Fighter/Wizard a good choice now! [3.5]

[reapersaurus]

gfunk - of course the spells don't last all day - that's not really the point.
The point is, the spell ALONE can make the difference as to who wins the fight - who cares (in the long run) if they have to spend one action to cast a fight-winning spell?

Pants - Who cares about G. Weapon Focus and Spec when spells utterly dominate their benefit?

Carnifex - the EK only loses out on 2 feats - look at the comparisons, once at EK5 and once at EK10:

_________________
Fighter11:
BAB+11, 11d10 HD (65 HP's using max 1st HD + avg), 6 fighter feats, +7/+3/+3 (+13 to saves in total)

Wizard11:
BAB+5, caster level (CL) 11, 11d4 HD (29 HP), 3 mage feats + familiar, +3/+3/+7 (+13 total)

Ftr1/Wiz5/EK5:
BAB+8, CL 9, 1d10+5d4+5d6 (40 HP), 2 Ftr feats + 2 mage feats + familiar, +7/+2/+5 (+14 total)

So at EK 5, he's given up 2 caster levels and 1 mage feat to gain +3 BAB, 38% more HP's, 2 more Ftr feats, and +1 to saves (compared to a wizard)
He's given up 3 BAB, 4 Ftr feats, and 38% less HP (actually only 17% less when the EK has False Life up) to gain 9 caster levels, 2 mage feats + familiar, +1 to saves (compared to a fighter)
_______________

At EK10:

Fighter 16:
BAB+16, 9 feats

Wizard 16:
BAB+8, CL 16, 4 mage feats + familiar

Ftr1/Wiz5/EK10:
BAB+13, CL 14, 2 ftr + 2 mage feats + familiar

You can work out the differences...
_______________

 

[d12]

P.S. drnuncheon and D12, you are so far away from objectiveness with this, it's not even funny. (d12, you even admitted that you like the fighter/mage concept)
You obviously have decided you like it, regardless of what anybody says. The problem is, the EK appeals to people who want to be better than all fighter-types in their field of expertise : combat - which he quite easily would be, with Polymorph and buff spells at his disposal.

Please don't bother arguing that an EK would not be as good as a Bbn in combat, with all the spells at the EK's disposal. You'd just embarass yourself.

There are so many spells that unbalance this PrC in combat, it's not even funny.

• False Life grants 1d10+ caster level HP's, narrowing the HP gap
• GMW greatly enhances the EK's combat strikes
• Polymorph (AFAIK) gives the EK an overwhelming advantage, even allowing the EK to effectively have much more attribute points to spend on the ones that won't be 'replaced' by the cherry-picked combat-monster Polymorphed form.
• Transformation eradicates the loss of 3 BAB his 5 wizard levels cost him
• not to mention insane stuff like Forcecage, etc that stops the fights dead
• Fly completely changes combat
• Greater Invisibility alone will cause the EK to win any fight with a comparable level fighter-type (without help for the fighter)
• the fighter-types will be required to buy magic items to make up for the EK's spells (like Fly and G. Invis), leaving the EK with a money advantage (furthered, since he can Craft his own)
• Haste gives a melee boost, also
• Heroism and Greater Heroism alone help the EK to hit better than a fighter-type
• Mage's Sword is a nice companion to have to heap on damage in a combat

This is just a small sample, from briefly looking over 3.5E (I'm not schooled on it yet).

If you can't see that a EK would OWN a fighter-type in combat, than you're really not seeing it objectively.

Why should any of us aim at objectivity? We aren't journalists, we're roleplayers. So, I like the fighter/mage concept. That doesn't mean that I'm incapable of making an assessment on whether or not the EK is balanced. I found the fighter/wizard too powerful in 2ED compared with the other classes. In 3.0 it was very much on the weak side, even with spellsword as an option. The EK seems balanced to me in 3.5 and yes I have decided that I like it. If someone could convince me it was broken then I wouldn't play one and woundn't allow them in my game. I haven't closed my mind on this issue but at the same time no one has convinced me that this is too powerful.

When it comes to comparing character classes you shouldn't compare how they fare against each other (i.e. EK against Barbarian in a death match) but rather does one dominate the action in a room full of ogres? A dragon? Undead? Elementals? Is one so much more powerful than the other that the player of the crappy PC feels slighted?

Take a look at the character I posted earlier. A 10th level barbaran half-orc built with 32 point buy and with 50,000 gp worth of gear could have a str of 18 easily. With the +4 Guantlets that goes to 22. He's still got lots of points to sink into Con and Dex too. With the right items he would be soooo very scary. Would the EK be better than the barbarian? Sometimes. But not all the time. I would bet the barbarian would die less for one. My example EK is pretty fragile - espcially against spells requiring a reflex save. He runs into three 6th level gnoll sorcerers with fireballs and smart tactics and he might just buy the farm. The barbarian shakes off that damage and starts chopping off heads.

You point out all those spells he can use to buff with but PCs don't always have time to buff. Sometimes they get surprised. Sometimes they get woken up in the night by packs of wolves. There are precious few rounds in combat to cast all those spells. The barbarian just stands up, says "Naaaaaaarg!" and....starts chopping off heads. Now me, I like the fact that I could turn into something else and fight. But eventually my EK is gonna run out of spells - or at least good spells.

And all those spells you named are indeed supercoolpowerfulwowwowwow. But the wizard gets em all two full levels before the EK. In my experience when spells turn a big combat they are usually the highest level spells theoretically available to the party. So, sure Harm or Disintegrate takes out the BBEG when the PCs are all 11th level. The best spells the EK might have at that point is Cone of Cold or maybe Feeblemind. Plus he's going to 2 behind the Cleric or Wizard in beating SR. In the face of that nasty demon he might be better off casting true strike + power attack (repeat), rather than actually trying to penetrate SR.

As to the statement "The problem is, the EK appeals to people who want to be better than all fighter-types in their field of expertise : combat - which he quite easily would be, with Polymorph and buff spells at his disposal." Well, the EK appeals to me and I don't think it will be better than the fighter types in combat under most situations. If I wanted to dominate combat situations I'd make a barbarian or a fighter or an arcane archer.

 

[Storminator]

Doesn't the EK essentially have to give up his armor? That'll play a big difference in his value. He'll also have to divide his equipment money up a lot.

I've seen to many "monk is broken" threads to decide before I playtest.

PS

 

[Celestian]

The lack of armor is a problem but this class never had armor in 2ED (unless you were an elf and had elven chainmail - soooo broken).

So, its balanced and fun! Yay 3.5! Comments? [/B]

eh? Broken? Ever hear of bracers of ac2, rings of protection? Far better than elven chain for a fighter mage. The only reason to wear elven chain was either it was all that was around or for role playing reasons. Elven chain was suppose to be as rare if not more so than magic... a magic suit of elven chain? Should be really rare.

Broken indeed. Elves cant have their own elven chain now cause it wasn't "fair" but dwarves get to use dwarven hammers. Go figure. Balance? I think more just a lack considering the options in the game properly.

 

[ShadowX]

18 levels of spellcasting; remember the pre-reqs: Ftr1/Wiz5, and you gain no spellcasting ability for the first level of the EK.

You are 2 levels behind a standard wizard, and that's an entire spell-level, something that is considered significant.

The normal mage also gives up a few bonus feats, which are significant to my mind.

Cheers!

If we are looking at only the 3 core books you lose 2 casting levels, but there are some PrC's with martial proficiency and a spellcasting level. If you are only using core, you lose only a feat. You get at least one for wizard 5, and another for first level of EK, and one last one for a fighter level, compared to 4 for a normal wiz. Anyways Ill retract the overpowered arguement, maybe after 20 levels but being a few casting levels behind for most of your career is a bummer.

 

[Pants]

Pants - Who cares about G. Weapon Focus and Spec when spells utterly dominate their benefit?

G. Weapon Focus and Specialization are
A) Always active
B) Cannot be dispelled

 

[Pants]

Pants - Who cares about G. Weapon Focus and Spec when spells utterly dominate their benefit?

G. Weapon Focus and Specialization are
A) Always active
B) Cannot be dispelled
C) And they stack with the aforementioned spells

 

[Garmorn]

Chalk me up to agreeing with Pants.


Wizard is the only class that should be able to multiclass quite well with rogue (AT) cleric (MT) and fighter-type (EK).
Why?
Because D&D is biased towards wizards. There, I said it.

D&D is not biases towards wizards in 3rd. It might have been in earlier editions, but one of the main selling points of 3ed is that ALL of the classes are blanaced.

There is no reason why other classes should also multiclass just as well as the wizard less specialized PrCs.

Please don't bother arguing that an EK would not be as good as a Bbn in combat, with all the spells at the EK's disposal. You'd just embarass yourself.

There are so many spells that unbalance this PrC in combat, it's not even funny.

• False Life grants 1d10+ caster level HP's, narrowing the HP gap
• GMW greatly enhances the EK's combat strikes
• Polymorph (AFAIK) gives the EK an overwhelming advantage, even allowing the EK to effectively have much more attribute points to spend on the ones that won't be 'replaced' by the cherry-picked combat-monster Polymorphed form.
• Transformation eradicates the loss of 3 BAB his 5 wizard levels cost him
• not to mention insane stuff like Forcecage, etc that stops the fights dead
• Fly completely changes combat
• Greater Invisibility alone will cause the EK to win any fight with a comparable level fighter-type (without help for the fighter)
• the fighter-types will be required to buy magic items to make up for the EK's spells (like Fly and G. Invis), leaving the EK with a money advantage (furthered, since he can Craft his own)
• Haste gives a melee boost, also
• Heroism and Greater Heroism alone help the EK to hit better than a fighter-type
• Mage's Sword is a nice companion to have to heap on damage in a combat

This is just a small sample, from briefly looking over 3.5E (I'm not schooled on it yet).

If you can't see that a EK would OWN a fighter-type in combat, than you're really not seeing it objectively.

Here I think is a weakness in your argument. Most combats run between four and eight round (based on the polls done here). If the EK cast two buffing spells, he has used up from half to a fourth of the combat. Just to get equal to the fighter.

Some spells are no longer the power houses they use to be. Take Greater Magic Weapon. It is now +1 per 4 levels. At 10th level the EK will give a +2 bonus to a weapon. Most fighter will have that if not better at that level. Haste does not affect spell casting and will affect most of not all of the party. Haste is now for more beneficial to the fighter/barbarian/Paladin then others.

Add to this: lots of these spells will be cast on your fighters if he needs them, because it lots of times it is more effective for any spell caster to buff friends the to attack the foe. Good examples are opponents that are immune or have high saves or spell resistance. (These last two are even harder for the EK to over come)

 

[PowerWordDumb]

i'd rather just be a flying monkey. WOW flying monkeys. What a great idea.

Unless you were a flying BUTT monkey, in which case that would suck.

Chalk me up as having no chalk since you guys used it all up!

 

[Terwox]

There's a bit much speculation on this thread, I think.

Most of the people who have played a fighter/wizard in 3e and spoke up, said they weren't having fun with it, or were troubled by it.

The one person who piped up with an EK they'd played said they had fun with it, and weren't overshadowing other people.

Spellsword is fun, but I ran a game where there was a spellsword, a normal fighter, and a psion. The spellsword was noticeably beneath both of the other two in power level. Had he been an EK, he would have been a bit more balanced -- I speculate.

However, that player also, talking about it later, stuck with the spellsword later in a new character -- he liked the flavor of the spellsword better.

I dunno. EK doesn't seem like a broken class. It seems like this class makes fighter/mages more fun to play for some people -- and they're not going to be overshadowing anyone else's niche in the party, either. EK's might be able to do something in a smackdown -- but so can everyone else. It's how they work out in an actual game, and I'm guessing, and hearing, that that works out pretty well.