Thoughts on Eldritch Knight Polearm Build

[neogod22]

i think this is true, but it is somewhat offset at level 7+ by War Magic.

That will cover you until lvl 10. But at 11 when you have 3 attacks plus the bonus, you're going to stop using the cantrip again.

 

[Dausuul]

So the misconception with green flame blade and booming blade is that people think you're casting the spell on the enemy. You are actually casting it on your weapon. The reach of the spell should say melee weapon. The is no somatic component, only verbal and material components, and the material component is the weapon. These spells are basically the cantrip version of smites. It does the weapon damage, plus the spell damage. There should be no problem using the cantrips on polearms.

The very first sentence of both spells:

"As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell’s range, otherwise the spell fails."

They went out of their way to specify that the creature must be within the spell's range, which is 5 feet. If they meant it to work like the smite spells, they'd have written it like the smite spells.

 

[Caliban]

This is why I rarely look at Sage Advice, because 1. it's not a rule, and 2. sometimes I don't think they know what they're talking about because it makes no sense. When I'm the DM, the rule is the way I interpret it, if I'm not the DM, I ask and follow their ruling.

Although in this case the Sage is entirely correct, and you were ignoring the wording of the spell. But why let things like facts get in the way of a good rant?

 

[neogod22]

The very first sentence of both spells:

"As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell’s range, otherwise the spell fails."

They went out of their way to specify that the creature must be within the spell's range, which is 5 feet. If they meant it to work like the smite spells, they'd have written it like the smite spells.

So let me ask you something? How do you imagine the spell works? Do you think you strike someone with an attack with one hand, and cast the spell with the other, kind of like the Hexblade cantrips in 4e, or do you imagine casting the spell on the weapon while you're striking the target and the energy of the spell comes off the weapon? I imagine the latter, and like I said, it's the way I interpret it. I have never had a DM tell me it wasn't allowed for me to have the spell reach with the weapon in the short time I tried it with a warlock,,and like I said, it makes no sense for it to work at 5ft. but not work at 10ft. with the same weapon. But again, like I said before, it doesn't matter once he has multi attack and he decides to attack 3 times instead of using the cantrip once.

 

[neogod22]

Although in this case the Sage is entirely correct, and you were ignoring the wording of the spell. But why let things like facts get in the way of a good rant?

We are talking about an imaginary game where people pretend to cast spells and slay monsters. There's no such things,as facts. Especially when you're arguing my opinion.

 

[Caliban]

We are talking about an imaginary game where people pretend to cast spells and slay monsters. There's no such things,as facts. Especially when you're arguing my opinion.

LOL, well then I guess my fireballs have a range of 250 feet, do 20d6 damage, and have a 40' radius. Because that's how I'm going to choose to "interpret" the spell. And you can't say different, because that's my opinion.

 

[neogod22]

LOL, well then I guess my fireballs have a range of 250 feet, do 20d6 damage, and have a 40' radius. Because that's how I'm going to choose to "interpret" the spell. And you can't say different, because that's my opinion.

If you're the DM, you can rule whatever you want.

 

[Caliban]

If you're the DM, you can rule whatever you want.

Yeah, who cares about the rules of the game.

Not exactly a helpful attitude when someone is asking questions assuming we are actually following the written rules.

 

[neogod22]

Yeah, who cares about the rules of the game.

Not exactly a helpful attitude when someone is asking questions assuming we are actually following the written rules.

The rules are guidelines to be interpreted by the DM, and can be changed anytime by the DM. Players are subject to the rulings of the DM. I don't have my players handbook with me, so I can't quote it word for word, but it does say that in there. It is also reinforced in Xanathers Guide to everything.

 

[Dausuul]

So let me ask you something? How do you imagine the spell works?

It creates a blast of fire on the weapon when you hit a creature within 5 feet of you. If the creature is outside that range, then the spell fails to create fire, because weird arcane explanation that only a wizard would understand.

(I'm a software developer. "Thing works except in this one odd circumstance because weird arcane explanation that only a specialist would understand" is something I see every day. At least in D&D, I don't have to spend hours walking some clueless fighter through the reasons why the spell won't do what the fighter thinks it should do.)

The rules are guidelines to be interpreted by the DM, and can be changed anytime by the DM. Players are subject to the rulings of the DM. I don't have my players handbook with me, so I can't quote it word for word, but it does say that in there. It is also reinforced in Xanathers Guide to everything.

Of course you can house rule anything you like, any way you like. But you claimed that people had a "misconception" in how they interpreted the spell. They do not. The spell is crystal clear about requiring the target to be within 5 feet, and it's not a misconception to play it by the book.