Eldritch Knight, Effective or Defective?

[Grimstaff]

I'm taking a break from DM'ing for a couple of months and get to play for change! I thought of running an Eldritch Knight but have never done so myself or seen anyone else run one. If you have, would you say the EK is an effective character type or not. If so, what have you seen to be most effective in terms of levels taken before the PrC?

 

[The_Gneech]

I play an Eldritch Knight in a Greyhawk game and he works very well. Finally makes a 3.x fighter/mage combo a feasible idea!

Arcane spell failure is still a pretty big hindrance (as it was intended to be); I've been bouncing back and forth between EK and Spellsword (CW version, not Tome & Blood version) to represent the character's training to compensate for that.

He doesn't have a lot of endurance in straight-up melee, mostly due to low hit points; if I was doing it again from the beginning I'd go with an archery-based build instead. But he is capable of holding his own in a fight, and serves as the party's primary wizard.

-The Gneech

 

[JoeGKushner]

Depends. If your GM will let you take one of the PrCs from some other sources, they totally smoke the Eldritch Knight. For example, there's a PrC in Waterdeep that is almost like a template in that either a fighter or mage can take it, but they don't adjust hit dice or other factors for a mage, so it's got like d10 hit dice and spellcasting advancement at almost every level.

Then there's a PrC in one of the Eberron books, might be Explorer's Handbook or Five Nations, that gets 1d8, some special abilities, and I think spellcasting at every level.

If it's a core books only type of game, yeah, the EK is good, but once you start branching out...

The Thanemage or Thaneblade, can never keep it straight, from Advanced Player's Guide by Green Ronin, isn't a bad fighter mage style character. One of the things from that book that I've tried to incorporate into my own games.

 

[Psion]

I certainly think you have to put some design thought into it. For example, you have to watch your AC and pick your spells carefully, or you will be made into mincemeat in melee.

 

[Zappo]

I'm (rarely ) playing a bladesinger and I've just got the feature that lets me ignore ASF; after this, I think I'll go EK. The BBEG in my current Planescape campaign is an Eldritch Knight. I like it, but I can't yet say whether it is strong, balanced or weak.

 

[DanMcS]

I'm playing a fighter/sorceror/EK, and he works. Depends heavily on buffing, but since he can do that for himself, he's constantly got a greater mage armor, alter self, and phantom steed going, and within a few rounds of combat starting can have up a shield, protection from evil, and/or fly if the situation warrants it. He's much better at being a fighter/mage than he was before he got into the class, that's for sure.

The class itself might need another bonus feat or two, maybe at 5th and 10th level? Haven't hit that point yet, but he doesn't really feel underpowered so far.

Before you go into the class, fighter-type 1 /wizard 5 or sorceror 6 is the most straightforward way in. A paladin/sorceror would be interesting, at which point you might go paladin 2 for divine grace and lay on hands.

 

[Warehouse23]

A ranged-based EK with a big honkin' magical crossbow and a couple of wands of truestrike goes a long way towards being a force in combat. I have played a non-ranged EK who focused on reach weapons to support/flank the party's main fighters. Investing in the Dodge-Mobility-Spring Attack chain is key, as the EK's strength is getting in, doing damage, and getting out before the counterattack comes.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Why not use a longbow?

The interesting thing about the EK is that, because it is a generalist of sorts, you have to "re-specialize" it a bit to get power out of it. IMHO,the D&D model of the four-person party simply does not reward a generalist sufficiently. Thus, you should think about what exactly you want your EK to do. Being the party spellcaster is clearly a no-go, because then you should go straight wizard or cleric. So it's gotta be something else.

One of the nice things is that the EK can fuel other builds (bladesinger, spellsword) to make them work better than just taking the PrC would. For example:

1) The Bladesinger. Ftr2/Wiz4//Spellsword 1/EK 8/BS 5. Concentrate on mobility feats (including Quick Draw, for neat wand/attack combos). You will have a caster level of 15 and BAB +18 at the end of this progression. In mid-levels, act as a tactical support (mobility) fighter and cast exclusively utility spells. At the high end, you can buff yourself to the roof, utilize polymorph in conjunction with fly and ability buffs, and hammer your foes into the ground.

2) The spellsword. Wiz4/Ftr2/Spellsword 5/EK 9. This build uses heavy (mithril) armor, Extend Spell, Persistent Spell, and LOTS of buffs. Caster level 15, Spell failure mitigation 20%, BAB +18. This build is easily usable as a tank.

3) Pal2/Sor6/EK 10/something else 2. 9th-level arcane spells and Charisma bonus to saves. (DanMcS, Pal2 is a MUST. Having Cha bonus help out with spellcasting AND saves is awesome.) This is a pure combat mage build; you have the advantage of paladin levels to provide you with a few extra hp and that save bonus!

 

[Merlion]

I like the Spellsword better, personally. EK gives you full spell progression and full BAB, but it doesnt do anything about ASF, and it has a crappy hit die, so it really doesnt do you that much good. As far as melee anyway

Spellsword loses some spell progression, but it has good BAB also, and lets you slowly ignore more and more ASF, as well as the nifty Channel Spell ability.

Bladesinger is pretty nice to if you like that style of combat.

 

[Thanee]

A Fighter 1/Sor/Wiz 5-6/Spellsword 1/Eldritch Knight X works pretty well.

Bye
Thanee