Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- individual adventure modules! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed to plug in to your game.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="drnuncheon" data-source="post: 1044238" data-attributes="member: 96">You say that like the EK isn't giving up just about everything that makes the fighting class useful.  He is.See, when people say things like "getting BOTH fighting and spellcasting at almost the full rate", it sounds really scary.  But it's not.  Someone with 10 levels of EK doesn't get anywhere near the fighting ability of a fighter.  He's missing out on 20 hit points and 4 feats, or a slew of special barbarian or ranger or paladin abilities.Looked at from the other side, he's a wizard who's given up a level of spellcasting and two wizard feats for +5 BAB, +5 hp, and a fighter feat (oh, and swapped good Will for good Fort).Is he going to dominate in melee? Hell no.  The fighter's still +2 BAB and 4 feats ahead of him (at least), plus he's got fewer stats to concentrate on boosting.  Unless the EK wants to suck up spell failure, the fact that he can't wear armor is going to mean his AC is lower than the fighter's.Is he going to dominate at spellcasting? Again, no.  He's at least a spell level behind the single-class wizard,  the wizard will have more spellcasting feats, and not have to worry about boosting the physical stats as much.  So the wizard is going to be a better caster.The EK pretty much winds up as a second-string fighter and good caster - kind of like a cleric, really.  I don't think it's as scary as most people think it is.Now, if it got +1 BAB, +1 spellcasting, and a feat every 2 levels...then you'd have a point.J</blockquote>

Verification