 on a failed save or half as much on otherwise. That's nice for a large group of creatures with low HP or low dex saves. The wizard has been able to do it since level 5 and can now upcast it to a 7th level spell for an additional 4d6 (12d6 total) with an 18 spell save DC from stats alone. If you think that fireball is an efficient use of a spell selection, feel free. Granted, Eldritch Strike can give three targets disadvantage on a fireball the next round with the Attack Action in the leading round.
Or you can make selections within the abjuration school that will improve your survivability and use the unrestricted spell choices for those transmutation spells that you would like to have. This allows you to focus more on survivability with your ASIs than trying to bump your to hit and spell save DC to accomplish something that the full caster has been able to do for 8 levels.
As for your point about transmutation being a better school for EK than evocation, I'll grant you that. If you can talk your DM into (or if you want to allow your EK player to) allowing that, go for broke. Before you do, if you haven't tried to fill out your spell list with spells that don't use to hit rolls or force spell saves, try it. See what choices you are able to make. Then try it again with your modified spell list and see if the spell selections are more meaningful because they did something different. Consider the level that you'd be at when you could cast the spells and what you'd gain and give up to have those choices.
Fellow DMs, how strictly do you adhere to the spell selection for EK and AT? Personally, I'd let players select any Wizard spells. Is that over powered some how?
I generally stick to the limitations given in the PHB, however if the player can give me a legitimate reason why they might know a certain spell, i.e. They find the spellbook of a defeated wizard and are able overtime to learn the spell from the book and add it to their skill set then, then i would consider letting them have something different but maybe throw in some checks during the learning process to make things more fun.
As for the classes being OP i think it depends on the campaign and the context, in a high magic campaign i would say these two classes are necessary otherwise the poor rogue and fighter will be left in the dust by everyone else and have very little to add in more magically based fights other than having to make lots of saving throws against spell effects.
Its all a subject of context, if a DM thinks that his campaign isnt right for these classes then dont let your characters play them, if the campaign fits or the characters backstory meshes well with it i see no reason not to let them take the class and give them some utility and freedom they didnt have before.
A single class AT or EK will be behind the curve on spell progression as they only get new spell slots every 3 levels. Factor in that their spell attack and spell save key off of intelligence, an EK or AT built on standard array or point buy isn't likely to have as high of an intelligence score as most casters would have with their casting stat. This means that your spell attack bonus and spell saves will be lower (or your melee skills will be lower than other fighters or rogues because of a suppressed strength or dexterity score compared to them, or you'll be unable to take as many hits with a lower constitution score). Even though rogue and fighter get more ASIs than other classes, that lower casting stat isn't as likely to increase because of the demands of other score increases, and particularly if feats are available.
The additional limitation on the schools that they can choose from means that they have to really consider their spells. Often, the spells selected are focused more on utility or effects that don't make a spell attack or force a spell save. Additionally, they are able to select from any school of magic at certain levels, and those choices become very important to consider because they are so limited in number.
High rolled stats, multiclassing, and fully unlocked wizard spell lists all negate some of the built in restraints that help balance these subclasses (multiclassing does it at a cost of slowing your progression along the fighter path and limiting the top end power level of the character). Before playing with any of those toggles, I'd at least create a character, level by level, and see what choices you'd make at each level. Just work on the mechanics and enough of the personality to inform the choices you'd make. Repeat the process with a wizard with similar intent to see when your spells would come online with a full caster, just for comparison. Then repeat the process by removing the restraint placed on the class to see what would change. This will give you some idea of how your homebrew will affect the character and being able to compare it to another character will help you understand what it might mean for the other players.
I guess I just wish that Transmutation spells were available to the EK and AT. Rather than offensive spells, they should benefit from buffs like Jump or Expeditious Retreat.
Why do you want the ET or AK to have those powers?
...I mean, as a player, I know why you would want more power - because more power is better the less power. You'd want the ability to have more spells for the same reason you'd rather have an extra +1 to AC (or even better, an extra +2 to AC! or even better, a +3! And a +5 weapon!).
But as a designer, I don't see why it would make a more fun game for ET or AK to have the same flexibility as a Wizard. In-game choices matter because they're always tradeoffs - you have to think about whether as a player you would rather have this or that, weigh the advantages/disadvantages of each. Limitations and disadvantages are a crucial part of making tradeoffs meaningful.
They should be able to choose those spells the levels that they can select any wizard spell. It's at the opportunity cost of selecting another spell with those limited selections, but it can be done.
I wouldn't say they would have the same flexibility as a wizard. They have more limited resources, they don't have a spell book, they can't cast as rituals etc.
This is what I would like: At third level you can pick 3 spells from any school, two of which must come from abjuration or transmutation. At 8th, 14th, and 20th level you may pick an Evocation spells.
This is why: Fighters fight better than anyone, they train to use their physicality as a weapon. Transmutation magic would be the DnD equivalent of performance enhancing drugs. Instead of making EK watered down wizards in heavy armor, let's make them more like transmuted Super Soliders.
The War Wizard makes more sense to me than the EK. If you have Evocation Magic, why do you need a sword? Why wouldn't an EK just become a Wizard? Transmutation Magic however just let's them do what they do better. They can run longer and faster, they can jump higher, and they can fight in any environment. Transmutation makes fighter better at fighting, which I believe makes more sense than just being able to cast Fireball less often than a wizard.
You have the ability to choose those transmutation spells at 3rd level (1 of the 3 spells), 8th level, 14th level, and 20th level. As for Fireball, consider that it's a 3rd level spell. That means that you won't get it until 13th level unless you multi class. It'll have a dexterity save. Let's say you went high elf with a 14 in dex, a 13 in constitution and a 15 in intelligence. You'll have 16, 13, 16 in those stats after racials giving you a +3 dex, +1 con, and +3 int. Let's say that you do +2 dex at 4 and 6 to get your melee (and AC) maxed at 20. Your HP will be 11 at 1, 18 at 2, 25 at 3, 32 at 4, 39 at 5, and 46 at 6. If you point buy instead of standard array, you can steal the 2 points from the 10 to make your con 14 instead with a +2 mod and adding 1 HP at each level. That would give you 52 HP.
Do you forgo more constitution at this point to improve your casting ability? Do you go for something like warcaster to allow you to cast spells while going sword and board plus the advantage on constitution saves (which you are proficient in, thanks fighter!)? Do you go for something like tough to give your HP a boost? Your AC is probably reasonable, particularly if you went defense fighting style and sword and board. Just with Leather Armor, you'd be 11+5+1+2=19. Studded Leather armor gives you 20. Magical Armor could boost you more. Maybe something like Defensive Dualist would need to be picked up so that you had something to augment the Shield spell? Magic Initiate (Cleric) to add Shield of Faith? If you need to do anything like that to increase your survivability, you would still be sitting at +6 to attack and 14 spell save DC. Sticking with standard array, level 7 would give you 53, lets go tough for our ASI at 8. HP would be 60 from the level, plus 16 from tough =76. That's a little better.
Level 9 gives 85 HP, level 10 gives 94, level 11 gives 103, level 12 brings us to 112 and an ASI. Warcaster or Int +2? Let's say Int+2 to get that to 18 and the +4 mod. We're now rocking a +8 to hit and a 16 spell save DC. Our melee to hit bonus is +9. As of level 11, we can make 3 attacks with the Attack Action for 3d8+15 or potentially booming blade for 1d8+5 melee attack + 2d8 booming blade rider + potential 3d8 if they move + the 1d8+5 from war magic. Level 13 gives us 121 HP and we can finally cast fireball with a 17 spell save DC (dex) for 8d6 on a failed save or half as much on otherwise. That's nice for a large group of creatures with low HP or low dex saves. The wizard has been able to do it since level 5 and can now upcast it to a 7th level spell for an additional 4d6 (12d6 total) with an 18 spell save DC from stats alone. If you think that fireball is an efficient use of a spell selection, feel free. Granted, Eldritch Strike can give three targets disadvantage on a fireball the next round with the Attack Action in the leading round.
Or you can make selections within the abjuration school that will improve your survivability and use the unrestricted spell choices for those transmutation spells that you would like to have. This allows you to focus more on survivability with your ASIs than trying to bump your to hit and spell save DC to accomplish something that the full caster has been able to do for 8 levels.
As for your point about transmutation being a better school for EK than evocation, I'll grant you that. If you can talk your DM into (or if you want to allow your EK player to) allowing that, go for broke. Before you do, if you haven't tried to fill out your spell list with spells that don't use to hit rolls or force spell saves, try it. See what choices you are able to make. Then try it again with your modified spell list and see if the spell selections are more meaningful because they did something different. Consider the level that you'd be at when you could cast the spells and what you'd gain and give up to have those choices.