Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8384015" data-attributes="member: 18">I'd agree with all of this, and add that, I think it's bit off to use up one of the PHB subclasses for Fighter (and Rogue) with what is essentially a multiclass combo, rather than a particularly interesting expression of the Fighter. It's like Wizards are so important to D&amp;D, that they need to bleed into the subclasses of other classes. That'd be fine, I think, in post-PHB books, but it seems messed-up in the PHB (I know there's precedent with junk like the Arcane Archer in 3E, but that's not a good reason at all).I think in any future PHB, the subclasses of a class should be focused on making entertaining visions of what that class can be, not a crummy version of a multiclass. The EK is just not a good design, doesn't have a good spell list, and whilst it can be effective, to do so requires pretty specific spell choices, and making those choices requires a degree of system mastery that I think relatively few players possess. As you point out, the Cantrip + Weapon Attack option is rarely going to be a good idea, but to most players, who aren't system masters, it's going to look like one. Not cool. Equally, because they have this weird and slightly perverse selection of spells, non-system-master players (i.e. most players) are likely to pick spells which are actually not a good idea at all.All classes and most subclasses in 5E can benefit from system mastery to a degree, but the EK benefits from it far more than most (the AT issues are much smaller).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 8384015, member: 18"] I'd agree with all of this, and add that, I think it's bit off to use up one of the PHB subclasses for Fighter (and Rogue) with what is essentially a multiclass combo, rather than a particularly interesting expression of the Fighter. It's like Wizards are so important to D&D, that they need to bleed into the subclasses of other classes. That'd be fine, I think, in post-PHB books, but it seems messed-up in the PHB (I know there's precedent with junk like the Arcane Archer in 3E, but that's not a good reason at all). I think in any future PHB, the subclasses of a class should be focused on making entertaining visions of what that class can be, not a crummy version of a multiclass. The EK is just not a good design, doesn't have a good spell list, and whilst it can be effective, to do so requires pretty specific spell choices, and making those choices requires a degree of system mastery that I think relatively few players possess. As you point out, the Cantrip + Weapon Attack option is rarely going to be a good idea, but to most players, who aren't system masters, it's going to look like one. Not cool. Equally, because they have this weird and slightly perverse selection of spells, non-system-master players (i.e. most players) are likely to pick spells which are actually not a good idea at all. All classes and most subclasses in 5E can benefit from system mastery to a degree, but the EK benefits from it far more than most (the AT issues are much smaller). [/QUOTE]

Verification