Thoughts on Eldritch Knight Polearm Build

[neogod22]

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.)

Again, when you DM, rule it the way you want.

 

[Caliban]

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.

None of which is actually relevant to the topic at hand. It's just a smokescreen to cover up the fact that you've been using the spell wrong and didn't realize it.

 

[neogod22]

None of which is actually relevant to the topic at hand. It's just a smokescreen to cover up the fact that you've been using the spell wrong and didn't realize it.

Wrong. I just think it's stupid that a spell will work on only half of a weapon because of "reasons."

 

[BookBarbarian]

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.)

Oh god, now I'm envisioning fighters as Business Analysts, Product Owners, and other stakeholders.

You may have ruined a class for me.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Wrong. I just think it's stupid that a spell will work on only half of a weapon because of "reasons."

It's also entirely possible that the designer of the spell forgot to account for the existence of reach weapons. It would hardly be the first such oversight in this edition.

The Sage has a tendency to err on the side of assuming everything is intentional, even when the alternative explanation - that someone goofed - would be far more plausible.

 

[neogod22]

None of which is actually relevant to the topic at hand. It's just a smokescreen to cover up the fact that you've been using the spell wrong and didn't realize it.

Just like the explanation of "if you take. t he spell sniper feat, then the spell works the rest of the way on the weapon." I really feel like spell sniper shouldn't work at all on the spell since it's cast on the weapon.

 

[neogod22]

These are the same idiots who said " a wizard casting a spell can counter the counterspell cast on him because you can take a reaction at any time."

 

[neogod22]

It's also entirely possible that the designer of the spell forgot to account for the existence of reach weapons. It would hardly be the first such oversight in this edition.

The Sage has a tendency to err on the side of assuming everything is intentional, even when the alternative explanation - that someone goofed - would be far more plausible.

I'm pretty sure that's what happened.

 

[neogod22]

Just like the explanation of "if you take. t he spell sniper feat, then the spell works the rest of the way on the weapon." I really feel like spell sniper shouldn't work at all on the spell since it's cast on the weapon.

They also forgot about crossbows for the arcane archer. Mike actually admitted that one.

 

[Dausuul]

It's also entirely possible that the designer of the spell forgot to account for the existence of reach weapons. It would hardly be the first such oversight in this edition.

They went out of their way to specify that the target had to be within the spell's range. If they weren't trying to prevent the use of reach weapons, what would be the point of that language? Other than reach weapons, there are very few ways to make melee attacks against targets more than 5 feet away.