Eldritch Knight... how broken would this make them?

[Nargrakhan]

Two things that randomly popped in my mind while taking a shower... so they may sound stupid in reality, but sorta peaked my curiosity for a moment.

1.) If the Eldritch Knight used Strength as their primary casting attribute (i.e. rends reality with the force of their attacks, as a wizard rends reality with their minds) -- how broken would that make them?

In a separate scenario...

2.) If the Eldritch Knight had full access to all schools, instead of just Abjuration and Evocation, how broken would that make them?

And lastly... what if scenario 1 and scenario 2 were combined?

[Shadow]

1) Bad idea. This one should be obvious.
2) Not a great idea, but not a terrible idea either. This one is less obvious. They were limited to 2 schools to keep their relative power in check. They also get one spell from each level from any school they wish, so it's less of an issue than it seems. Free reign to choose spells as they wish would indeed be too powerful.

Our group allows EKs and ATs to choose a third school in addition to the two listed. This allows for more customization, but doesn't allow competely free access.

[Nargrakhan]

1) Bad idea. This one should be obvious.

Could someone just humor me and elaborate as if it wasn't obvious.

***EDIT***
If the fear is because another class could just "dip" in EK and take the Strength as casting, what if it was an additional capstone to the EK at level 20?

[BigONotation]

Could someone just humor me and elaborate as if it wasn't obvious.

I don't know why either. Wizards only need 1 stat, why should it be different for a partial wizard?

[silveralen]

Could someone just humor me and elaborate as if it wasn't obvious.

Fighter gets a lot while remaining SAD. It sets him apart from classes like ranger/paladin, who need to invest in 2-3 attributes to be effective. The fact fighter starts with con prof already gives him a leg up against other Gish like classes in terms of attribute allocation, as well as his extra boosts.

It isn't an awful idea, but I think it might be a bit much. I wish you could choose between cha and int so you could mix it with sorcerer easier.


I don't know why either. Wizards only need 1 stat, why should it be different for a partial wizard?

Not really. To maintain spells he needs con or a feat. Without armor prof he is vulnerable in combat without some dex. He can get around those, but so can fighter.

Fighter who focuses on buffs and saveless spells doesn't really need int. He isn't as versatile, but the same can be said of wizard who doesn't invest into dex/con (or feats to cover).

[Regulas]

Could someone just humor me and elaborate as if it wasn't obvious.

Because DC's directly effect spell power, consolidating the casting stat would effectively give them a large boost in casting power especially early game as you would only have 1 main stat. So if nothing else it would throw off the balance.

In comparison so long as he only knows the same number of spells letting him cast different types doesn't augment his power too much because they are still the same level spells and he still only knows the same number.

[MaxWilson]

Addressing number 2:


2.) If the Eldritch Knight had full access to all schools, instead of just Abjuration and Evocation, how broken would that make them?

Not very broken, IMHO. They still only get a handful of spell slots and a handful of spells. They still don't have a wizard's ability to cast ritual spells or swap spells out as-needed. I would oppose this change on thematic grounds since it leads to them not having to choose carefully between e.g. Mirror Image/Blur/Expeditious Retreat, and having to make hard choices is good for the game and also good for the Eldritch Knight's flavour. (I think of them like Pandion Knights: tutored in magic, but very focused on battle and not as adept as an actual Styric magician.) But due to the Concentration economy, there is no single combination that an Eldritch Knight with unrestricted schools could do that would break the game. If there were, an Eldritch Knight with restricted schools would already be doing it.

I honestly think Eldritch Knight is pretty fun the way it is. With only 15 or so spells total, it's not hard to find 10 Abjuration/Evocation spells worth knowing. Fireball/Counterspell are nice to have, Banishment-with-disadvantage is fun, Shield is great, and Wall of Fire is a nice battlefield-shaping spell. You use your unrestricted slots on some combination of Find Familiar, Dimension Door, Polymorph, Blur, Mirror Image, Hypnotic Pattern, Hold Person, and Expeditious Retreat.


Could someone just humor me and elaborate as if it wasn't obvious.

1.) It's thematically weird. Muscle-wizardry?
2.) Eldritch Knight already gets to inflict disadvantage on spell saves pretty much at will. Combine this with your option 2 and it becomes trivially easy to build a SAD character who can cast save-or-lose spells with DC 19 (eventually) and disadvantage for minimal attribute cost. Eldritch Strike is meant to replace the need for high Int. If you give it yet another Int-replacement feature you're doubling up.

That said, I don't think a EK with both of your suggested features would be game-breakingly good or anything, in the sense of rendering other class choices bad or meaningless. If you wanted to run this in your own games, I'd say go for it. I just find it unaesthetic and weirdly-balanced.

[EugeneVoid]

1. In 5e, stats matter... a lot. Having less MAD is so good that I'd reckon its not fair. If you really want you can add some feature for the Eldritch Knight to cast from Str, but make int matter.
Wizards need 3 stats. Int (for casting), Con (concentration, health), Dex (ac) in that order.

2. Should be fine. Kind of weird, and opens up animate dead, etc, so careful

[GiantOctopodes]

Sorcerer Attribute Dependencies: Cha, Con, everything else. Makes up for AC (normally obtained from Dex) through magic, but Dex is definitely a tertiary ability. Note that AC is the *worst* defense magic provides, and that Mirror Image, as an example, provides far more effective damage mitigation (and other benefits) than any amount of AC could provide.

Wizard Attribute Dependencies: Int, Con, everything else. See above.

Warlock Attribute Dependencies: Cha, Con, everything else. See above.

Druid Attribute Dependencies: Wis, Con, everything else. See above.

Bard Attribute Dependencies: Cha, Con, everything else. You can make a stronger argument for Dex here than anywhere else, but it's moreso that they get more use out of it, rather than they "need" it more than anyone else. As with all casters, Dex is the 3rd most important attribute, but also as with all casters, they can survive its absence if needed.

Fighter Attribute Dependencies: Str, Con, everything else. Armour provides AC, Str provides hits, con provides damage mitigation / protection from save or die effects.

Rogue Attribute Dependencies: Dex, Con, everything else. You could argue for Cha being in here, but that is only if the Rogue Chooses to be a "Face", and in that case, it is no more necessary than anyone else serving that role, which is really more of an argument for including a Warlock, Bard or Sorcerer to be the "face" than an indication of increased MAD for a Rogue. Dex provides AC and damage, con provides damage mitigation / protection from save or die effects.

Barbarian Attribute Dependencies: Str, Con, Dex, everything else. They *need* Dex for AC, otherwise see the fighter.

Ranger / Paladin / Monk Attribute Dependencies: Str or Dex, Wis, Con. Str or Dex to hit with attacks, Wis for casting, Con for damage mitigation and protection from save or die effects.

Really, other than the "bottom tier" in terms of most MAD classes, everyone has one primary stat, and Con. Sure, almost everyone can benefit from a 3rd attribute, but no one other than them has primary class features tied to more than one attribute. Having Eldritch Knight based on Str does *not* make them more Single Attribute Dependent than other classes, rather, it keeps them from being more MAD than other classes. Sure, in combat, they are the "best" at getting away with not having any other useful attributes, but outside of combat, Str and Con won't do all that much good, so if the Eldtritch Knight is going to contribute meaningfully in the 2/3rds + that is not combat, they will want (and will take) other stats, you're simply not forcing a stat on them at that point.

The latter idea, giving them all spell schools, is far more balance impacting in my book. I would definitely not do both- I see nothing inherently wrong with giving them all schools, since they're already limited in spell level etc as is. However, that amount of versatility should come with *some* cost, and making them more MAD is a fair one. Basically, I would actually recommend doing one or the other. It makes them far more palatable. I do not recommend doing both.

[silveralen]

Sorcerer Attribute Dependencies: Cha, Con, everything else. Makes up for AC (normally obtained from Dex) through magic, but Dex is definitely a tertiary ability. Note that AC is the *worst* defense magic provides, and that Mirror Image, as an example, provides far more effective damage mitigation (and other benefits) than any amount of AC could provide.

Wizard Attribute Dependencies: Int, Con, everything else. See above.

Warlock Attribute Dependencies: Cha, Con, everything else. See above.

Druid Attribute Dependencies: Wis, Con, everything else. See above.

Bard Attribute Dependencies: Cha, Con, everything else. You can make a stronger argument for Dex here than anywhere else, but it's moreso that they get more use out of it, rather than they "need" it more than anyone else. As with all casters, Dex is the 3rd most important attribute, but also as with all casters, they can survive its absence if needed.

Fighter Attribute Dependencies: Str, Con, everything else. Armour provides AC, Str provides hits, con provides damage mitigation / protection from save or die effects.

Rogue Attribute Dependencies: Dex, Con, everything else. You could argue for Cha being in here, but that is only if the Rogue Chooses to be a "Face", and in that case, it is no more necessary than anyone else serving that role, which is really more of an argument for including a Warlock, Bard or Sorcerer to be the "face" than an indication of increased MAD for a Rogue. Dex provides AC and damage, con provides damage mitigation / protection from save or die effects.

Barbarian Attribute Dependencies: Str, Con, Dex, everything else. They *need* Dex for AC, otherwise see the fighter.

Ranger / Paladin / Monk Attribute Dependencies: Str or Dex, Wis, Con. Str or Dex to hit with attacks, Wis for casting, Con for damage mitigation and protection from save or die effects.

Really, other than the "bottom tier" in terms of most MAD classes, everyone has one primary stat, and Con. Sure, almost everyone can benefit from a 3rd attribute, but no one other than them has primary class features tied to more than one attribute. Having Eldritch Knight based on Str does *not* make them more Single Attribute Dependent than other classes, rather, it keeps them from being more MAD than other classes. Sure, in combat, they are the "best" at getting away with not having any other useful attributes, but outside of combat, Str and Con won't do all that much good, so if the Eldtritch Knight is going to contribute meaningfully in the 2/3rds + that is not combat, they will want (and will take) other stats, you're simply not forcing a stat on them at that point.

Notice how all the hybrid classes, the ones who are gishes and are the most direct comparison to eldritch knight, have this sort of MAD? In fact, considering they can't rely on con prof for concentration saves, have fewer stat bumps, and don't have a built way to grant disadvantage to saving throws, eldritch knight is already far better off than them on this front.

A fighter can survive a low INT as well as casters can a low DEX. Proper spell selection (focusing on buffs) and judicious use of their ability to impose disadvantage help massively.

[Shadow]

Ranger / Paladin / Monk Attribute Dependencies: Str or Dex, Wis, Con. Str or Dex to hit with attacks, Wis for casting, Con for damage mitigation and protection from save or die effects.

This is the category that you need to compare EKs and ATs with. They are capable in combat, and they are fractional casters. So just like the other classes which are capable in melee and are fractional casters, they should require MAD to be good at both.
If you allow EKs and ATs to drop the tertiary casting stat, then what reason would anyone have to play a Pally or Ranger, for example? I mean, they do a lot of the same stuff, but they require more stats to do it.
If you make EKs SAD then you invalidate Pallys/Rangers/Monks in the process. That's basically the definition of unbalanced.

[GiantOctopodes]

Notice how all the hybrid classes, the ones who are gishes and are the most direct comparison to eldritch knight, have this sort of MAD? In fact, considering they can't rely on con prof for concentration saves, have fewer stat bumps, and don't have a built way to grant disadvantage to saving throws, eldritch knight is already far better off than them on this front.

A fighter can survive a low INT as well as casters can a low DEX. Proper spell selection (focusing on buffs) and judicious use of their ability to impose disadvantage help massively.

Yes, this is (somewhat) true. And it is also true that a Wizard with just Int and Con won't be able to beat someone with a stick anywhere near as effectively as a 'gish' class (though to be fair with cantrips, why would they need to?). My point was moreso that the Gish classes have the short end of the stick. We all know and agree what the RAW is, the question posed is how broken would this houserule make them. I guess the larger answer is, if you reduce the MAD of gish classes down to two, pure casters cease being the obviously superior choice as often. Is the resultant Eldritch Knight stronger than a Ranger? Oh you betcha. Is it stronger than a Sorcerer? Eh, depends on the situation. Which was kinda my goal. If you do this, I would similarly parse down the MAD for everyone other than a Monk (they're just fine as is imho). I mean, is anyone really arguing a Paladin is the obviously superior choice to a Wizard, if they are not MAD? I'd love to see something supporting or proving that, maybe I still have 3e caster bias in my bones and I'm just not seeing things properly.

[Shadow]

maybe I still have 3e caster bias in my bones and I'm just not seeing things properly.

That's my feeling on it, yes.

[silveralen]

Yes, this is (somewhat) true. And it is also true that a Wizard with just Int and Con won't be able to beat someone with a stick anywhere near as effectively as a 'gish' class (though to be fair with cantrips, why would they need to?). My point was moreso that the Gish classes have the short end of the stick. We all know and agree what the RAW is, the question posed is how broken would this houserule make them. I guess the larger answer is, if you reduce the MAD of gish classes down to two, pure casters cease being the obviously superior choice as often. Is the resultant Eldritch Knight stronger than a Ranger? Oh you betcha. Is it stronger than a Sorcerer? Eh, depends on the situation. Which was kinda my goal. If you do this, I would similarly parse down the MAD for everyone other than a Monk (they're just fine as is imho). I mean, is anyone really arguing a Paladin is the obviously superior choice to a Wizard, if they are not MAD? I'd love to see something supporting or proving that, maybe I still have 3e caster bias in my bones and I'm just not seeing things properly.

I mean... they aren't really comparable in that manner. This isn't the edition where cleric is a better fighter than fighter.

For example, paladin vs wizard, the problem isn't in combat. In combat paladin ahs access to more than enough tricks to keep up with a wizard, and may easily outpace him depending on the wizard/paladin's relative focus and the encounter type.. The only time paladin might be weaker is outside combat, in pure utility (and honestly I'm not convinced he is actually that bad off, with spells like scry, raise dead, dimension door, detect/dispel magic, zone of truth, tree stride, and more all being options). Which is an issue SAD won't fix, as you'd simply pour excess points back into non combat utility attributes, like CHA.

[Person_Man]

My thoughts:

1) It depends on the method being used for ability score generation, how lucky the player is, and what your preference for game balance is. The Monk, Paladin, Barbarian, Arcane Trickster, Eldritch Knight, and weapon focused caster builds are more MAD then other builds. Anything that reduces MAD can allow those builds to be on par with other classes, or they might make them significantly more powerful, depending on how high the ability scores are and what their distribution is.

2) I'm generally opposed to open ended spell lists. My opinion is that each class (or subclass) should have a tight and thematic list that overlaps as little as possible with other spellcasters. I want each class/subclass to be unique and interesting, and not just a nerfed or kludged together version of some other class.

[Longcat]

1) Not broken, but very overpowered when combined with Rule 2 and their L10 ability. It's an effective Int 30 for the purpose of DCs if the Fighter has Strength 20.

2) I would maybe allow them to switch out a single school (Abjuration+Transmutation makes more sense for a Gish anyway), but unlimited access has a lot of pitfalls.

[D.U.P.A.]

The problem with gishes is also they are mostly melee, so along with attack stat and spellcasting stat they need a considerable amount of constitution. After that you must also invest a little in stats with saving throws. Paladin is a bit problematic here, having two stats with uncommon saving throws (unless going for dex build). Eldritch knight is a bit better on this, as fighter having most ability increases.

[Longcat]

Eldritch Knight, unlike Paladin, works just as well at range as in melee.

[JFahy]

Mike Mearls said that they put in the school restriction partly for battle-caster flavor, and partly so that there's a reason to multi-class Fighter/Wizard.

[Person_Man]

Mike Mearls said that they put in the school restriction partly for battle-caster flavor, and partly so that there's a reason to multi-class Fighter/Wizard.

I completely hate that line of reasoning, and I think that Mearls probably made a lot of similar idiosyncratic design decisions throughout this edition.

First, there are a lot of spells that would make perfect sense for a "battle-caster" that are outside of the Abjuration and Evocation schools. And once splat starts coming out, its likely that there will be many spells within those schools which don't make sense for a battle-caster. It would have made a lot more sense to just tailor a specific spell list to fit the desired role of the sub-class.

Second, if you want Fighter/Wizard to fill the Gish role, then don't write an Eldritch Knight subclass. If you want sub-classes to fill hybrid roles, then don't include multi-class rules. (Which mostly suck for this edition anyway). But creating multiple overlapping ways to more or less do the same sorts of things with slight variations creates needless confusion and rules complexity, and leads to trap options for players who lack sufficient rules mastery.

[silveralen]

The main problem is that they didn't give him transmutation. Why? I honestly can't say, some of the most appropriate spells are in that school. That's what annoys me the most.

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

If any of my players express interest in playing an EK, I think I'll allow them the choice of either getting the spells allowed by the PHB, or choosing any 3 schools but getting no free-pick spells. The choice of spell schools would give some nice flavor to the character.
Combat Buffer: Abjuration, Transmutation and Illusion
Death Knight: Necromancy, Evocation and Conjuration
Fey Knight: Illusion, Enchantment and Conjuration
Action Hero Detective/Spy: Divination, Illusion and Enchantment
etc etc.

The only worry I'd have is if this would be stepping on other classes' toes, but the limited spell slots/levels should keep him from outshining any other player in a dedicated role.

[unwise]

I don't really like the flavour or the effect of using Str to cast with. If you find that their spells are resisted to much, just give them a magic spell-blade that adds its bonus to spell DCs as well. Better to fix the problem ad-hoc if it happens rather than making sweeping changes.

I have no issue with allowing more spell choices for a EK, I just want them to have a theme. In my game, the EK actually uses druid spells rather than wizard ones. He can pick any spell that has a plant based theme to it, regardless of its school.

What I would be tempted to do is just make EK spells outside of the suggested schools really hard to find teachers for. They are not the same as wizard spells, so you have to find a mentor who can teach them. I think it would be cool travelling around trying to find eldritch swordmasters, or ancient manuals to teach you new techniques.

In an upcoming campaign the EK is an Eladrin, so I am more than happy for him to swap Evocation for Illusion/Enchantment as it just fits the fey knight theme so much better. I prefer to do things like this ad hoc, if I wanted an overarching rule, I would simply make up a full spell list for EKs, putting in everything that seems to fit the stereotype.

[Doug Lampert]

Second, if you want Fighter/Wizard to fill the Gish role, then don't write an Eldritch Knight subclass. If you want sub-classes to fill hybrid roles, then don't include multi-class rules. (Which mostly suck for this edition anyway). But creating multiple overlapping ways to more or less do the same sorts of things with slight variations creates needless confusion and rules complexity, and leads to trap options for players who lack sufficient rules mastery.
In this case the non-included option is multiclassing since that's optional. So why is a standard option being weakened to make the optional rule option viable?

In any case, if for some reason making fighter/wizard viable is important in Mearl's opinion:
1) Eldritch knight casts from the list of a prepared arcane caster of his choice.
2) Eldritch knights that multiclass can add 1/3rd their Eldritch knight level to their chosen prepared arcane caster class for purpose of determining the level of spells they can learn.

Done!
EK 4/Wiz 16 gets level 9 spells, he's a fighter, he doesn't give up any stat gains, and he's got a fine reason to multiclass fighter/wizard.
Conversely
EK 13/Wiz 7 gets level 6 spells and three attacks, he's got a fine reason to multiclass ftr/wiz.

You can use multiclassing as a slider to adjust how much your EK emphasizes magic and how much he emphasizes melee rather than multiclassing giving you two different ways to learn and prepare low level spells.

It works at lower levels to. The way to make multiclassing work is to make things stack when they can and should, if EK is a wizard/fighter type then his casting should stack with wizard casting.