DMG - Eldritch Knight

[hong]

And finally, why should things be consistent? I would much rather have a large assortment of "bland" PrCs that I can easily add to my campaign without having to rewrite the flavor for.

How broadly applicable a PrC is has very little, if anything, to do with how bland its _mechanics_ are. IMC I've managed to find places for the arcane archer, dwarven defender, loremaster, order of the bow initiate, church inquisitor, deepwood sniper, king/queen of the wild, spellsinger, thief-acrobat, candle caster, elemental savant, guildmage, and spellsword. I've also managed to find places for most of the samurai PrCs from OA, as well as several others. That's despite having a list of house rules and setting-specific changes that's as long as your arm, including wholesale reworking of many D&D sacred cows (alignment, races, classes, planes, deities, monsters, spells).

It is much easier to add flavor (IMO) then it is to rework flavor.

You can always rewrite the flavour. You can't say the same about mechanics, because in the end, a class is about mechanics. Change enough things around, and you've lost the point of using that class in the first place.

 

[hong]

Rules tweaking is different from rules rewriting.

Huh?

A change to the multi-classing system in order to fit in a balanced Fighter / Wizard would require a major rules rewrite. Much larger than anything that could posibly be included in the ELH section.

Nonsense. All you really need is something to allow non-spellcaster levels to add to your spellcaster levels for purposes of determining spell effects, duration, penetrating SR, etc. And perhaps allowing levels from different casting classes to stack for the same purpose. This is not a major rules tweak. It _is_ a rethink of what fundamental assumptions drive a D&D world, since D&D has a major divide between people who can use magic and those who can't. If you've ever played (say) Earthdawn or L5R, however, it's something you're already used to.

Granted, I don't have the DMG yet, so I can't see the ELH section for myself, but I seriously doubt it consists of a major rules rewrite.

The D&D rules change _fundamentally_ when you go from 20th to 21st level.

 

[James McMurray]

Well, that's all your opinion. I happen to think that EK and MT are reasonable solutions to the multi-classing problem. As I told LokiDR, no one will ever win this debate, so I'll bow out.

The D&D rules change _fundamentally_ when you go from 20th to 21st level.

How so? I've played Epic games, and am running one right now. We still use the same rules though. Did they completely redo Epic rules for the DMG? If not, please point out the _fundamental_ changes that occur in the current system (apart from BAB and save bonuses of course).

 

[youspoonybard]

What characters *can* and are *expected to do* change dramatically, with the simple inclusion of epic feats, really.

 

[drnuncheon]

Ranks in a cross-class skill are limited, and that would hold a pure-rogue back. They would have a maximum of 11 ranks at 20th levle (about an 8th level caster) unless they multiclassed.

Clr1/Wiz1/Rog18 was what I was thinking of. One level in a class lets you use the class skill level caps. Heck, with the rogue's skill points you might as well add Druid too.

... in other words, thank you for accepting my point that the EK and MT are hacks.

...which is not at all what I was arguing - but if it makes you feel better to claim a 'win', please, by all means, carve another notch on your keyboard.

If, on the other hand, you'd like to present something relevant to what I was saying - which was 'it may be a hack but it's also the best solution so far' - well, feel free to do that as well.

J

 

[hong]

How so? I've played Epic games, and am running one right now. We still use the same rules though.

For certain values of "same" anyway.

Did they completely redo Epic rules for the DMG? If not, please point out the _fundamental_ changes that occur in the current system (apart from BAB and save bonuses of course).

Well, obviously if you want fundamental changes but leaving out the fundamental changes, there aren't any fundamental changes to speak of.

 

[Terwox]

"Warrior" on the toher hand. Now there's a class name with flavor. A character from that class can say, "you merely fight, but I wage war". I think I'll play one of those guys with my next character.

I nearly fell over. That's hilarious!
but I wage WAR! great!

 

[James McMurray]

Ah, now I see where you were coming from Hong. Those two changes are fundamental, but not major, changes.

Terwox: Thanks!

 

[DiFier]

I have to admit I relay like the spell sword. but my plan had ornignally been to get 6 levels of it (till the cache ability) and then switch back to wizard. Instead I'm goign to be taking levels of EK. (sorry familiar)

Sure by itself it may seem a little boring to some. it is trading the special abilities (the non-boring parts) that an other spell caster PRC would give you (like the Arcane trickster's ranged slight of hand stuff or the loremaster's special knowlege) and instead giving it a fighter's BAB. not bad if you are fighter who wants to cast some spells or a wizard who wants to participate in mele combat. I for one am goign to use a combination of fighter wizard spellsword and Eldridge Knight.

At 20th level I will not be able to stand against a 20th level pure fighter and fight it out just using swords. I also will not be able to hold my own against a 20th level wizard just using spells. I can use the combination of them and get past things that a pure fighter couldn't and a pure wizard couldn't.

And no one is going to be calling my charachter boring. that has nothing to do with classes or abilities. If you don't like a PrC don't use it. There are alot of them. pick another one.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Obviously you and Andy Collins have had a vastly different gaming experience than me -- for those of you who see classes like the Eldritch Knight and Mystic Theurge as a necessity, the "flexibility" gained from multi-classing is apparently almost worthless.

The flexibility gained from a multiclass with a spellcaster is basically one of the following two:

1) wiz 19/ftr 1: "Woohoo! I can use any martial weapon and armour!"

2) ftr 19/wiz 1: "Woohoo! I can use some first level spells!"

Because if you do ftr 10/wiz 10, it's
"Woohoo! My spells rarely work, except those self-buff ones I could cast as a level 1 wiz, and I miss a lot! I wish I was a cleric!".

I'll admit that cleric doesn't stack too badly with fighting classes, but it certainly doesn't gain much over just taking a single level of fighter. ftr 10/cle 10 is just a cleric who can't cast properly. It gets an entire 2 points of bab, and 5 feats (one of which is weapon specialisation, admittedly) over a ftr 1/cle 19. I honestly don't think that spell levels 6 through 9 are worth that.