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

Well, it shows yet again why it is right to say that spells are typed according to the list they were learned from. There is no Eldritch Knight spell list (nor a Magic Initiate list, nor an Elven Lineage list) but there are Bard, Cleric, Druid and Wizard spell lists. That's why it has to be spelled out: there could be a spell found only on the Cleric list that a Bard can take, and the rule counts that spell as nevertheless learned from the Bard list. Were that not stated, then any spell learned from the Cleric list would count as a Cleric spell.

I agree that is the most likely RAW that can be taken from this.

In a way, and the consistent principle is "does this class have a spell list" which all full casters have.* There can be Paladin spells and Ranger spells, but there cannot be Eldritch Knight spells. Were EK to be given it's own spell list, that would change because then there would be an Eldritch Knight list that spells could be learned of. As it is, their spells are Wizard spells... because they are learned from the Wizard spell list.

*I've heard "full caster" used to mean the spells known and castable progression. There could thus be such a full caster "F" with the spell progression of a Wizard, but lacking a spell list: there would nevertheless be no "F spells". Possibly the term must be expanded to requiring a spell list!

Right, but wanting to focus back on my original point. The Bladesinger or the Valor bard COULD learn, say, a Cleric cantrip via either a dip or the use of Magic Initiate, and their wording of their extra attack would allow that spell to be cast in exchange for a weapon attack. I can acknowledge that, pure RAW, the Eldritch Knight is different in that it is limited to Wizard spells, but since it is the ONLY case of this limitation existing with the extra attack cantrips, I think it is fair to say that RAI could be interpreted as the Wizard Spell mention being an artifact of the writer's perspective ("this class has no spell list, thus we make sure to specify which spell list they use to avoid confusion") rather than an indication that there was a balance concern at work.

It makes sense as an initial hypothesis. What does "a Wizard spell" imply in the context of EK features? Hypothetically, it implies that the EK is some sort of wizard caster and it means their spells, i.e. "Eldritch Knight spells". Having tested that hypothesis, it not ony lacks evidence but there is strong evidence against it: the better theory turned out to be something else.

Agreed
 

log in or register to remove this ad

There are focus in the Eberron book that add a small bonus to spells cast with them. Then there are standard magic staves and wands, including some that give a bonus to save DCs and/or attack rolls.

Yeah, I was initially happy about those, but they are SO incredibly weak, and the wands are the only ones that I could see anyone using. Going out of your way to have a specific orb, that can use a reaction to reduce one instance of a specific elemental damage by an average of 2? It isn't enough to make you feel like an orb caster is doing something different or impactful compared to a stave user.

I did some homebrew on them a few years back, but never quite was fully satisfied with them (and noticed a bias which made only one of them generally viable)

I house rule that a focus can always be used for S components. And additional components can always be added by the caster, irrespective of if the spell has them by default or not.

Agree that that is effectively what we do.
 

No struggle at all: I've played characters who leveraged the mechanics in that way. Mainly with 1st- and 2nd-level spells getting a free cast from a feat but also with a class or sub-class feature that offers a benefit. Mulling possible cases that could motivate learning the same spell from multiple lists...

Feat free casts as discussed (Magic Initiate, Fey-touched, Shadow-touched, Telepathic)
Innate Sorcery as discussed
Aberrant Mind sorcerer Psionic Sorcery
Wild Magic sorcerer Wild Magic Surge
Warlock spell slots
Some warlock invocations
Abjurer wizard Empowered Evocation and Overchannel

Caveat: I am sure of the feat free cast motivation as I've played it. I haven't made characters exploring all the other possible combinations, but as usual multiclassing will open up numerous valid strategies.

Much of this is not the same sort of thing however.

I agree feats like Magic Initiate are amazing. But if I make a cleric, I am not going to take magic Initiate and choose for my casting stat to be my 12 Intelligence instead of my 16 Wisdom. I find it very, very telling that every single feat that uses a casting stat now allows the character taking the feat to choose which stat they are using. Additionally, all of those feats also allow a caster to cast them using spell slots, effectively adding them to their prepared spells permanently.

Warlock invocations are interesting, but generally if you multi-class warlock with the intent of getting a specific invocation, and you are not a charisma caster, then the invocation chosen is likely NOT one that uses your charisma. For example, I doubt anyone would choose to get Agonizing Blast to add a +1 to their cantrip damage, instead of something like Armor of Shadows for at-will mage armor, or Fiendish Vigor for a max at-will false life, neither of which uses their charisma casting stat.


And I won't say that no one ever in the history of the game would make the decision to do something like that. I know someone who played a 6 Int Wizard who hated magic and refused to cast spells because they thought it was funny. But when I think, for example, of the sorcerer/wizard who is angling to use Innate sorcerery and Psionic Spells, but focuses on their Intelligence, I wonder if they are getting any real benefit from their plan. Because let us say that by mid-levels they have an 18 Intelligence and a 14 Charisma. This means that every spell they cast as a sorcerer is -2 to hit and -2 to their DC. Yes, with advantage from Innate Sorcerery their cantrips and spell attacks can have advantage... but their spell DCs are still -1. And it begins to look, to me, as though they either had a very specific story, or wanted a very specific ability like Subtle Spell, and are using the Innate Sorcery to mitigate the downsides of their build. Which raises the question of other routes, such as taking the Metamagic Adept feat and getting subtle spell and some sorcery points WITHOUT needing to multiclass, and without picking the same spells and cantrips twice.
 

Much of this is not the same sort of thing however.

I agree feats like Magic Initiate are amazing. But if I make a cleric, I am not going to take magic Initiate and choose for my casting stat to be my 12 Intelligence instead of my 16 Wisdom. I find it very, very telling that every single feat that uses a casting stat now allows the character taking the feat to choose which stat they are using. Additionally, all of those feats also allow a caster to cast them using spell slots, effectively adding them to their prepared spells permanently.

Warlock invocations are interesting, but generally if you multi-class warlock with the intent of getting a specific invocation, and you are not a charisma caster, then the invocation chosen is likely NOT one that uses your charisma. For example, I doubt anyone would choose to get Agonizing Blast to add a +1 to their cantrip damage, instead of something like Armor of Shadows for at-will mage armor, or Fiendish Vigor for a max at-will false life, neither of which uses their charisma casting stat.


And I won't say that no one ever in the history of the game would make the decision to do something like that. I know someone who played a 6 Int Wizard who hated magic and refused to cast spells because they thought it was funny. But when I think, for example, of the sorcerer/wizard who is angling to use Innate sorcerery and Psionic Spells, but focuses on their Intelligence, I wonder if they are getting any real benefit from their plan. Because let us say that by mid-levels they have an 18 Intelligence and a 14 Charisma. This means that every spell they cast as a sorcerer is -2 to hit and -2 to their DC. Yes, with advantage from Innate Sorcerery their cantrips and spell attacks can have advantage... but their spell DCs are still -1. And it begins to look, to me, as though they either had a very specific story, or wanted a very specific ability like Subtle Spell, and are using the Innate Sorcery to mitigate the downsides of their build. Which raises the question of other routes, such as taking the Metamagic Adept feat and getting subtle spell and some sorcery points WITHOUT needing to multiclass, and without picking the same spells and cantrips twice.

Anyone playing a troll character eg int 6 wizard who refuses to use magic I'm probably gonna boot them.

I do cover that session 0. Don't play troll characters with cowards being an example.

Been there, seen it, I'm assuming you actually want to adventure. You're basically trolling the DM and other players at that point so good bye.
 

Anyone playing a troll character eg int 6 wizard who refuses to use magic I'm probably gonna boot them.

I do cover that session 0. Don't play troll characters with cowards being an example.

Been there, seen it, I'm assuming you actually want to adventure. You're basically trolling the DM and other players at that point so good bye.

Yeah. Wasn't my game, wasn't my circus. And it was a literal kid (17?) so like... expected really.
 

Yeah. Wasn't my game, wasn't my circus. And it was a literal kid (17?) so like... expected really.

I've seen a couple of players both cowards. One was always to far away to fo anything (80' or so) and the other one just ran away a lot leaving the other players in the lurch. One point blank told me "why adventure it's dangerous".

Fair PoV IRL in game not so much. One got booted the other game blew up in spectacular fashion (not my circus)
 
Last edited:

I've seen a couple of players both cowards. One was always to far away to fo anything (80' or so) abd the other one just ran away a lit leaving the other players in the lurch. One point blank told me "why adventure it's sangerous".

Fair PoV IRL in fame not so much. One got booted the other game blew up in spectacular fashion (not my focus)

Oh, didn't think of cowards.

Had one Pacifist who was playing a 4e Deva. She had a really cool idea of being the girlfriend/lover of a Diety, reincarnating through time. Then proceeded to try and pull the "my boyfriend is a god who will solve this for me" card (it was one of my first times DMing)

Dark Sun game in 4e 9I was not DM) had a tank who refused to tank in case he got hurt, as well as a player who during one of the climatic final battles decided to go around picking metal coins off the floor instead of fighting the ghost of the sorcerer king, so he wouldn't make the enemy mad at him.

Don't think I ever had a player actually abandon the party (except in specific games where the party was playing a specific kind of story)
 

Oh, didn't think of cowards.

Had one Pacifist who was playing a 4e Deva. She had a really cool idea of being the girlfriend/lover of a Diety, reincarnating through time. Then proceeded to try and pull the "my boyfriend is a god who will solve this for me" card (it was one of my first times DMing)

Dark Sun game in 4e 9I was not DM) had a tank who refused to tank in case he got hurt, as well as a player who during one of the climatic final battles decided to go around picking metal coins off the floor instead of fighting the ghost of the sorcerer king, so he wouldn't make the enemy mad at him.

Don't think I ever had a player actually abandon the party (except in specific games where the party was playing a specific kind of story)

Players like that can go play somewhere else. I booted 3 in one go and they got booted from two other games and word gets round.

Being a coward if you have been hurt bad sure. Default run away though. You don't have a group if it's more than 1 person.
 

Much of this is not the same sort of thing however.

I agree feats like Magic Initiate are amazing. But if I make a cleric, I am not going to take magic Initiate and choose for my casting stat to be my 12 Intelligence instead of my 16 Wisdom. I find it very, very telling that every single feat that uses a casting stat now allows the character taking the feat to choose which stat they are using. Additionally, all of those feats also allow a caster to cast them using spell slots, effectively adding them to their prepared spells permanently.

Warlock invocations are interesting, but generally if you multi-class warlock with the intent of getting a specific invocation, and you are not a charisma caster, then the invocation chosen is likely NOT one that uses your charisma. For example, I doubt anyone would choose to get Agonizing Blast to add a +1 to their cantrip damage, instead of something like Armor of Shadows for at-will mage armor, or Fiendish Vigor for a max at-will false life, neither of which uses their charisma casting stat.


And I won't say that no one ever in the history of the game would make the decision to do something like that. I know someone who played a 6 Int Wizard who hated magic and refused to cast spells because they thought it was funny. But when I think, for example, of the sorcerer/wizard who is angling to use Innate sorcerery and Psionic Spells, but focuses on their Intelligence, I wonder if they are getting any real benefit from their plan. Because let us say that by mid-levels they have an 18 Intelligence and a 14 Charisma. This means that every spell they cast as a sorcerer is -2 to hit and -2 to their DC. Yes, with advantage from Innate Sorcerery their cantrips and spell attacks can have advantage... but their spell DCs are still -1. And it begins to look, to me, as though they either had a very specific story, or wanted a very specific ability like Subtle Spell, and are using the Innate Sorcery to mitigate the downsides of their build. Which raises the question of other routes, such as taking the Metamagic Adept feat and getting subtle spell and some sorcery points WITHOUT needing to multiclass, and without picking the same spells and cantrips twice.
Just for clarification, the examples I am thinking of here (and have played) are dissimilar from those I discussed in my #357 where I posited a character using multiple spellcasting abilities. I posited that only in order to see what must be true given the actual workings of the game mechanics.

The times I see the same spell taken multiple ways in play are for dichotomous benefits like "I want to have a free cast of X and I want to be able to cast it using Sorcery Points" which can come up for an Aberrant Mind. So it's not -- I want to use multiple ability scores -- it's "I want to avail of dichotomous benefits."
 

So as to useful choices for an EK, I currently like fitting Arcana and Jeweler's Tools in somehow. Then for 50gp craft a Ruby of the Warmage (wondrous item, common, requires attunement by a spellcaster), stick it to your bonded weapon and you're done.

Etched with eldritch runes, this 1-inch-diameter ruby allows you to use a simple or martial weapon as a spellcasting focus for your spells. For this property to work, you must attach the ruby to the weapon by pressing the ruby against it for at least 10 minutes. Thereafter, the ruby can't be removed unless you detach it as an action or the weapon is destroyed. Not even an anti-magic field causes it to fall off. The ruby does fall off the weapon if your attunement to the ruby ends.​
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top