Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ThoughtBubble" data-source="post: 1060178" data-attributes="member: 9723">I don't see it at all.There was a long time where I looked through the spell list, and went "Wow. Stoneskin would be great to have as a fighter. And dude, that spell summons a +4 weapon!" I still think that there's a good range somewhere for a fighter caster who isn't a cleric (who makes a great fighter caster). And from the arguements, though I never tried it myself, appearently multiclassing with a fighter into an arcane caster gets one the shaft. I can see how being a decent fighter with low level spells could be difficult. And I can see how being a decent mage who can't really fight too well would suck.But anyway, on topic, I have a couple complaints about this class. The foremost: "Flavor text goes here." Ultimately, without that flavor, I can't really judge your PRC as well as I'd like. Sure, it's a bit more knightish than the original, I suppose. But is this meant to be an armored warrior who unleashes spells into the midst of battle, a wizard who realized that adventuring without armor is a bad idea, a light fighter who casts spells, a warrior with a special bond with his weapon, or just a better version of the multiclass fighter/mage?From some of your earlier comments, the class seems to be aimed at a spellcasting weaponsmaster. In which case, it seems a little bland. If the class is trying to fill the role of the original EK (a generic multiclass) then it's a bit too focused.Anyway, the entry requirements do seem a little high. Weapon Expertise? Weapon Focus? Those do add quite a bit of burn to what is needed to get into the class.I'm not overly fond of the weapon attunement either, aside from the somatic portion of it.Knowledge (nobility) and Sense Motive seem to hearken back to some paladin roots, but aside from that the skill selection seems good.Clerity is a good idea. I would have done it more like a domain spell than a metamagic feat, but it serves its intended purpose either way.All and all it's a pretty good multiclass. I'd just reccomend taking it more strongly in the flavor direction. Trying to keep it generic is just hurting a lot of the delivery.Did you try to build this from the EK from the beginning? I probablly would have started from a bard and pulled inspriation from the cleric and EK. Why? The bard forms the basis for a hybrid fighter arcane caster(coming out slightly ahead of a fighter wizard, I believe) and the generic idea is angling for a cleric who can cast arcane spells.And I'm wondering now, due to Saeviomagy's comments just what other sorts of goals there are for warrior/casters. I can see fighters who use spells to enhance their fighting ability, fighters who unleash dangerous magical attacks, and mages who don't crumple like tissue paper. But I'm sure there are more.</blockquote>

Verification