What's the point of the Eldritch Knight PrC?

[Voadam]

Eldritch knight was great because it had no organization requirements, I just took it as it matched the character concept and class path and fit naturally.

I considered witch hunter from OA but the religious aspects the DM threw on taking it made it no longer appealing for me.

 

[The_Gneech]

Eldritch Knight is the perfect warrior-mage PrC. Ftr/Wiz characters can neither fight nor do decent spellcasting. Eldritch Knights are competent (if not stellar) at both.

-The Gneech

 

[tarchon]

What IS it with all these EK builds that have fighter 4 or 5??

Usually Fighter 4 is so you can get the Weapon Spec feat, for what it's worth.

 

[Droogie]

Eldritch Knight is the perfect warrior-mage PrC. Ftr/Wiz characters can neither fight nor do decent spellcasting. Eldritch Knights are competent (if not stellar) at both.

-The Gneech

What about the battle sorcerer variant from UA? I haven't seen anyone mention that class yet. How do they stack up?

 

[Silveras]

What about the battle sorcerer variant from UA? I haven't seen anyone mention that class yet. How do they stack up?

That's a whole different topic, really. Battle Sorcerer is a variant base-class Sorcerer that gets extra weapon proficiencies plus Cleric BAB and hp, losing 1 spell slot and spell known of each level from the regular sorcerer's charts.

 

[Saeviomagy]

What is it with all these builds that assume level 20 characters? Try level 10, and you'll see a big difference.

Yeah - fighter 4 /wizard 5/ek 1. Basically the weakest point the class can get if you continue with the trends.

A fighter 1/wizard 5/ek 4 will be significantly more powerful.

Usually Fighter 4 is so you can get the Weapon Spec feat, for what it's worth.

2 damage or 9th level spells... hmm... not really a tough choice.

Again - the difference between only taking a single fighter level, and taking multiple ones is - the multiple fighter level variants are considerably weaker.

 

[MerricB]

Don't you need BAB +7 to qualify for Dwarven Defender?

Yes - I'm just guessing at the levels. I know they may be off by one or two.

Cheers!

 

[philreed]

Nice thread, guys. Thanks for the different takes on the class. I thought I had once read that pretige classes were meant to add flavor and interest to a character but I must have been dreaming (again).

 

[johnsemlak]

Yeah - fighter 4 /wizard 5/ek 1. Basically the weakest point the class can get if you continue with the trends.

A fighter 1/wizard 5/ek 4 will be significantly more powerful.


2 damage or 9th level spells... hmm... not really a tough choice.

Again - the difference between only taking a single fighter level, and taking multiple ones is - the multiple fighter level variants are considerably weaker.

I'm not a rules guru, but I'll take a stab at offering a contrary POV--might be off base...

You're not considering all the advantages a F4/W5/EK1 has over a F1/W5/EK4 It's not just Weapon specialization

The total benefits would be:
+9 HP
2 additional fighter feats (If we assume these feats are Rapid Shot and Weapon Specialization, that's an addtional attack per round and +6 points of damage per round)
+2 to BAB
+2 to Fort Save (I believe)

 

[johnsemlak]

My take on 'bland PrCs is, what's wrong with some of them? If they're bland but good mechanical concepts, they should be easy for DMs to port. A DM can easily add flavor, plus a roleplaying requirement, to a PrC like the Eldritch Knight.

If all PrCs that WotC put out were full of setting-specific fluff that was unusable to most DMs, imagine the flack they'd get for that.