D&D (2024) Not a fan of the new Eldritch Knight

[Tawek21]

EK should just have an extended list of spellcasting focuses that includes their bonded weapons.

That sounds thematically good.

My only caveat is game balance. I've designed builds for, but not actually played, an EK.

If real life play shows that an EK without restrictions to their spell focus overshadows other fighters, then the balance may need tweaking. But some table home-brewing this is how we will find out.

 

[Tawek21]

"Add your proficiency bonus" works the same way. You can get it from several sources (e.g. getting a skill proficiency twice), but you still only add it once. If you are to add a multiple of your proficiency score bonus the text will read "your Proficiency Bonus is doubled".

I've always assumed it worked as follows: You can add your ability score once for damage if it is the ability modifier for your weapon. (Normally strength or dex, but sometimes a casting stat, such as charisma for a 2014 hexblade)

There were a few special abilities that allowed your modifier to be added to damage a second time.

The 2014 warlock 12th level invocation, life-drinker, also added your charisma modifier to your damage. I think it's clear that that was intended to stack with the charisma damage from a hexblade. The first addition of the charisma modifier was the weapon's damage modifier, the second from another warlock feature.

With the level 7 feature aura of hate in the 2014 oathbreaker paladin, you could also add your charisma modifier to your damage. If you had a level 7 oathbreaker multiclassed with a level 12 warlock, could you add your charisma modifier three times to your damage?

As this would have been a level 19 character, I'm not sure too many people would have worried. But, while it's explicit that two identical features, such as extra attack, don't stack, whether two similar but different features stack is one for DM to adjudication.

In my opinion, any similar cases in 2024 rules are unlikely to have been thought about by the game authors, and are issues for DM adjudication.

 

[Tawek21]

Cha-max

Any race
Entertainer
17 Cha, 16 Dex, 13 Str, 12 Con, 8 Int, 8 Wis.

Warlock 2, true strike, agonizing blast
-Cha to hit,
-cha+cha damage
Devoton Paladin 6, Warcaster, searing/ shining smite with True strike
-Cha + Cha to hit
-Cha opportunity attacks
-Cha to all saves
Celestial warlock 6, +2 Cha (20)
-cha+cha+Cha damage.
--+Cha again on a smite.
Dragon Sorcerer 3, quicken
+Cha to AC
Dance bard 3
-Cha dice to hand out
-advantantage when doing the Cha-Cha (Really, take glamor, just couldn't resist the pun)
Sorcerer 4/Bard 4 to get 2 epic boons (22 Cha).

That would be a functional, well rounded build.

Thanks for such an interesting and detailed build.

Generally, I think the stacking you are doing of charisma bonuses is reasonable, as you don't seem to be stacking near-identical features. I hope you don't mind the following nitpicky questions, especially if the questions are based on a misunderstanding.

When you get extra attack as a paladin, in practice wouldn't you do more damage with two melee attacks rather than a single casting of true strike? (d8+2+10+d6=20 vs (d8+2+5)*2=23)
Wouldn't two attacks also increase the chance you'd hit, and thus be able to apply the smite spell?

Once a Paladin, would you also use Sacred Weapon to get double charisma to-hit bonuses?

While levelling the Celestial warlock 6, a single true strike with triple charisma bonus would do more more than two long sword attacks with one charisma bonus. (1d8+2+15+2d6=28.5) vs (d8+2+5)*2=22) So from that level, the true strike makes sense over two attacks, probably even with a magical great sword and graze. When you can add a quickened true strike, the damage will double.

I've read some discussion online about whether the bonus damage from agonizing blast applies to true strike. Some argue that the bonus damage from agonizing blast is reserved for spells that have spell attacks or ones that force a DC for damage, and that true strike is a buff to a weapon attack, rather than doing the damage directly. Most in the discussions seem to allow agonizing blast with true strike, but anyone planning to use this build might want to ask their DM first. A similar issue may also come up with adding the Radiant Soul damage to true strike.

Some DMs might question whether the extra damage to spells from Radiant Soul applies to smite as it is a non-Warlock spell. I don't see how that is against RAW, but again, something to check with the DM first.

Overall, a very interesting build. I'm curious how the damage stacks up against a build using Great Weapon Master and/or Polearm Master with graze, or a build using Dual Wielder and nick. My guess is it'll do competitive damage but not game-breaking, so I hope DMs allow it.

 

[clearstream]

Some DMs might question whether the extra damage to spells from Radiant Soul applies to smite as it is a non-Warlock spell. I don't see how that is against RAW, but again, something to check with the DM first.

I'm with you in not seeing how it would be against RAW. Radiant Soul reads

Once per turn, when a spell you cast deals Radiant or Fire damage, you can add your Charisma modifier to that spell’s damage against one of the spell’s targets.​

Which isn't tying it to Warlock spells (unlike Agonizing Blast.)

 

[mellored]

When you get extra attack as a paladin, in practice wouldn't you do more damage with two melee attacks rather than a single casting of true strike? (d8+2+10+d6=20 vs (d8+2+5)*2=22)
Wouldn't two attacks also increase the chance you'd hit, and thus be able to apply the smite spell?

I didn't do any math on it.
But you can snag Pact of the Blade at level 1 and multiattack with Cha a few levels.

Once a Paladin, would you also use Sacred Weapon to get double charisma to-hit bonuses?

Yes, that's why in went Devotion.

While levelling the Celestial warlock 6, a single true strike with triple charisma bonus would do more more than two long sword attacks with one charisma bonus.

Sounds right.
Though nothing requires a longsword. You could use also use a greatsword.

When you can add a quickened true strike, the damage will double.

No, because you will be trading away your smite to quicken.

Though you still might want to use a shining smite to boost your allies.

Or you might quicken Hypnotic Patter any of your other spells.

I've read some discussion online about whether the bonus damage from agonizing blast applies to true strike

it's a spell, uses your spell attack, and deals radiant damage.
Checks all the boxes.

And it's not going to be OP. As you mentioned, worse than multi-attack with a longsword.

Some DMs might question whether the extra damage to spells from Radiant Soul applies to smite as it is a non-Warlock spell.

Nothing about Radiant Soul or says it needs to be a "warlock" spell.

Overall, a very interesting build. I'm curious how the damage stacks up against a build using Great Weapon Master and/or Polearm Master with graze, or a build using Dual Wielder and nick. My guess is it'll do competitive damage but not game-breaking, so I hope DMs allow it.

It will be a bit weak damage compared to a dedicated damage build.

But you can stand next to a greatsword fighter, give him advantage with shining smite, help him make his save with your aura, and heal him when he drops.

Plus get disguises self at-will, scout with a familiar, unseen servant, and plenty of other spells. No high level ones, but a lot to choose from and plenty of slots. And even a decent ranged attack.

Good (not great) damage, very good defenses, good support, good utility. Ends up being pretty well rounded.

 

[Tawek21]

Good (not great) damage, very good defenses, good support, good utility. Ends up being pretty well rounded.

Sounds good.

Too many builds try to be amazing in one area, esp damage. What's more important is to be well-rounded, and to have enough variety to be fun to play.

What I like is when there's enough options that you can keep surprising yourself and your team mates with a new strategy. Sounds like you've got that here.

As I said, I hope DMs allow it.

In my opinion, the major reason for disallowing a build is if it creates something overpowering which will put other players in the shade.

 

[ECMO3]

There is no readon to assume they DO stack unless the rules state they do. “Add your ability score bonus to damage” is a feature. You can get the same feature from different sources. Add twice your ability score to damage would be a completely different feature.

But it is not always the same ability and this means inconsistent results. If I add one stat (say Intelligence or Wisdom) then I could add Charisma on top of that ability and it would stack, but you can't stack it if it is the same ability score?

That makes no sense at all.

"Add your proficiency bonus" works the same way. You can get it from several sources (e.g. getting a skill proficiency twice), but you still only add it once. If you are to add a multiple of your proficiency score bonus the text will read "your Proficiency Bonus is doubled".

Your proficiency bonus has a specific explicit rule on page 13:

"Your Proficiency Bonus can’t be added to a die roll or another number more than once."

The fact they put a general rule for proficiency bonus but did NOT put a similar rule for ability score bonus indicates the intent is not to apply such a rule for ability score bonuses.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yeah I think that is why they used "Wizard Cantrip" - to refer to the cantrips you get from the Eldritch Knight feature without using more wording.



Get whatever you want at your table, but the PHB is clear on this and I don't feel I need to repeat it dozens of times.

Read page 97 and 98 it is all there what cantrips you can choose.



Yes exactly. It is spelled out very clearly and in fewer and less redundant wording than you are using.



The PHB does tell you where to get them from - the Wizard spell list.

It is clear what it is intended to mean and I really think these are a bunch of strawman arguments you are throwing up one after another.



Yes exactly it means a Cantrip selected through your Eldritch Knight subclass. You have not chosen it before you select it. After you select it then you have chosen it and at that point it is one of the Cantrips from your Eldritch Knight subclass and a "Wizard cantrip" under the intended

Before you select it you have not selected it. Before I level up I have not leveled up. One I level up then I have leveled up.



Actually it makes perfect sense, your repeated refusal to read the PHB and continued argument is nonsensical.



That is not the intended meaning in the Eldritch Knight subclass WRT to how it is used on page 97 and 98.





No they don't . Niether the description of Magic Initiate, nor the description of High Elf use the term "Wizard Cantrip" at all as far as I know.

Before we go further, please provide a page where the Magic initiate feat says "Wizard Cantrip" or where the High Elf description says "Wizard Cantrip".

IF you won't provide a page number then please admit you were mistaken and it is untrue that "Those all say Wizard Cantrip"



I don't know. Maybe it is in the same place as the part of the book that refers to the Cantrip you get from Magic Initiate as a "Wizard cantrip"!



I never said the term "Eldridge Knight spell" is in the PHB. Page 96-98 describe the Eldritch Knight subclass, including the procedures for them to get spells.




Yes they are Wizard spells, from the Wizard spell list which are defined as Wizard spells and that term "Wizard spells" as used on pages 98 is intended to refer ONLY to those specific spells selected as part of the Eldritch Knight subclass feature and not to any other spells that are on the Wizard list.

This is crystal clear.




Sure I can. I have said it many timesalready. I will type it here again:

Wizard cantrip in context on page 97 and 98 is intended to refer specifically to the spells gained through the Eldritch Knight subclass feature.

See I can say it lots of times .... and not only can I say it, I am right about it too!



At least I am not saying that there is verbiage in the PHB that is not there. It is one thing to disagree over what something means. It is quite another to say specific verbiage is written in the PHB when it is not and then to refuse to even retract the statement.

So, you think that an Eldritch Knight on page 97 learns a "wizard cantrip" which means a cantrip from the wizard spell list, but then after that, wizard cantrip means a Eldritch Knight Cantrip gained from the Eldritch knight subclass.

Do you know why an Eldritch Knight's abilities only work with spells an Eldritch Knight knows? Because nothing in the fighter, wizard or eldritch knight allows you to cast a spell you do not know. Your entire reading seems to rest on the idea that it can't mean wizard spell or wizard cantrip, because if it did, then you could cast spells you don't know. And I have no idea how you conceived of that idea.

 

[Chaosmancer]

My Arcane Trickster is an Intelligence caster and has MAgic Initiate-Wizard on Charisma.

Congratulations.

Using the 2014 rules every single Eldritch Knight I played had an 8 Intelligence, except the ones that multiclassed Wizard and they had a 13 or 14 and the feat spells I got were on other abilities.

Good for you.

Dumping Intelligence is EXTREMELY common on an Eldrtich Knight. Treantmonk did it in his first 2024 EK.

Good for him

Just because YOU personally don't do that doesn't mean no one else does and just because you don't have to keep track of that "fiddly" stuff on your PCs doesn;t mean no one else does either

Did Treantmonk have a mutliclass with his Eldritch Knight to need to track charisma or wisdom spells? No. He dumped Intelligence, as many people did, and took wizard spells that didn't rely on their casting stat. Shield, Magic Missile, Jup, Misty Step. So yeah, you are correct, it is very common to dump intelligence depending on your spell choice.

That doesn't mean that you are somehow required to have other casting stats. In fact, that seems to be a pretty terrible choice.

Except a Cleric gets 3 cantrips and you only mentioned one. Further saying it does not matter in one specific build is hardly evidence it does not matter in general.

Your point is it is overly fiddly to keep track of where you got what spells from and that is not true generally in a multiclass build. In most multiclassed builds it is essential.

You insisting it is true doesn't give me any reason to believe it is true, especially since you keep attacking ONLY the point of multiclassd spellcasters with different casting stats, and not the idea that the specific wording such as "wizard cantrip" instead of "cantrip" is going to make a massive difference in which spells you can use.

It proves there is at least one character being played like that, unlike your hypothetical strawman Cleric-Wizard-Fighter.

I provided a real world example of a PC being played to support my point. Can you provide one to support yours? A character actually being played, that you can provide a link to, that is multiclassed with 2 different casting stats AND has the Magic Initiate Feat AND does not concern themselves with fiddling on which classes get what spells?

Actually you claim above 90% of multiclassed casters don't concern themselves with this, while offering no evidence at all to back this up. If this is true, it should be pretty easy to find 9 real multiclassed characters with different casting abilities actually being played to counterbalance the one I provided.

How many multiclassed casters are you playing right now that don't need to track which spells are from which classes? (I am playing three that do FWIW)

Since I've pretty much never seen someone multiclass something that needed three different casting stats, because that seems like a horrible idea that is completely anti-synergistic... no, I can't show you that. Because, generally, if you are making a character, you synergize your abilities, or make those abilities not matter and so you don't bother to track it.

I don't need to track whether or not I have any particular score to cast mage hand, light, or guidance. So why would I bother to do so? And if I had an ability that I would cast with a -1 modifier... why would I have picked such an obviously bad ability for my character?

 

[Chaosmancer]

There is no readon to assume they DO stack unless the rules state they do. “Add your ability score bonus to damage” is a feature. You can get the same feature from different sources. Add twice your ability score to damage would be a completely different feature.

But you could add your level with Aasimar and then add your level with Assassinate, correct? So why can't you add your charisma modifier twice?