Eldritch Knight - Making Intelligence Viable through Archetype Changes (Homebrew)

[Lollerabe]

Hey guys,

I'm currently playing an Eldritch Knight. While I'm having fun and feel the archetype is flavourful, I have a few issues with the EK. This thread is my attempt at homebrewing a solution that would fix these ´issues´ without making the archetype completely broken.

I would really love feedback, ranging from opinions on fluff to the actual numbers.
This will be a long post, but I really hope you'll read it all!

Anyway my main issue with the EK is that the class features synergise poorly with the features of the fighter and that the EK doesn't have enough mechanical use of INT.

Here are the examples where I feel rather weak, but flavourful features, can be buffed without breaking the game by adding some INT-contingent abilities. I'll first point out the features that are somewhat dysfunctional before suggesting INT-dependent fixes:

1. Weapon bond
This feature could be very flavourful, and I think most players love the idea of a fighter bound to his/hers weapon through arcane energy.
However the actual features are very lackluster: being immune to disarm is damn near irrelevant due to how the action economy currently works (it might be less useless if you have a DM that actively tries to make this feature shine).
Even then disarming is just a weak option in 5e by RAW. The summon part is again cool in theory, but unless you have a player who's trying to make a throwing weapon build - rather weak. Safe for the classic jailbreak scenario the feature might never come up, unless again you have a DM trying to make you feel awesome (which isn't a bad thing).

2. War magic
Except for the actual spell slots I imagine this is the feature 80% of the EK players pick the archetype for. In practice though it's almost anti-synergetic with the fighter's features and play style.
First off, the feature is based on a bonus action - this might not be a problem at first glance, but it makes the feature work really horribly in conjunction with almost EVERY weapon based feat in the game: Shieldmaster, Polearm Master, Crossbow Expert and Great Weapon Master all lose a lot of their value if you aren't able to use a bonus action.
This upsets me a bit, as I imagine almost every single fighter would love to have a weapon feat. The fact that dual wielding just dosen't work at all with the feature is even worse.
Oh, and the feature becomes near useless from lvl 11+ due to extra attack (2). Some might argue that it shines from lvl 7 to 11, but often you would propably be better off taking the attack action for 2 hits + whatever bonus action feature your weapon feat gives acces to (be it butt end PAM attack, a shove attempt from shield master, or a good 'ol cleave attack from great weapon master).

3. Intelligence as a stat for EK
The Eldritch Knight gains acces to magic like a wizard - they study. However in practice the INT stat does next to nothing for them. It's not that you can't pick a bunch of spells that benefits from INT; you can, but this would most likely be because you WANT your INT fighter to profit from a high INT-score, not because it's the best option.
The fact that a lot of people are agreeing on the fact that an EK that dumps INT is the most optimized says a lot in my opinion. When I made my EK I put 14 in INT off the bat (which I'm fine with, I love INT) then I went through my spell list and figured out which spells I would want in the future. Even with a pretty good INT, I ended up picking this list:
Shield, Absorb elements, Expeditious Retreat, Blur, Mirror Image, Magic Weapon, Haste etc.

Note: Not a single DC reliant spell. I would have been better off dumping INT, it seems. The fact that INT is considered the worst sta, mechanically speaking, in 5e dosen't help either.

Anyway enough with the complaints, I just wanted to spell out what I want to fix, and why I believe it needs fixing.

Homebrew suggestions

Weapon bond - as is but with the following added:
Arcane Fighting Styles
While wielding a bonded weapon you can enhance your combat abilities with small bursts of arcane energy. The effect changes according to the fighting style you gained acces to as a fighter. You can use this feature only once per turn. You can use this feature a number of times per day equal to your intelligence modifier. You regain all expanded charges on a short or long rest.

Arcane Aim (Archery): When making a ranged attack you can add half your proficiency bonus (rounded up) to the attack roll.

Eldritch Armor (Defense): As a reaction you can add half your proficiency bonus (rounded down) as a bonus to AC against a single attack.
You can use this feature after seing the dice rolled, but before you know the result.

Arcane Strike (Duelist): When you hit with an attack, you can add half your proficiency bonus (rounded up) to the attack's damage roll. This attack counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming damage resistances and immunities.

Arcane Smash (Great Weapon Fighting): When you hit an enemy with an attack you can add an additional 1d4 force damage to the attack's damage roll. This attack counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming damage resistances and immunities. The damage increases to 1d6 at 5th level, 1d8 at 11th level and 1d10 at 17th level.

Barrier (Protection): When an effect would cause damage to an ally within 5 feet of you, you can, as a reaction, grant damage resistance to said ally.

Two Weapon Fighting: Any idea is welcomed.

War Magic - as is but with the following added:

You can chose to forego one of your attacks to cast a cantrip in its place. You can only use this feature once per turn. You can use this feature a number of times per day equal to your intelligence modifier. You regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.



There it is. My idea is to make the both weapon bond and war magic fun and viable while also being dependant on the EK's intelligence modifier. Basically, I'd like to give the player a reason to not dump stat his INT (and also open up the opportunity for other high INT characters to profit more from their INT score).

I feel the war magic fix is really good: it's hardly broken, but allows for something akin to the spellblade flavour a few times per day, while still adding value later in the game.

I like the idea of the weapon bond changes (it's different and flavourful in my opinion), but fear they might be too strong. I would love some feedback on that. I really don't intend to make the EK overpowered. I do, however, fully intentionally want them to be a competitive choice. Currently, EKs feel very poorly designed by RAW.

While both the war-magic and weapon bond changes are straight buffs, remember they do come with an opportunity cost - actually having a decent INT score. I'd imagine most players would love to use these features (or similar features) which would make intelligence a high(er) value stat on EKs.

Anyway please chime in! - Thanks in advance.

Lollerabe.

P.S All you guys who are good at number crunching please help out if you can (it's really not something I have proficiency in... High INT or not).

[EvilAnagram]

The biggest argument that Int is valuable comes from the EK's ability to impose disadvantage on save-or-suck spells. That means that a 16 Int caster can effectively outcast a wizard when it comes to major debuffs. Note that this feature appears just as your evocation spells stop being relevant (on account of being so far behind full casters'), so your Int will stay consistently useful throughout your career.

[Cybren]

The biggest argument that Int is valuable comes from the EK's ability to impose disadvantage on save-or-suck spells. That means that a 16 Int caster can effectively outcast a wizard when it comes to major debuffs. Note that this feature appears just as your evocation spells stop being relevant (on account of being so far behind full casters'), so your Int will stay consistently useful throughout your career.

I was going to point this out, with the addition that, if you want your EK to make more use of int (and I think they can already make good use of it!), there's an obvious avenue for that: multiclass to wizard. You get more spells out of evo/abj, more spell slots, and more spellcasting related features.

I'm also not sure that war magic is anti-synergistic with other fighter things. Lateral development in power isn't necessarily bad. There's already going to be turns where you decide to make a regular attack, and it may be motivated by wanting to use your bonus action on something (say, second wind), or it may be that you have incentive to use your regular attack action, which then motivates you to use your bonus action for something else. To say nothing of bonus action spells you might want to cast that preclude using war magic at all

[Vogonjeltz]

First off, the feature is based on a bonus action - this might not be a problem at first glance, but it makes the feature work really horribly in conjunction with almost EVERY weapon based feat in the game: Shieldmaster, Polearm Master, Crossbow Expert and Great Weapon Master all lose a lot of their value if you aren't able to use a bonus action.

Most combat feats provide a bonus action, but Longbow would be unaffected (Sharpshooter).

I think you'd be better served looking towards the Spellcasting (or other) feats as an EK:

Warcaster (for the reaction casting), Spell Sniper (so they can pick up non-combat cantrips for additional utility), Ritual Caster (for additional utility), Elemental Adept (parallels Great Weapon Fighting Style), or Magic Initiate (for a wider range of spells).

[Tanarii]

Cantrip + Attack > attacks. Even before SGAG came out. At level 11 you're doing 2x3d6 acid to adjacent targets, plus one 1d8 or 2d6+Str. You can compare to that if you're using 2H weapon, but not S&B. Even better is when all or most of your opponents are at range. 3d10 fire + 1d6+Str (Javelin) is way better than 3 javelins.

If you're intentionally building yourself as a GISH, picking melee enhancing feats and non-attacking buff/defense spells, then yeah, Int becomes useless. That's like saying that Cha is almost useless to a Valor Bard or Pact Blade Warlcok that picks all non-attack/save spells. Cha-dump VBards & Bladelocks are totally valid builds. But GISH VBards/bladelocks sure aren't the 'standard' any more than a GISH EK is standard. They just indicate you've chosen to focus on one specific aspect of your capabilities and dump another.

[Flashy]

Weapon Bond is also pretty clearly a ribbon. It's not supposed to be powerful.

[Tanarii]

Weapon Bond is also pretty clearly a ribbon. It's not supposed to be powerful.For sure. It's the same as the Artisan's Tools Proficiency for BattleMaster. Useful in the right circumstances, but not powerful.

[djreynolds]

You spell DC is based on your character level and proficiency bonus and casting stat. So yeah, when you drop that fire ball, you want a high int.

Just look at your stats like a paladin, high str, good con, high int. You do not need dex, your firebolt is your ranged attack, good enough and keys on intelligence.

Not enough spells, easily grab wizard levels, its a strength of the fighter class to multiclass so easily.

[Skylivedk]

The biggest argument that Int is valuable comes from the EK's ability to impose disadvantage on save-or-suck spells. That means that a 16 Int caster can effectively outcast a wizard when it comes to major debuffs. Note that this feature appears just as your evocation spells stop being relevant (on account of being so far behind full casters'), so your Int will stay consistently useful throughout your career.

You get the feature (Eldritch Strike) at level 10. At level 10 an Eldritch Knight has access to level 2 spells (level 3 spells isn't till level 13), effectively meaning Hold Person, Phantasmal Force, Crown of Madness, and Blindness/Deafness (I hope we can agree that Aganazzar's is too trash to be worth mentioning). Like most other save or suck spells, these aren't really on the EK list so they take up some of your precious "all school" slots. While being able to impose disadvantage is a quite powerful feature, having 16 INT is quite an opportunity cost for a feature that doesn't provide anything before level 10(!). More importantly: almost all "save or suck"-spells give a save at the end of the enemies' turn - which would be a normal save (and hence against a normal DC).

More importantly, I would love to hear if you think that the suggested changes make the EK over-powered. If they don't, if the EK isn't the top-pick with the changes, the changes should be fine, no?


I was going to point this out, with the addition that, if you want your EK to make more use of int (and I think they can already make good use of it!), there's an obvious avenue for that: multiclass to wizard. You get more spells out of evo/abj, more spell slots, and more spellcasting related features.

I'm also not sure that war magic is anti-synergistic with other fighter things. Lateral development in power isn't necessarily bad. There's already going to be turns where you decide to make a regular attack, and it may be motivated by wanting to use your bonus action on something (say, second wind), or it may be that you have incentive to use your regular attack action, which then motivates you to use your bonus action for something else. To say nothing of bonus action spells you might want to cast that preclude using war magic at all

Valid points. I would love to see you substantiate your point about EKs making good use of intelligence. Running the numbers, War Master is good for level 7-11 (given enemies standing right, etc.). After that, the EK should strive to attack. Again, my main question would be: is being able to substitute an attack for a cantrip INT MOD times pr. short rest game-breaking? If yes, why? If yes, would that also be the case if it were done pr. long rest? Lollerabe's suggestion does seem to make this extremely flavourful and class-defining feature useful throughout the career of the EK, whereas it seems to fall of a cliff at level 11 currently.


Most combat feats provide a bonus action, but Longbow would be unaffected (Sharpshooter).

I think you'd be better served looking towards the Spellcasting (or other) feats as an EK:

Warcaster (for the reaction casting), Spell Sniper (so they can pick up non-combat cantrips for additional utility), Ritual Caster (for additional utility), Elemental Adept (parallels Great Weapon Fighting Style), or Magic Initiate (for a wider range of spells).

How does this relate to the suggested changes? Are you saying an EK, a full fighter progression, would get more mileage out of spell feats than combat feats? Have you seen the spells/day for an Eldritch Knight?


Cantrip + Attack > attacks. Even before SGAG came out. At level 11 you're doing 2x3d6 acid to adjacent targets, plus one 1d8 or 2d6+Str. You can compare to that if you're using 2H weapon, but not S&B. Even better is when all or most of your opponents are at range. 3d10 fire + 1d6+Str (Javelin) is way better than 3 javelins.

If you're intentionally building yourself as a GISH, picking melee enhancing feats and non-attacking buff/defense spells, then yeah, Int becomes useless. That's like saying that Cha is almost useless to a Valor Bard or Pact Blade Warlcok that picks all non-attack/save spells. Cha-dump VBards & Bladelocks are totally valid builds. But GISH VBards/bladelocks sure aren't the 'standard' any more than a GISH EK is standard. They just indicate you've chosen to focus on one specific aspect of your capabilities and dump another.

I'll start with your first part:

3d10 (16.5) + 1d6+STR (7.5) > 3*(1d6+STR) (7.5*3=23.5) <=> 24 > 22.5

OR

3d10 (16.5) + 1d6+STR (8.5) > 3*(1d6+STR) <=> 25 < 25.5

So yes, better... sometimes... If your STR is low and INT is high. But way better? Not really. Especially not when the 3d10 is hitting worse (probably having a +2 or +3 instead of a +4 or +5) and has a greater variance, since you only roll once. And as the math shows: once you hit 20 STR, javelins come out on top.

Second part:
Highly disagree with you. A bard is a full caster and a bladelock is a full-caster. A Bard has an extreme amount of DCs on their spells and is one of the classes to get most out of their main stat. Dumping CHA is not "viable" from a mechanic point of view. A heavy melee-focused Bladelock could do it, but why would he? Later, he can add CHA to his damage. In both cases, the classes gain an EXTREME amount of mechanical, hard-coded bonuses from having a high casting stat. Now compare to an EK. He gets... yeah... not so much. Level 3 spells at level 13 are not going to do all that much if you pick fireball over haste/other utility.

Which brings me to the third part: how would you play a fighter EK if not as a fighter/gish? He sucks as a spell-caster. EK and AT are, by simple spell-slot progression, by far the two worst casters in the entirety of 5e. Almost all class features they have, are there to enhance their use of spells as a supplement to their primary features (fighting/thieving).

Most importantly: did any of the suggested changes seem game-breaking to you? If yes, why?


Weapon Bond is also pretty clearly a ribbon. It's not supposed to be powerful.

True. The suggestions strike me as being an attempt at bringing EK as a choice up to par with BattleMaster. Weapon Bond is not supposed to be powerful, but what's the harm in adding something to it when the EK spellcasting is currently so inferior to the Battle Manoeuvres? Are the suggested buffs too much? Does the BM pale in comparison now?


For sure. It's the same as the Artisan's Tools Proficiency for BattleMaster. Useful in the right circumstances, but not powerful.

True. Now it is both flavourful and useful. Is it too useful?


You spell DC is based on your character level and proficiency bonus and casting stat. So yeah, when you drop that fire ball, you want a high int.

Just look at your stats like a paladin, high str, good con, high int. You do not need dex, your firebolt is your ranged attack, good enough and keys on intelligence.

Not enough spells, easily grab wizard levels, its a strength of the fighter class to multiclass so easily.


Are the suggested changes breaking anything? (... and good Dungeon Master above, what is up with all these lvl 14 fireball dropping EKs?)

What good does fireball do at level 14? Even if we said it is good - what good does INT do you until level 10? (especially compared to just going longbow and dex).

[Tanarii]

Which brings me to the third part: how would you play a fighter EK if not as a fighter/gish? He sucks as a spell-caster. EK and AT are, by simple spell-slot progression, by far the two worst casters in the entirety of 5e. Almost all class features they have, are there to enhance their use of spells as a supplement to their primary features (fighting/thieving). As an occasional magical ranged and AoE blaster as a backup to strong me lee capabilities. That's what they are designed to do. Especially once the 'disadvantage on saves to targets you hit' ability comes online at level 10. Hit 2-4 targets, drop an AoE on them next round.

Edit: also works well as part of a Acid Splash + Melee attack rotation.

[Skylivedk]

As an occasional magical ranged and AoE blaster as a backup to strong me lee capabilities. That's what they are designed to do. Especially once the 'disadvantage on saves to targets you hit' ability comes online at level 10. Hit 2-4 targets, drop an AoE on them next round.

Edit: also works well as part of a Acid Splash + Melee attack rotation.

Well, your description is super close to how I would describe a gish (a martially adept character that can fall back on magic for utility, AoE and/or range) - which means we're loudly agreeing :)

At level 10, what are you going to drop on 2-4 targets? Shatter? Web? Web is pretty good, but not a class pick. Shatter sucks if you aren't a Tempest cleric. Your 2-4 targets can also move during their turn before you can drop anything.. And, again, we're talking a class feature at level 10 that, occasionally, can be good, IF you have had a high INT-stat that has done (almost) nothing for you so far.

Would the suggested INT-based abilities break the game? Or make it more fun and viable to play an EK? Current tests seem to indicate the latter, but I haven't run the numbers to see if it holds true or if this amount of power-creep would make the EK outshine other classes drastically.

[Tanarii]

Well, your description is super close to how I would describe a gish (a martially adept character that can fall back on magic for utility, AoE and/or range) - which means we're loudly agreeing :)gah. I was falling back on the classical definition of GISH meaning Melee attacker who self-buffs with magic, not the more modern common version of mixed melee & magical attacker. I always forget because I've used the classical definition of GISH for too many years in these kinds of discussions.


Would the suggested INT-based abilities break the game? Or make it more fun and viable to play an EK? Current tests seem to indicate the latter, but I haven't run the numbers to see if it holds true or if this amount of power-creep would make the EK outshine other classes drastically.you might as well just rewrite the class if that's how you want to go. Because adding Int based abilities makes EKs overpowered if they also use Int based spells, as the designers assumed.

[EvilAnagram]

You get the feature (Eldritch Strike) at level 10. At level 10 an Eldritch Knight has access to level 2 spells (level 3 spells isn't till level 13), effectively meaning Hold Person, Phantasmal Force, Crown of Madness, and Blindness/Deafness (I hope we can agree that Aganazzar's is too trash to be worth mentioning). Like most other save or suck spells, these aren't really on the EK list so they take up some of your precious "all school" slots. While being able to impose disadvantage is a quite powerful feature, having 16 INT is quite an opportunity cost for a feature that doesn't provide anything before level 10(!). More importantly: almost all "save or suck"-spells give a save at the end of the enemies' turn - which would be a normal save (and hence against a normal DC).


It's not really an opportunity cost when it gives you solid ranged cantrips. At most, it's one ASI, and most builds can get there from racial bonuses. But sure, let's look at non-damaging spells an EK can make good use of with Int.

Charm Person
Grease
Tasha's Hideous Laughter
Blindness/Deafness
Gust of Wind (remember that you can keep attacking people and changing the direction of the wind as a bonus to continually push them where you want).
Hold Person
Phantasmal Force
Ray of Enfeeblement
Suggestion
Web


Plus, Burning Hands and Thunderwave are still pretty damn useful until level 7-8.

Also, your War Magic boost essentially adds up to 9d8 to a Fighter's damage without any opportunity cost. That's OP, yo.

[Skylivedk]

It's not really an opportunity cost when it gives you solid ranged cantrips. At most, it's one ASI, and most builds can get there from racial bonuses. But sure, let's look at non-damaging spells an EK can make good use of with Int.

Excellent! Thank you very much for the specific feedback.

I wouldn't say that the cantrips measure up to a longbow or the other bonuses from Dex (initiative, skills, more used saving throw). I love that EKS can use cantrips (it makes INT better for them), but from a mechanics point of view, I think Dex is still superior.




Excel

Charm Person
Grease
Tasha's Hideous Laughter
Blindness/Deafness
Gust of Wind (remember that you can keep attacking people and changing the direction of the wind as a bonus to continually push them where you want).
Hold Person
Phantasmal Force
Ray of Enfeeblement
Suggestion
Web


Plus, Burning Hands and Thunderwave are still pretty damn useful until level 7-8.

Very nice list. I love your utility choices. That's one of the reasons why I would let my EKs have more schools to choose from (especially with such a juicy list as the Wizard's).

As things stand, they have access to few of those since most of them are from the wrong schools. And quite often (if they're filling a fighter's role), they'd have to pick quite a few defensive spells further straining their amount of utility spells.



Also, your War Magic boost essentially adds up to 9d8 to a Fighter's damage without any opportunity cost. That's OP, yo.

I considered (as Lollerabe's DM) to limit the cantrip power later, but my numbers get a 4d10 bonus, not a 9d8.

If the bursts/short rest are too much, then would it work to make them daily?

It's a question, I'd love to get into. I think, I'd need a little time with Kryx' sheet to be able to do the math.

I really love the flavour of War Magic, but the current version strikes me as thoroughly underwhelming.

[EvilAnagram]

Excellent! Thank you very much for the specific feedback.

I wouldn't say that the cantrips measure up to a longbow or the other bonuses from Dex (initiative, skills, more used saving throw). I love that EKS can use cantrips (it makes INT better for them), but from a mechanics point of view, I think Dex is still superior.
Yeah, a longbow with four attacks is superior to a cantrip vasting, but if you focus on Str then a cantrip is pretty damn nice to fall back on when you can't close the difference.



Very nice list. I love your utility choices. That's one of the reasons why I would let my EKs have more schools to choose from (especially with such a juicy list as the Wizard's).

As things stand, they have access to few of those since most of them are from the wrong schools. And quite often (if they're filling a fighter's role), they'd have to pick quite a few defensive spells further straining their amount of utility spells.
Remember that you get one spell at each level outside of the evocation and abjuration schools, so you'd get two from that list, plus abjuration and evocation spells. The abjuration spells typically help with your defensive abilities, and they frequently don't need Int.



I considered (as Lollerabe's DM) to limit the cantrip power later, but my numbers get a 4d10 bonus, not a 9d8.
Booming Blade can add 4d8 to a normal attack, plus 5d8 to the extra damage.


I really love the flavour of War Magic, but the current version strikes me as thoroughly underwhelming.

It allows for Blade Ward to not suck, plus it increases the effectiveness of already awesome cantrips by quite a lot.

[djreynolds]

It is tough to speak of PCs or characters in a vacuum, eldritch knight is IMO, humbly, is best served in melee.

Access to heavy armor

Access to the shield spell from 3rd level on

And AoO in melee coupled with war caster, great way to get good use out of these SCAG cantrips.

And hold person can be nasty.

7 feats/ASI enough to max out stats and grab feats, you don't have to max out intelligence, just leave it respectable

Mirror image and blur in melee, not much will get through that with shield/plate and the shield spell. Misty step is awesome.

Hey I like your changes, they are very cool, but they feel more like a prestige class, and not in a negative way. Or this could be a wizard archetype, or wizard/EK PrC

[Lollerabe]

Hey guys thanks for all the feedback. It seems that most of you have a vastly different view on INTs importance on the raw EK than me. Which is fine, I still miss a bit of feedback on the actual class changes I've suggested though.
What I've gathered so far:
My warmagic remake needs to be toned down. Making it only recharge on long rests seems fair, it also stays true to the EK being the long rest dependent fighter.
If it recharge on long rests, at lvl 20 (with an INT of 14) an EK could add 3(7)d8 twice a day with BB. Keep in mind that this requires not dumping INT, and remember that you could miss the attack - thus blowing a precious charge to no avail.

I would also love some insight on the arcane fight styles, both the flavor and the numbers :)

Overall (sorry that I repeat myself) I'm not trying to make the EK surpass the champion/bm when it comes to daily dpr, rather I want them more mechanical viable.
I guess my first question in this thread should've been: do you feel the current EK is mechanically viable ?
I'm not talking fluff/rp value, they have plenty of that. I guess I (somewhat arrogantly) assumed that there were a large agreement as to the EK being a subpar choice from a mech standpoint.

With the change to long rest recharge on warmagic, can these features be added without the EK blowing everything out the water? If not do explain :)

Cheers

[djreynolds]

If I could throw the shield spell to another party member, as Barrier, suggests. I would take it.

Archery is too powerful, as is Arcane Smash

Eldritch armor could be cool, say if you could cast on yourself mage armor even in heavy armor, but it would be abused.

Its a cool thread, but I would go about just making an intelligence based paladin.

[EvilAnagram]

snip

The problem with the Arcane Fighting Styles is that you're trying to add a mechanical advantage to the ribbon feature of a well balanced class. It would be like saying that after a Battle Master studies a character, he gets to turn every hit into a crit. It's a ribbon. There shouldn't be any mechanical advantage to it.

[Skylivedk]

Yeah, a longbow with four attacks is superior to a cantrip vasting, but if you focus on Str then a cantrip is pretty damn nice to fall back on when you can't close the difference.



Remember that you get one spell at each level outside of the evocation and abjuration schools, so you'd get two from that list, plus abjuration and evocation spells. The abjuration spells typically help with your defensive abilities, and they frequently don't need Int.



Booming Blade can add 4d8 to a normal attack, plus 5d8 to the extra damage.



It allows for Blade Ward to not suck, plus it increases the effectiveness of already awesome cantrips by quite a lot.

Of course - booming blade and green flame blade :) I can see how at lvl 17, the EK is suddenly out DPR'ing the BM, which he is not supposed to do. The numbers look way better if the ability is INT MOD / daily. (I've an exam coming up, so I haven't run the numbers yet, but it brings the ability down to a third of the original power). I've a sneaking suspicion that this ability might be too hard to balance out properly.


It is tough to speak of PCs or characters in a vacuum, eldritch knight is IMO, humbly, is best served in melee.

Access to heavy armor

Access to the shield spell from 3rd level on

And AoO in melee coupled with war caster, great way to get good use out of these SCAG cantrips.

And hold person can be nasty.

7 feats/ASI enough to max out stats and grab feats, you don't have to max out intelligence, just leave it respectable

Mirror image and blur in melee, not much will get through that with shield/plate and the shield spell. Misty step is awesome.

Hey I like your changes, they are very cool, but they feel more like a prestige class, and not in a negative way. Or this could be a wizard archetype, or wizard/EK PrC

Interesting - we've tried to come up with a concept that would let the EK be more of an INT-fighter, but you feel it is becoming more like a wizard. Perhaps we're very off-track. Why do you think it is like a prestige class though??


If I could throw the shield spell to another party member, as Barrier, suggests. I would take it.

Archery is too powerful, as is Arcane Smash

Eldritch armor could be cool, say if you could cast on yourself mage armor even in heavy armor, but it would be abused.

Its a cool thread, but I would go about just making an intelligence based paladin.

Thank you for the feedback. Can you let me know, why you think those two abilities stand out as being too powerful? Arcane Smash, in particular, doesn't strike me as being game-breaking... it adds 1 extra die pr INT MOD pr short rest. At a glance that is too little to brake anything (compared to BM's battle maneuveurs, we're way off in terms of DPR). Both of them can also miss... I know Archery combines supremely well with sharpshooter, but then again... It is not that often that the EK can do it.


The problem with the Arcane Fighting Styles is that you're trying to add a mechanical advantage to the ribbon feature of a well balanced class. It would be like saying that after a Battle Master studies a character, he gets to turn every hit into a crit. It's a ribbon. There shouldn't be any mechanical advantage to it.

I think, we're approaching the very core of our discussion here. All of these changes are straight buffs. We wouldn't give straight buffs to a character that we thought was "well-balanced". Both me and Lollerabe (and most of the mech discussions on this forum) rated EK as the mechanically weakest of the 3 fighter subtypes at the moment. At least until later levels where the casting starts to really shine. Our current attempt is to let the EK be fun from level 3-13 and especially make it less suck from level 3-7. Most of our changes were made with those levels in mind (reference that our changed War-Magic is nice at lower levels, but can be game-breaking at level 17).

I think we both know that Weapon Bond is, currently, strictly a ribbon feature. Considering that we don't find the EK spell-casting to be a like for like replacement of the BM's maneuveurs, we decided to buff the EK - not caring much whether that buff would change a ribbon into a fully fledged nice feature.

Honestly, I find that a comparison between adding 1d4 damage and having an auto-crit ability to be rather disproportionate.

As Lollerabe's DM, I'm currently prone to letting him keep the Arcane Fighting style. His Gnome EK isn't close to touching the Bladelock in terms of martial prowess any time soon. I'd love to find another way to make war-magic interesting. Currently, it seems to be strictly better at level 7-11 whereafter it is more or less useless. Perhaps change it the other way? "At level 11 you can make two attacks with your bonus action when you use a cantrip" (perhaps pr INT mod? Daily or short rest) or something like that. I'm not sure yet.

More to the point, I'd love to see the EK be less sucky in the most played levels. At level 3: 2 level 1 spell/day + cantrips are definitely not as strong as 4 BM Dice/short rest.

[Submortimer]

As Lollerabe's DM, I'm currently prone to letting him keep the Arcane Fighting style. His Gnome EK isn't close to touching the Bladelock in terms of martial prowess any time soon. I'd love to find another way to make war-magic interesting. Currently, it seems to be strictly better at level 7-11 whereafter it is more or less useless. Perhaps change it the other way? "At level 11 you can make two attacks with your bonus action when you use a cantrip" (perhaps pr INT mod? Daily or short rest) or something like that. I'm not sure yet.

How is this possible, that the Bladelock is outclassing the FIGHTER in martial abilities? What level are you all playing at/what are the builds you guys are using?

[EvilAnagram]

snip
That's a little weird. An Eldritch Knight with Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade has strictly superior melee damage than other Fighters for levels 3-4, then 7-10. It should blow the Bladelock out of the water at every level after 5.

[Skylivedk]

How is this possible, that the Bladelock is outclassing the FIGHTER in martial abilities? What level are you all playing at/what are the builds you guys are using?

They started at level 3, now they're 4.

It's quite simple. The bladelock is Fighter 1 / Fiendlock X, VHuman with Polearm Mastery.

He strictly outclasses an EK (would have a closer run for his money with a BM). Hex, spell-casting, temp-HP on kill, by-pass all magic resistance... How wouldn't he outclass an EK?

Here at level 4, the difference is even more grotesque. The EK knows 4 level 1 spells. He can use them 3 times per long rest (an average of once per short rest). The bladelock knows 4 spells. They are all cast at spell level 2 twice per short rest.

The bladelock also has a better cantrip in terms of range and damage (due to his invocation) and superior darkvision which can help him to do Darkness shenanigans later on.


That's a little weird. An Eldritch Knight with Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade has strictly superior melee damage than other Fighters for levels 3-4, then 7-10.

Battle Master has better damage due to 4 superiority damage each short rest. A fighter with Polearm master is most of the time better than a Booming Blade EK. With GWM it depends on whether or not you proc your bonus action attack (which is a lot easier as a BM since you can add the extra oomph as you strive to kill an opponent off). Booming blade and Green Flame Blade are both situational in their use (with Booming Blade being particularly hard to trigger when you are the frontline tank. Mobile helps A LOT in this regard).

A Battlemaster with GWM and a maul could do:
2d6+STR = 10
2d6+STR = 10
total = 20
With GWM this number can go up to 40 with -5/+10 (and 30 with a bonus action attack and no -5/10) and 60 if he crits or downs an opponent. If he crits, his manoeuvres double in value.

At level 7, a polearm master would do:
2d6+STR = 10
2d6+STR = 10
1d4+STR = 5.5
total = 25.5
and with GWM, potentially: 55.5

At level 7, an EK would be able (with a maul and GFB), situationally, to do:
2*(2d6+STR) = 7+3=20
+ 1d8 = 4.5
+ 1d8 + INT = 6.5
total = 31

For a more reliable comparison we should look at Booming Blade:
2*(2d6+STR) = 7+3=20
+ 1d8 = 4.5
= 24.5
(rider would add another 9 to bring it up to 31.5).

Again, this measures up nicely compared to the GWM Battlemaster not doing anything, but is instantly worse than the use of a single manoeuvre (which would also have rider effects).

With one use of GWM on GFB, we hit 41. We're probably not going for two times GWM, since GFB has rider effects that tilts the reward/risk calculation in favour of not using -5.

All in all, I think we can agree that the EK sweet spot is in the 7-10 range. Hopefully, we can also agree that it isn't blowing a polearm master out of the water, since it is only situationally better, and, also, way more MAD.


It should blow the Bladelock out of the water at every level after 5.

How do you make the blow the bladelock out the water from level 5 and onwards? At level 5 the pure fighter has an advantage due to the extra attack. The fiendlock has darkvision and hex to offset the difference, plus his Eldritch blast for damage and superior spell-slots regainable on short rests. On top of that he gains temp HP (7 in our Bladelock's case; 4 from level, 3 from charisma) every time he downs an opponent. That is a lot of HP over the course of 6-8 encounters.

At level 6, we're back to the fiendlock straight laughing at the fighter. 3 attacks with hex and superior spell-casting (level 3 spells to the EK's puny level 1 spells). The bladelock doesn't really look back from then and onwards - his spell slot level progressions dwarfs that of the EK, and his fighting is on par or better for a lot of the time. Speaking of martial prowess, there's a slight dip from level 11 till level 13, where Lifedrinker comes online and pretty much cleans the floor in terms of DPR.

[Tanarii]

It's quite simple. The bladelock is Fighter 1 / Fiendlock X, VHuman with Polearm Mastery.
That's a fighter with bladelock piled on top, not a bladelock. It's an optimized (and powerfully so) multi class. One of the best possible ones. Then you've stuck the most powerful race and one of the top three feats on it.

Of course it out-classes any single class build, especially if it's one that isn't doesn't have more powerful optional races/feats.

IMO the solution isn't to house-rule to power up single classes when an uber-optimized build using variant & optional rules (vumans & multiclassing & feats) is stealing the spotlight. It's time to start limiting the optional rules causing the problem.

[Skylivedk]

That's a fighter with bladelock piled on top, not a bladelock. It's an optimized (and powerfully so) multi class. One of the best possible ones. Then you've stuck the most powerful race and one of the top three feats on it.

Of course it out-classes any single class build, especially if it's one that isn't doesn't have more powerful optional races/feats.

IMO the solution isn't to house-rule to power up single classes when an uber-optimized build using variant & optional rules (vumans & multiclassing & feats) is stealing the spotlight. It's time to start limiting the optional rules causing the problem.

I agree: the bladelock is powerful. I am not sure, I follow you in terms of removing options. I also don't agree that single-classing is always worse (wizards and druids seem to wonderfully well without dipping into anything). Also, the damage of the bladelock in question isn't depending on the fighter dip. At all. All it takes is a feat (which can be done by VHuman at 1st level and everybody else at 4th).

I always prefer to expand options rather than limit them. I am definitely not going to take feats and multi-classing away. Removing feats seriously gimps all martial classes. Removing multi-classing is a huge creativity constraint and highly unnecessary.

A straight paladin compares nicely to the Bladelock. So does any spellcaster.

A Moon Druid eats him, poops him out and plants a tree in him (hence I've also changed wild shape).

[EvilAnagram]

I agree: the bladelock is powerful.

That is not what he said. He said an uber-optimized multiclass build with strong feats outclasses a vanilla, unoptimized EK.

[Tanarii]

All it takes is a feat (which can be done by VHuman at 1st level and everybody else at 4th).One of the top three feats in the game. One considered overpowered by many people.

Polearm mastery is often considered to unbalance interclass balance. If your players consider interclass balance to be broken by it, and it's bothering them, then IMO fixing Polearm Mastery makes the most sense. It's easiest, and it fixes a 'broken' rule, and it is a rule is optional (as in explicitly allowed by DM choice, per the PHB).

Edit: Or if you prefer, it is often considered to unbalance "people having the feat" vs "people not having the feat" balance.

[Skylivedk]

That is not what he said. He said an uber-optimized multiclass build with strong feats outclasses a vanilla, unoptimized EK.

And I went on to show that multi-classing or uber-optimizing (beyond picking Polearm Mastery) wasn't necessary, so I dropped all the superlatives. I don't think I ever presumed a vanilla EK. As is, the EK doesn't get much from INT (main point of OP), so "uber-optimizing" doesn't change much. Most of the bonuses from the feats (as mentioned by OP) do not synergise well with EK, but excellently with out temp-HP guzzling warlock.


One of the top three feats in the game. One considered overpowered by many people.

Polearm mastery is often considered to unbalance interclass balance. If your players consider interclass balance to be broken by it, and it's bothering them, then IMO fixing Polearm Mastery makes the most sense. It's easiest, and it fixes a 'broken' rule, and it is a rule is optional (as in explicitly allowed by DM choice, per the PHB).

Edit: Or if you prefer, it is often considered to unbalance "people having the feat" vs "people not having the feat" balance.

My players are not bothered by Polearm Mastery. Neither am I. Nor do I think we have reasons to be. IIRC it doesn't outperform GWM according to the calculations by Kryx (it can be found here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=1998304060): it is some of the most solid, I've seen around here).

I can't really see, what the suggested fix would be (but I'm open to suggestions!). My concern would be, how the fix would not make it strictly inferior to GWM? Or Shield Master? Or Sharpshooter? Adventurer's League allow all of them. Personally, I've buffed Dual-Wielder to bring it somewhat up to par. GWM would quite often yield the same results for the little 'lock

So, as is, the point stands: The Bladelock can outcast and almost outfight an EK until around level 7, where he must be contend with outcasting him.

[Submortimer]

So, as is, the point stands: The Bladelock can outcast and almost outfight an EK until around level 7, where he must be contend with outcasting him.

This is patently false.

Outcast? yes, of course, we are comparing a 1/3 caster to an arguably full caster.

Outfight? Hardly.

Before you start making large changes to a class, you need to properly compare it to the class you are attempting to balance it against, and you have not done that yet.

We need some assumptions if we are going to do things the right way, and I'll lay those out here:

Assume both are full classes (no multiclassing)
Assume both have standard PHB stat spread (15, 14, 13, 11, 10 8)
Assume Both are vHuman, going for a strength focused build, and take PAM as their bonus feat.
Assume both take a stat increase at level 4
Assume best non-magical gear possible.


Now that we have that out of the way, here are the likely builds

Fighter
Str: 18 HP: 36
Con: 14 AC: 18 (Full plate)
Int: 14

Attack action: 1d10 + 4
Bonus action: 1d4 + 4
Fighting Style: GWF

Warlock
Str: 18 HP: 29
Con: 14 AC: 13 (Armor of Shadows)
Cha: 14
Dex: 11

Attack action: 1d10 + 4
Bonus action: 1d4 + 4
Invocations: Devil's Sight, Armor of shadows
Primary Spell: Hex

So, we already have a discrepancy. Sure, the warlock does the same damage, but his AC suffers dramatically due to no having heavy armor proficiency, which means his survival in melee is highly questionable. To counter that, we can cast darkness around a foe to give him disadvantage and us advantage to hit, thanks to Devil's sight, but this doesn't work against all targets and really cuts into the action economy.

Now, first three rounds of combat go something like this, assuming all attacks hit:

Fighter
Round 1: Swing twice for 1d10+1d4+8 damage, rerolling 1s and 2s (16 avg damage)
Round 2: Swing twice for 1d10+1d4+8 damage, rerolling 1s and 2s (16 avg damage)
Round 3: Swing twice for 1d10+1d4+8 damage, rerolling 1s and 2s (16 avg damage)
Total: 48 avg damage

Warlock
Round 1: Cast hex, Swing once for 1d10+1d6+4 damage (13 avg damage)
Round 2: Swing twice for 1d10+1d4+2d6+8 damage(23 avg damage)
Round 3: If target is dead, pick new target for hex, Swing once for 1d10+1d6+4 damage (13 avg damage); if target is still alive, Swing twice for 1d10+1d4+2d6+8 damage(23 avg damage)
Total: 49 avg if switching hex mid fight, 59 if single target the whole time.

So, the warlock as presented will outclass the fighter in damage (to a point. I don't remember how much avg damage goes up when you factor in GWF rerolls), but is absolutely a glass cannon. A housecat in a bad mood will hit the warlock, while the fighter remains comfortably behind his plate armor and reaction Shield spell.

As YOU presented it, the warlock should be doing far WORSE in the damage department (45 avg over three rounds, 53 is all on one target), considering the straight fighter will get a stat increase at level 4, while the warlock/fighter hybrid will only just get his pact boon. He does shore up his defense though, which helps.

That being said against the pure warlock, the next several levels are very interesting:

Level 5, the warlock still eeks it out as they both get extra attack (76.5 avg over three rounds vs. 81 or 98, depending)
Level 6, the fighter gains with his last stat boost to str (85.5 avg over three rounds vs. 81 or 98, depending)
Level 7, the fighter gets War magic, which is good but not enough to outclass the attack action.
Level 8, the fighter can either take Enlarge/Reduce or Magic Weapon, but the warlock gets his last stat boost to str (108 or 94.5 avg over three rounds vs. 90 or 107, depending)
Level 11, the fighter gets his third attack (147 or 129 avg over three rounds vs. 90 or 107, depending)
Level 12, Warlock gets a charisma boost (to 16) and Lifedrinker (147 or 129 avg over three rounds vs. 117 or 134, depending)


In most cases, the Warlock DOES have the advantage when it comes to out-damaging the EK. At ALL levels, though, the warlock is at a much higher risk of dying during the fight with far lower HP and AC abilities.

[Lollerabe]

I would love if people took the time to comment on my actual suggestions with math etc, as the thread is getting derailed a bit here.

Telling me that arcane smash is to good but with no explanation makes it hard for me to balance it.

Saying that the EK is a well balanced class is cool, though I guess I just disagree, but I don't have the numbers to support that claim. So yeah overall more detailed feedback on my suggestions would be awesome.

[Submortimer]

I would love if people took the time to comment on my actual suggestions with math etc, as the thread is getting derailed a bit here.

Telling me that arcane smash is to good but with no explanation makes it hard for me to balance it.

Saying that the EK is a well balanced class is cool, though I guess I just disagree, but I don't have the numbers to support that claim. So yeah overall more detailed feedback on my suggestions would be awesome.


Arcane Smash is too good because you are giving free minor hex to the class that can benefit from it the most. Even at level 5, A PAM EK using arcane smash is doing 2d10+2d4+2d4+str every round. By contrast, the BM can hit for roughly the same amount 4 times per short rest.

Arcane Strike is almost worse, since it is free Magic Weapon that STACKS WITH MAGIC WEAPON. At level 8 (when you can cast magic weapon), you're now hitting for 2d10+1d4+str+6 every round, which is potentially better than arcane smash.

EK is balanced because it has survivability, not just damage: higher AC, Higher HP, Higher con saves, ability to cast shield, etc. Bladelocks do not, outside of some temp HP shenannigans.

[Lollerabe]

I'm confused as to your answer - every round? Arcane smash at lvl 5 is 1d6 only once per turn and you can use it your INT modifier per short rest.

So a lvl 5 EK with an INT of 14 can do it for 2 hits per short rest. Not an entire round, 1 hit per INT mod.

And the arcane fight style is linked to ur original fight style so arcane strike is only possible with 1 handed weapons.

And where does the +6 come from? Arcane strike is half proficiency rounded up, so 3 divided by 2 rounded up = 2.
On 2 attacks per short rest (assuming 14 INT, so again it comes with an opportunity cost the BM fighter don't need to worry about)

[Skylivedk]

This is patently false.

Outcast? yes, of course, we are comparing a 1/3 caster to an arguably full caster.

Outfight? Hardly.

Before you start making large changes to a class, you need to properly compare it to the class you are attempting to balance it against, and you have not done that yet.

We need some assumptions if we are going to do things the right way, and I'll lay those out here:

Assume both are full classes (no multiclassing)
Assume both have standard PHB stat spread (15, 14, 13, 11, 10 8)
Assume Both are vHuman, going for a strength focused build, and take PAM as their bonus feat.
Assume both take a stat increase at level 4
Assume best non-magical gear possible.



First of all: thank you. I love your approach and the fact that you work with presumptions so clearly laid out.



Now that we have that out of the way, here are the likely builds

Fighter
Str: 18 HP: 36
Con: 14 AC: 18 (Full plate)
Int: 14

Attack action: 1d10 + 4
Bonus action: 1d4 + 4
Fighting Style: GWF

Warlock
Str: 18 HP: 29
Con: 14 AC: 13 (Armor of Shadows)
Cha: 14
Dex: 11

Attack action: 1d10 + 4
Bonus action: 1d4 + 4
Invocations: Devil's Sight, Armor of shadows
Primary Spell: Hex

So, we already have a discrepancy. Sure, the warlock does the same damage, but his AC suffers dramatically due to no having heavy armor proficiency, which means his survival in melee is highly questionable. To counter that, we can cast darkness around a foe to give him disadvantage and us advantage to hit, thanks to Devil's sight, but this doesn't work against all targets and really cuts into the action economy.


Agreed - if we presume that the Warlock isn't multi-classed (which my player happens to be). I guess most Bladelocks would go Pala or Fighter first to avoid the glass-cannon syndrome. That would also get rid of Armor of Shadows. I know you are basing your calculations on a non-multiclassed version (where all I have argued that on damage, the Warlock is doing just fine). For any STR-based Warlock I'd recommend a dip in a armour proficiency granting class. Also - if we're talking optimization, I'd have 16 in CHA.



Now, first three rounds of combat go something like this, assuming all attacks hit:

Fighter
Round 1: Swing twice for 1d10+1d4+8 damage, rerolling 1s and 2s (16 avg damage)
Round 2: Swing twice for 1d10+1d4+8 damage, rerolling 1s and 2s (16 avg damage)
Round 3: Swing twice for 1d10+1d4+8 damage, rerolling 1s and 2s (16 avg damage)
Total: 48 avg damage

Warlock
Round 1: Cast hex, Swing once for 1d10+1d6+4 damage (13 avg damage)
Round 2: Swing twice for 1d10+1d4+2d6+8 damage(23 avg damage)
Round 3: If target is dead, pick new target for hex, Swing once for 1d10+1d6+4 damage (13 avg damage); if target is still alive, Swing twice for 1d10+1d4+2d6+8 damage(23 avg damage)
Total: 49 avg if switching hex mid fight, 59 if single target the whole time.

So, the warlock as presented will outclass the fighter in damage (to a point. I don't remember how much avg damage goes up when you factor in GWF rerolls), but is absolutely a glass cannon. A housecat in a bad mood will hit the warlock, while the fighter remains comfortably behind his plate armor and reaction Shield spell.

True - so so far we loudly agree that a pure Warlock, measured on damage alone, easily can hold his ground. Also - why would he cast hex in the round he attacks? Let's keep it that way, but for the record, I wouldn't bet on all enemies starting in mêlée range.




As YOU presented it, the warlock should be doing far WORSE in the damage department (-4 to -6 avg damage, to be precise), considering the straight fighter will get a stat increase at level 4, while the warlock/fighter hybrid will only just get his pact boon.

Thank you for the correction in regards to the stat increase at level 4. If we look at my previous point about hex probably already being on the target, we're back at damage being in favour of our little bladelock (with an average of +4).



He does shore up his defense a bit. That being said, the fighter will then trump him again at level 5, when he gets extra attack, dip back below at level 6 (when the warlock gets HIS extra attack) and 7 (War magic is nice, but can damage wise is not better than the attack action), but then comfortably jumps ahead again at level 8 (with a boost to strength and the ability to cast either Enlarge/Reduce person or Magic weapon) and stays there.

I really liked the part where you used math to compliment your points. I doubt that Enlarge/Reduce (1 min) or Magic Weapon (1 hour) is better DPR than hex (8 hours). Also, speaking of Magic Weapons - the bladelock can morph any weapon into his pact weapon. Odds are much higher that he has a (better) magic weapon. Also - Enlarge/Reduce is 1d4 to Hex' 1d6. That shouldn't have him jumping too far ahead. The ASI is recaught by the bladelock at level 9.



Even the boost from Lifedrinker at level 12 for the warlock isn't enough, because with a proper melee build he dumped charisma down to 14: at most, it'll amount to +9 damage per round.

This is, of course, also ignoring Action surge, which (when properly applied) will win the fight for the fighter.

Depending on whether or not the bladelock doesn't go 1 or 2 more levels into fighter, picking up Action Surge and BM dice on the way. I never claimed the warlock stayed comparable in mêlée forever, only till level 7. You have proven that at level 5, the warlock is behind. That is true. Besides that, I haven't seen anything conclusive in this regard. We've also completely ignored how much more the warlock can do due to the rest of his class features (i.e. being a full-caster, darkvision advantage, temp HP pool that is refillable, reaction damage with rebuke, etc.). I must admit that the fact that a full-caster is so close to a fighter in mêlée brings back bad memories from 3.x.

Most importantly though, we are off track from the OP discussion, which is currently centred on two points:

Would Arcane Smash (extra damage die that scales with cantrip progression INT MOD pr. short rest)

AND/OR

the new War Magic (ability to cast a cantrip in place of an attack INT MOD per long rest)

make the EK hands-down better than Battle Master? Would it break the balance between the two?

Currently, I'm keeping the Arcane Smash. It doesn't seem to break anything (especially not because OP is four feet of furious Rock Gnome... pretty damn far from being optimised - rather than winging it for him, I'd rather find a more elegant and general solution that can be applied to EKs across my campaigns).

We're not far enough to have play-tested the different version of War Magic, so I've no data on War Magic, including essentials such as:
a) does it need a buff;
b) should it be based around cantrip in place of an attack (INT MOD/long rest) or scaling the number of attacks to two at level 11.

[Submortimer]

I'm confused as to your answer - every round? Arcane smash at lvl 5 is 1d6 only once per turn and you can use it your INT modifier per short rest.

So a lvl 5 EK with an INT of 14 can do it for 2 hits per short rest. Not an entire round, 1 hit per INT mod.

And the arcane fight style is linked to ur original fight style so arcane strike is only possible with 1 handed weapons.

And where does the +6 come from? Arcane strike is half proficiency rounded up, so 3 divided by 2 rounded up = 2.
On 2 attacks per short rest (assuming 14 INT, so again it comes with an opportunity cost the BM fighter don't need to worry about)

My mistake, I didn't read the first part of the ability properly. that certainly balances it more.

the +6 was my assuming Magic Weapon (spell) + Arcane Strike, which would combine to add +2 to each of the 3 attacks that round. hence, +6. Still, doesn't factor in since I read the ability wrong, so you can totally ignore my criticism!

[EvilAnagram]

Bit of a detour, but if your concern is for a specific case of intra-party balance, why not just give the Eldritch Knight Flametongue and be done with it?

If your concern is for the general balance and usefulness of Int, adding Int Modifier or half Int Modifier to damage rolls with the bonded weapon should round everything out quite simply, no? Maybe limit the uses to stop it from crowding out Champion and Battle Master damage.

[Lollerabe]

No worries, mistakes happen :)

So after having the actual changes clarified do you have any feedback on them?

Edit: adding INT mod to every hit would be a way bigger buff then my suggestions (and a lot more boring I think).

I think we are trying to address the EK overall, not just for our current campaign.

Again I'm not trying to have my cake and eat it too, I'm trying to figure out if the EK could need a buff in general and if yes what buff would be balanced, fun flavorful and INT dependent - hence my OP

[Submortimer]

Most importantly though, we are off track from the OP discussion, which is currently centred on two points:

Would Arcane Smash (extra damage die that scales with cantrip progression INT MOD pr. short rest)

AND/OR

the new War Magic (ability to cast a cantrip in place of an attack INT MOD per long rest)

make the EK hands-down better than Battle Master? Would it break the balance between the two?

Currently, I'm keeping the Arcane Smash. It doesn't seem to break anything (especially not because OP is four feet of furious Rock Gnome... pretty damn far from being optimised - rather than winging it for him, I'd rather find a more elegant and general solution that can be applied to EKs across my campaigns).

We're not far enough to have play-tested the different version of War Magic, so I've no data on War Magic, including essentials such as:
a) does it need a buff;
b) should it be based around cantrip in place of an attack (INT MOD/long rest) or scaling the number of attacks to two at level 11.

Here's the thing: I don't think it NEEDS to be better than the battlemaster. In fact, I don't exactly think it is better than the battlemaster, it just has different tricks.

If you want my opinion on making Int a more useful stat, allow him to use his Int for attack and damage rolls with his bonded weapons (instead of Str or Dex), and allow him to add his Int mod to damage on Cantrips (Not stackable with any other ability that allows you to add Int mod to spell damage). this change would make a high Int very valuable, but still maintains the requisite MAD of the build (since all of his defenses are based around either Dex or Str).

Doing so can really boost the benefit of choosing Cantrip over Attack action each round. I'm also of the mindset that Bonded Weapons should be magical, but that's just me.

[Vogonjeltz]

How does this relate to the suggested changes? Are you saying an EK, a full fighter progression, would get more mileage out of spell feats than combat feats? Have you seen the spells/day for an Eldritch Knight?

It relates in that the sub-class has a built in use for a bonus action, making feats that don't grant a bonus action preferable.

In the case of War Magic, which functions off a cantrip, yes, the Fighter would gain a significant more synergy benefit from using a ranged spell attack like Firebolt and then shooting an arrow or casting Shocking Grasp (or another melee focused cantrip) then stabbing someone near them. An archery focused EK would also benefit from Shocking Grasp as a means to break out of melee against a single opponent and continue shooting at them.

I did suggest feats that would benefit the Eldritch Knight more than most other casters: Ritual Caster for example is great to add a substantial number of spells to the EK's repetoire that don't cost them spell slots. Spell Sniper gives them greater combat benefits that synergizes with War Magic, a core ability.

Eldritch Strike provides a benefit for Acid Splash and Poison Spray as attack cantrips; Burning Hands, Thunderwave as 1st level evocations;
and Gust of Wind is an excellent 2nd level evocation to use with it: Shoot them with arrows and they keep getting pushed back by the wind, it doesn't even require an action after the casting. Using it would allow an EK to maintain crowd control quite efficiently.


More to the point, I'd love to see the EK be less sucky in the most played levels. At level 3: 2 level 1 spell/day + cantrips are definitely not as strong as 4 BM Dice/short rest.

Yeah I'd tend to agree that the Battlemaster is generally better at combat especially at 3rd level. Burning Hands is only going to deal 10.5 damage per target, so you'd have to hit 3 targets with each cast on average (i.e. 63 average damage) to out do the average damage from 12 superiority dice (54) used over the course of the day (2 short rests). This might be impossible to achieve if there are only single target fights, or the opponents are deliberately split up to try and avoid being hit by the same spell.

The EK's big advantage over the other two fighter class options is that they get access to area of effect damage and spells with rider effects. The Battlemaster and Champion are more single-target creatures, one having the higher sustained DPR (champion) the other having rider effects and good burst (battlemaster).

[Lollerabe]

I think another 'issue' could be that people are reluctant to simply accept bad game design. If you look at the EKs war magic feature I'd say it's just bad game design.

Off the bat you can't use it ever with dual wielding, a pretty classic fantasy fight style that many people enjoy. Hell, the fighter even has a fighting style feature that compliments it. You could then argue: if you wanna play a dual wielding fighter don't play an EK. Well ye I can't but I could also argue that it's just bad design that I can't.

Second, the feature is anti synergetic with one of the most iconic 5e fighter features - extra attack (2+). So the fighter subclass has a core feature that doesn't work with a core fighter feature - to me again, that's just bad design.


Then there's the weapon feats, as you have correctly pointed out, feats that provides bonus action options are less desirable on EKs, but that's the kicker, even IF you build around the subpar feature (war magic) you will eventually be worse off than just ignoring the feature and building around damage with weapon feats.

The EK isn't a caster that can also hold his own in melee, he's a fighter with a bit of casting. This is quite clear due to the fact that he's the worst caster in the game (1/3rd caster lvl, limited school options, no ritual casting). So having a core feature not compliment fighting is again IMO bad design.

Hell even if you wanted to play him as a tanky caster going sword and board, you even have to grab warcaster to even cast your spells without sheathing your weapon - at least bonded weapons should work as arcane focuses.

I guess the next step argument would be: having war magic is better than not having it. Yes options are always better than not having them. However I can also assume that war magic was intended to be part of the subclass' value, and if it ends up being worse than just attacking I think the value is gone, and it needs a rework.

All this was even worse before SCAG cantrips, before that warmagic was almost a ribbon effect.
So maybe I'm not playing the class wrong, maybe I'm not off my trolley for wanting to play my EK as a two hand swinging full plated warrior, that enhances his combat with spells, maybe it's just bad design that war magic dosent support that.
I can see that people might think: well if you don't wanna play to your subclass strengths then it's your own fault.

But that is my issue, even if I do that it might very well be subpar to do so. That tells me the feature might simply be poor design.

Edit: war magic is even worse on a ranged EK. First off why would an ranged EK waste a precious cantrip on firebolt? But let's assume he did, let's also assume he decided to start with 16 dex and 16 INT (which I see no reason too, but for the sake of the argument) he then spent his two first ASIS' on a dex bump and sharpshooter (he is a ranged EK after all).
Even disregarding the fact that he can shoot his bow at 5 times the range of fire bolt (600 ft vs 120 ft) we are looking at firebolt having +6 to hit (3 prof 3 INT) and dealing an average of 11 damg (2d10) or shooting his bow with +9 to hit (3 prof 4dex 2 archery) and dealing an avarage of 8,5 damg (1d8 = 4,5 damg + 4 from dex) and this is an EK desperately trying to make war magic viable.
Had said player chosen Vhuman he could pick SS as his free feat, use both ASIS' on dex which would result in +10 to hit with an avg damg of 9,5. Better yet he could chose to take a -5/+10 and hit with +5 (only one less than firebolt) and deal an avg of 19,5 damg.
So yeah, even worse for a ranged EK.

[Tanarii]

I think another 'issue' could be that people are reluctant to simply accept bad game design. If you look at the EKs war magic feature I'd say it's just bad game design.Alternately, it's that the 'issue' is that you don't agree with the designers balance choices, and then insult & blame the designers instead.

I disagree with the designers choices, and the balance of specific features, in editions of D&D all the time. But trotting out 'bad game design' hyperbole isn't cool when you don't like the way something works.

[Lollerabe]

Hardly think I insult anyone, but that's a matter of opinion I guess.

On topic: I think I made a pretty good attempt at explaining why I don't like how the feature works. I even gave a long list of examples as to why the feature feels poorly designed, even more so when the EK was released.

By all means do prove me wrong though, maybe I have missed something. However unless there is solid math and or a good explanation behind why war magic is good, then I feel it's a very fair statement to say it's a poorly designed feature.

It's ironic that it seems to annoy you that I find the feature lacking, as that was my entire point - people seem reluctant to ever think WOTC might have made a bad call.

I have given plenty of reasons as to why the EK feels underwhelming from a mechanical perspective, so far no one seems all that able to dispute it.

I think I wanna take a deeper look into a battlemaster 11 / abju wiz 9 and see how that compares to a straight lvl 20 EK, I have a feeling that the specific combo makes for a better EK than the EK - which would be quite funny.

Edit: what would you call the way the beastmaster's animal companion work Tanarii? The robotic like play style I mean, I think most people would chalk that up to being bad game design. Why? Because they don't like how it works and how it's balanced.

[Saggo]

Well, sure. It's bad if you're looking through a lens of pure DPR and with the specific caveats of not multiclassing and before Booming/Greenflame Blade.

As a single class EK alone War Magic allows you to (for absolutely no extra resources) prevent healing or reactions, reduce movement 10', cause disadvantage, create illusions, or pull a target closer to you (Lightning Lure and Thorn Whip are crazy good for tanks), most of which do 1-4d8 or so, and still make an attack (potentially a -5/+10). A wide range of utility for a minor reduction in DPR.

Good may be subjective, but that seems good to me.

Fun combo, Create Bonfire and Grapple.

[Tanarii]

Edit: what would you call the way the beastmaster's animal companion work Tanarii? The robotic like play style I mean, I think most people would chalk that up to being bad game design. Why? Because they don't like how it works and how it's balanced.I like the Beastmaster. I think it's effective, and don't get any "robotic play style" feeling when playing it. In fact, it feels like my character is working in sync with their companion to accomplish their goals.

Yes, I also think that's hyperbole to call it "bad game design" because you don't like the way it's designed as well. I don't like lots of things in D&D, including in 5e, and including feeling they aren't balanced very well. I don't call them bad game design. I call them things I don't like the way they work.

[Lollerabe]

I my defense if we wanna get technical war magic was straight up worse than attacking when the class was designed, jokes aside, if my usage of the term offends/annoys you or strikes you as arrogant then that's fair.
I don't know what qualifies as bad design to you or what difference it makes on my above post had I said 'thing I don't like'.
Almost every time I said 'bad design' it was followed by things such as: I could also argue, to me that's just.. And IMO.

I thought I made it beyond clear that it was bad design in MY opinion, not a certified truth.

I like your creativity Saggo :) but my point still stands, it quickly becomes worse for DPR (at lvl 11) for most builds, and many of the combos you refer to (while funny) comes with an opportunity cost in INT (for spell dc's) plus the EK have a very very limited amount of cantrips, so the awesome versatility you describe wouldn't see a lot of play.

Anyway having been sidetracked yet again (damn you lollerabe) I go back to my original question:

Do you think my suggestions would break anything? Aren't they flavorful and/or fun? My idea is pretty simple: I believe if I can add these features WITHOUT approaching the battlemaster/champions Dpr then I've made the EK more fun, a tad mechanically stronger (which a lot of players seem to agree that it needs to be) and I've given EK players a reason to place more value on INT.

I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't want those effects, if again they don't make the EK OP.

[Vogonjeltz]

All this was even worse before SCAG cantrips, before that warmagic was almost a ribbon effect.
So maybe I'm not playing the class wrong, maybe I'm not off my trolley for wanting to play my EK as a two hand swinging full plated warrior, that enhances his combat with spells, maybe it's just bad design that war magic dosent support that.
I can see that people might think: well if you don't wanna play to your subclass strengths then it's your own fault.

But that is my issue, even if I do that it might very well be subpar to do so. That tells me the feature might simply be poor design.


War Magic is a ribbon effect. It's the 7th level subclass ability, the same as Remarkable Athlete and Know Thy Enemy. It provides a minor benefit to aid in allowing the EK to engage in magic but still do fighter things.


Edit: war magic is even worse on a ranged EK. First off why would an ranged EK waste a precious cantrip on firebolt? But let's assume he did, let's also assume he decided to start with 16 dex and 16 INT (which I see no reason too, but for the sake of the argument) he then spent his two first ASIS' on a dex bump and sharpshooter (he is a ranged EK after all).
Even disregarding the fact that he can shoot his bow at 5 times the range of fire bolt (600 ft vs 120 ft) we are looking at firebolt having +6 to hit (3 prof 3 INT) and dealing an average of 11 damg (2d10) or shooting his bow with +9 to hit (3 prof 4dex 2 archery) and dealing an avarage of 8,5 damg (1d8 = 4,5 damg + 4 from dex) and this is an EK desperately trying to make war magic viable.
Had said player chosen Vhuman he could pick SS as his free feat, use both ASIS' on dex which would result in +10 to hit with an avg damg of 9,5. Better yet he could chose to take a -5/+10 and hit with +5 (only one less than firebolt) and deal an avg of 19,5 damg.
So yeah, even worse for a ranged EK.

If/when the ranged EK is closed on by a melee combatant they can use Shocking grasp to leave melee range without provoking an opportunity attack.

Firebolt doesn't require ammunition, quivers only hold 20 arrows/bolts.
A Longbow could fire up to 600 feet, but at disadvantage.
War Magic lets the EK shoot the firebolt and shoot the bow. That's 11 average for the firebolt at 7th and between 4.5 and 9.5 average for the Longbow, depending on ability score. Firing the bow twice would only average between 9 and 19, less than using firebolt at all points.

Sharpshooter is certainly a different matter, but that's burning an ASI that could have gone towards making the character better in other ways (i.e. War Caster, Ritual caster, Spell Sniper, Observant, Keen Mind, Linguist; better stats)

War Magic simply provides the character with more combat routines than were previously available. Now the Fighter can cast a cantrip and still engage in melee or ranged attacks whereas before a cantrip would have been mutually exclusive with doing so.

dual-wielding is best suited for the Battlemaster who can nova with additional superiority dice, or the champion who has no subclass bonus actions.

[Tanarii]

Do you think my suggestions would break anything? Aren't they flavorful and/or fun? My idea is pretty simple: I believe if I can add these features WITHOUT approaching the battlemaster/champions Dpr then I've made the EK more fun, a tad mechanically stronger (which a lot of players seem to agree that it needs to be) and I've given EK players a reason to place more value on INT.Your War Magic change (Substitute Cantrip for Attack, Int times per day) is probably fine, as long as you & your DM is fine with it, and you are willing to roll it back if you both find it to powerful. It's more powerful for a Ranged EK using PHB Cantrips, or for a Melee EK using SCAG Cantrips. For a Melee EK using PHB Cantrips I don't think it's massively overpowered. For starters, it wouldn't come into affect until level 11 for 2H, S&B or Archery. Secondly, it would enable War Magic to work with TWF, which is actually pretty neat.

[Lollerabe]

Thanks Tanarii, doubt we'll limit which cantrips can be used with the feature, but I'll definitely keep an eye out regarding the strength of the feature.

Vogon what ranged EK wouldn't grab SS ? Or bump his dex, we are talking about the class with the most asis, if he just grabs 1 dex bump it's 8,5 damg per shot with a longer range, and well you saw the SS result. I thought the firebolt example was perfect: that was with an INT of 16 which is a huge investment for very little payoff, and even then it's not better than actually just shooting - you can't just disregard the +2 to hit.

The whole ribbon concept is honestly arbitrary in my opinion, I can refer you to my previous point but I'll repeat: IF I can add these buffs to the EK and it DOSENT make the subclass OP, then it's funnier, more flavorful and most of all an indicator that it's currently mechanically behind other options.

You seem more interested in arguing that war magic is a solid option (which I have proven it ain't from a dpr perspective) than actually commenting on my OP.

[Tanarii]

Thanks Tanarii, doubt we'll limit which cantrips can be used with the feature, but I'll definitely keep an eye out regarding the strength of the feature.For sure, I didn't mean to limit it. I just meant how powerful it is will depend on the exact combination of cantrip and attack/feats being used in combo. You're opening up some very powerful combos, like Booming Blade & multiple PAM/GWM attacks. Although I'm pretty sure that's your intent, so the power levels wouldn't exactly surprise you.

[Lollerabe]

Yeah I'll see how it's pans out, at lvl 11 BB can deal a max of 5d8 (and I don't think it's that easy to trigger, but that's just my personal playing experience) with an INT of 14 the EK can do this twice per long rest, so I'm not sure how powerful that actually is in practice.

Any thought on the arcane fight styles ?

[Tanarii]

I think they're better as a LR recharge of Int uses, at least initially. Because Weapon Bond is a completely non-combat (or at least, just before combat begins) ability, and you're adding combat capability to it. Power them up later to SR if you find you need more power.

Personally I think Weapon Bond is awesome as is, but that's because I don't consider the ability to summon your weapon to you weak. I can't count the number of times as a Fighter-type I've been wishing there was a way to inconspicuously sneak my 6ft tall 2H sword with me somewhere. :)

[Saggo]

I like your creativity Saggo :) but my point still stands, it quickly becomes worse for DPR (at lvl 11) for most builds, and many of the combos you refer to (while funny) comes with an opportunity cost in INT (for spell dc's) plus the EK have a very very limited amount of cantrips, so the awesome versatility you describe wouldn't see a lot of play.
Thanks, but only your supporting arguments stand, not the point. It is less DPR (although most cantrips are 3dX by 11) and it does require INT more (I thought that was the goal?), but it offers something most features don't, more DPR for your utility at no additional resources cost. Utility is harder to quantify than DPR, but it's there. That alone pushes it out of "bad game design" and that is what I refute. As for cantrips, Mage Initiate let's you get up to 5 total.

If you want it solely for DPR, I'd have some more fun with it. Try something like Int Mod times a short rest you get to add one cantrip's unleveled effect (die and rider) to an attack. Flavorful arcane maneuvers, which should be pretty balanced to a Battlemaster.

[Lollerabe]

That would be to strong early game Saggo and not scale at all after that.

I see the LR argument on the arcane styles as that supports the caster concept. However that's not a very strong feature but I guess either one can be play tested.

Maybe it could be INT mod + 1 pr long rest, I don't know.

[Lollerabe]

Sorry if I came off as snarky Saggo (that was pre mocca) I think your idea is super cool but see a few flaws with it, I'll elaborate once off work.

I think I have a pretty good idea where to go with the remake as of now, and I truely appreciate the feedback, I'll do a short summary later - cheers guys.

[Markoff Chainey]

I am not sure if I get your approach...

You play an EK and think that your INT is a bit wasted, so you make up a quite extensive list of quite powerful abilities so that your INT becomes more important? - Although you also think that you are quite on the powercurve?

The problem with your suggestion is that it is totally missing its mark, because the EK is good and powerful as it is. INT is debateable quite a weird and not so useful stat throughout the game. So changing one class is obviously the wrong approach.

I would suggest to look into the survey that Kryx made and balance overall saving throws instead:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17ZeFuwQVvb9DsMseUU8Pb0KxDU7sizhmebp-U7FuzLY/edit#gid=0

This effects all classes and will lead to a bit more useful INT stat.

[Lollerabe]

I don't think I'm quite on the powercurve, and I don't think it's a balanced and powerful class - otherwise why would I try to home brew buffs ? Nor do I believe I'm missing my mark at all, the fact that INT is considered the worst stat in 5e is one thing, the fact that INT (even though it's a bad stat) is pretty wasted on EKs until at least lvl 10 is my problem.

And I don't even consider it all that good at that point, but some people seem to think a 16+ INT score and eldritch strike makes for some great combos, my opinion on that dosent matter.

It's strange to me that in most tier lists made, all agree that EKs are on the weak side of things, every EK guide posted (even on this forum) has multiple people arguing that EKs are better off dump stating INT, yet when I made this thread people act like this is completely unheard of.
On the same guides many people seem to agree that EKs just suck before lvl 10 straight up - I kind of agree and therefore am trying to add a buff/fix that still comes with an opportunity cost.

Isn't it strange that fx a battlemaster5/wiz3 is a argueably better EK than a EK 8, for both ranged and two handed builds?

Anyway a brief summary: I'm gonna go with the features as they are presented in the original post for now. At lvl 5 arcane strike and arcane smash adds 2 and 3,5(a bit more with GWF reroll) damage per use, with an int of 14 and two short rests that's : 8 damg for arcane strike throughout an entire day, and 14 for smash - hardly game breaking.

The war magic add on needs to stay long rest based though, I think allowing it to work at lvl 7 is fine, the difference between casting a cantrip then making an attack as a BA and foregoing an attack to cast a cantrip isn't major at that point. For a PAM EK it's adding a butt end attack so 5,5 - 6,5 more damg twice a day, for a GWM it depends on if he crits or kills in which case it's 10 - 11 (or 20 - 21) twice a day, but that's if the stars align.
For a ranged EK the feature most likely won't matter either way.

[Submortimer]

Isn't it strange that fx a battlemaster5/wiz3 is a argueably better EK than a EK 8, for both ranged and two handed builds?


Maybe I missed this somewhere, but what metric are you using to determine "Better"?

For me, the real strength of the EK is not purely in its combat ability, but the fact that it grants loads of non-combat versatility that the Battlemaster, Champion, and the PDK simply don't have, and they are still quite good when it comes to damage.

Now, multiclassing into a wizard certainly will grant that versatility, but it doesn't specifically mean you're going to be better. As it is, I'd probably rather play the level 8 EK than the Fighter/wizard combo, especially considering that a straight fighter will have also gotten 2 additional ASI's at that point.

Also, you are missing a potentially excellent bit of feat useage: crossbow expert. Forget the hand crossbow shenanigans and the removal of the loading property, and focus on being able to do ranged attacks in melee without disadvantage (yes, this applies to ranged spell attacks). Then combine that with blasting a guy in the face with Firebolt and then hitting him with your greatsword.

[Lollerabe]

So I'm suppose to take the crossbow expert feat so I can use firebolt in melee and then use a greatsword hit? A firebolt at lvl 5 is 2d10 (11 avg damg) a greatsword hit with an 18 strength score is 2d6 + 4 (11 avg damg) how in gods name is that 'excellent feat usage'? I could just whack 'em twice with same damg and a better + hit modifier, unless that build of yours also requires 18 INT in which case it's a toss up, except I still got a bonus action to spare.

Where does this 'loads of non combat utility' come from? You got 2 cantrips until lvl 10, a scarce amount of spells plus you are limited (almost) to evocation and abju schools. Oh and no ritual casting. I'm sorry but your definition of both 'excellent' and 'loads' differs greatly from mine.

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

For me, the real strength of the EK is not purely in its combat ability, but the fact that it grants loads of non-combat versatility that the Battlemaster, Champion, and the PDK simply don't have, and they are still quite good when it comes to damage.

I agree with this general sentiment. EK takes the base fighter chassis, already a solid combatant, and gives it a lot of options which can be used in combat, usually enhancing defense or giving an AoE option, or you can choose options which help in the other two pillars, exploration and interaction. It's a straightforward way to get a fighter who can cast disguise self, or scout with a familiar, or levitate over a wall.

If you really just wanted to maximize damage by piling feats and features one atop the other (Polearm master, GWM, Sentinel, martial dice, divine smite, etc. etc.) then maybe the tradeoffs and features that EK offers will not work best for you. Which is fine, since not all classes and sub-classes need to be equally capable in all areas.

[Submortimer]

So I'm suppose to take the crossbow expert feat so I can use firebolt in melee and then use a greatsword hit? A firebolt at lvl 5 is 2d10 (11 avg damg) a greatsword hit with an 18 strength score is 2d6 + 4 (11 avg damg) how in gods name is that 'excellent feat usage'? I could just whack 'em twice with same damg and a better + hit modifier, unless that build of yours also requires 18 INT in which case it's a toss up, except I still got a bonus action to spare.

Where does this 'loads of non combat utility' come from? You got 2 cantrips until lvl 10, a scarce amount of spells plus you are limited (almost) to evocation and abju schools. Oh and no ritual casting. I'm sorry but your definition of both 'excellent' and 'loads' differs greatly from mine.

Yeesh, someone is salty.

First off, the feat suggestion is in general. it gives you options. Sure, you could burn your two cantrips known on Greenflame Blade and Fire bolt, or you could take just take Fire bolt and burn a feat (which that straight fighter is going to have two extra of) and use that extra cantrip for something else.

Second, the EK HAS more out of combat versatility in comparison to the BATTLEMASTER, the CHAMPION, and the PDK purely by the fact that he has access to spells and cantrips. Is he more versatile than a multiclassed wizard? Nope. But that 8th level multiclassed fighter/wizard will lose in a fight against that straight EK.

[Tanarii]

In the original PHB, War Magic is considerably less useful. You can get decent use out of it with Shocking Grasp, Poison Spray or Acid Spash as a melee EK. But the instances you want to mix and match a ranged cantrip at a far target with a melee attack against a close target are fairly rare. It's the SCAG cantrips that make it really nice.


EK takes the base fighter chassis, already a solid combatant, and gives it a lot of options which can be used in combat, usually enhancing defense or giving an AoE option, or you can choose options which help in the other two pillars, exploration and interaction. It's a straightforward way to get a fighter who can cast disguise self, or scout with a familiar, or levitate over a wall.More importantly, it's a really straightforward way to get a melee fighter medium to strong AoE & Ranged backup capabilities. IMO that's the primary concept for the EK.

[Lollerabe]

Didn't mean to come off as offensive - pardon. Do clearify your logic on the crossbow expert idea though, 'cause I can't see how any math could ever make that a good choice.

How is firebolt + attack with greatsword (we are in melee as you stated) better than just attacking twice with said great sword? The proposed tactic is the first time I've seen someone attempt to optimize and do worse than just sticking to normal attacks.

The worst part is the battlemaster 5/wiz 3 would prolly beat the EK due to supp dice, but it was a bad example from my part anyway.

Besides I'm not arguing that the EKs strength isn't in spells, God knows it ain't in his other features.I'm merely suggesting that his subpar spell casting isn't strong enough to warrant such otherwise lacking class features, I might be wrong maybe the EK is a super balanced and powerful class.

[Skylivedk]

Thanks, but only your supporting arguments stand, not the point. It is less DPR (although most cantrips are 3dX by 11) and it does require INT more (I thought that was the goal?), but it offers something most features don't, more DPR for your utility at no additional resources cost. Utility is harder to quantify than DPR, but it's there. That alone pushes it out of "bad game design" and that is what I refute. As for cantrips, Mage Initiate let's you get up to 5 total.

If you want it solely for DPR, I'd have some more fun with it. Try something like Int Mod times a short rest you get to add one cantrip's unleveled effect (die and rider) to an attack. Flavorful arcane maneuvers, which should be pretty balanced to a Battlemaster.

I really like this idea. It is definitely stronger than Arcane Smash (and the other Arcane Fighting Styles) at lower levels though (but people might just have found Arcane Smash too strong because they thought it was a permanent buff, in which case, it would have been super broken).

It would also give True Strike some play :) My issue with the ability is that it doesn't scale in most instances, and in others become super powerful (Blade Ward). Would you have this feature instead of all other suggestions or in combination with some of them?


I am not sure if I get your approach...

You play an EK and think that your INT is a bit wasted, so you make up a quite extensive list of quite powerful abilities so that your INT becomes more important? - Although you also think that you are quite on the powercurve?

The problem with your suggestion is that it is totally missing its mark, because the EK is good and powerful as it is. INT is debateable quite a weird and not so useful stat throughout the game. So changing one class is obviously the wrong approach.

I would suggest to look into the survey that Kryx made and balance overall saving throws instead:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17ZeFuwQVvb9DsMseUU8Pb0KxDU7sizhmebp-U7FuzLY/edit#gid=0

This effects all classes and will lead to a bit more useful INT stat.

The entire discussion is based on:
a) EKs are quite often found to be on the lower end of the power-scale
b) we'd like to change that AND make INT more important for an arcane fighter.

You seem to disagree with a). Please elaborate: especially for levels between 3 and 7. You currently do nothing to substantiate your claim. If Lollerabe had used a level 9 character for his abjurer/batte master the chasm would appear a bit more clearly.

I agree that INT is in general weak in 5e. To me, it is the god-stat IRL (along with CHA), and I find it weird that is so mechanically inferior in 5e. Having a low INT is very painful in my campaigns though, so that alleviates a fair part. I might go with INT saves instead of Investigation checks for illusions (also buffing illusions a bit in the process).


Maybe I missed this somewhere, but what metric are you using to determine "Better"?
My guess is he meant spell-casting and fighting. AKA what the EK does.



For me, the real strength of the EK is not purely in its combat ability, but the fact that it grants loads of non-combat versatility that the Battlemaster, Champion, and the PDK simply don't have, and they are still quite good when it comes to damage.

What loads of non-combat versatility are you referring to? It doesn't have the spell slots/spells known to have "loads" of any kind of magical utility. Due to the school restrictions most of the spells are even combat-related as well.



Now, multiclassing into a wizard certainly will grant that versatility, but it doesn't specifically mean you're going to be better. As it is, I'd probably rather play the level 8 EK than the Fighter/wizard combo, especially considering that a straight fighter will have also gotten 2 additional ASI's at that point.

Also, you are missing a potentially excellent bit of feat useage: crossbow expert. Forget the hand crossbow shenanigans and the removal of the loading property, and focus on being able to do ranged attacks in melee without disadvantage (yes, this applies to ranged spell attacks). Then combine that with blasting a guy in the face with Firebolt and then hitting him with your greatsword.

Level 8 is weak on ASIs: true, but check the rest though: superiority dice + better spell-casting + abjurer special features. At level 9 you are only 1 ASI behind. You cap out (11/9) with 1 attack and 18 HP less, but with better short rest DPR and riders plus better casting and the Abjurer's ward.

Also, I really don't get how you can think of Crossbow Expert as being worthy of a feat. Nor do I get that argument for spell-sniper (as being the case for the EK instead of the BM who could longbow with sharpshooter). Both of those feat uses (spell sniper and crossbow expert) seem to approach the problem from the angle "How do we make this feature better?" - which is noble by itself, but seems to forget "Is the feature now better than the original alternative?" and "Is it worth the opportunity cost".

[Tanarii]

I agree that INT is in general weak in 5e. To me, it is the god-stat IRL (along with CHA), and I find it weird that is so mechanically inferior in 5e. Having a low INT is very painful in my campaigns though, so that alleviates a fair part. I might go with INT saves instead of Investigation checks for illusions (also buffing illusions a bit in the process).Killing me over here :smallbiggrin: Given that Cha is confidence, I'd call it the god-stat IRL, in conjunction with personal ambition and drive. Int comes in a close second though. But IRL isn't about people smashing face with swords & sorcery. Any more, for the former. :smallwink:

Nor is D&D necessarily though. I find Int to be relatively useful in many games just for straight ability checks. Far more useful than forum posters usually give them credit for. But YMMV and it'll be both DM & play-style dependent. (Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of "Int check to remember X" all over the place. Checks should be meaningful.)

[Skylivedk]

Yeesh, someone is salty.

First off, the feat suggestion is in general. it gives you options. Sure, you could burn your two cantrips known on Greenflame Blade and Fire bolt, or you could take just take Fire bolt and burn a feat (which that straight fighter is going to have two extra of) and use that extra cantrip for something else.

Second, the EK HAS more out of combat versatility in comparison to the BATTLEMASTER, the CHAMPION, and the PDK purely by the fact that he has access to spells and cantrips. Is he more versatile than a multiclassed wizard? Nope. But that 8th level multiclassed fighter/wizard will lose in a fight against that straight EK.

Or you could use a longbow and let go of the firebolt.

What spells do you have in mind that you can pick which will keep the EK viable in combat and give him utility? Again - he has an extremely limited selection. Both the Champion and BM have at-will utility features.

The EK might win the straight fight (it's 4 sup dices vs. 2 ASIs) depending on how the battle was construed. At level 9 (and 3-5, unsure about 6-8) it looks ugly for the EK though - and the ugly continues as level progression kicks in. For the party having the EK, I'm pretty sure, they'd rather have the ritual casting, the ward and the regained superiority dices+spell slots on short rest.


In the original PHB, War Magic is considerably less useful. You can get decent use out of it with Shocking Grasp, Poison Spray or Acid Spash as a melee EK. But the instances you want to mix and match a ranged cantrip at a far target with a melee attack against a close target are fairly rare. It's the SCAG cantrips that make it really nice.

More importantly, it's a really straightforward way to get a melee fighter medium to strong AoE & Ranged backup capabilities. IMO that's the primary concept for the EK.

Longbow on a Battlemaster is a much stronger ranged back-up. The AoE... medium to strong? Your DCs are probably rather weak and you don't get the strong AoE damage before level 13 (I do love Web and Grease though) at which point your contribution with your fireball is probably not worth nearly as much on account of your casters being able to do so much more.

[Skylivedk]

Killing me over here :smallbiggrin: Given that Cha is confidence, I'd call it the god-stat IRL, in conjunction with personal ambition and drive. Int comes in a close second though. But IRL isn't about people smashing face with swords & sorcery. Any more, for the former. :smallwink:

Nor is D&D necessarily though. I find Int to be relatively useful in many games just for straight ability checks. Far more useful than forum posters usually give them credit for. But YMMV and it'll be both DM & play-style dependent. (Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of "Int check to remember X" all over the place. Checks should be meaningful.)

I only rank INT higher than CHA IRL, because you can learn charisma, confidence, persuasion, etc., but being naturally charismatic might be counter-productive to learning how to learn faster (since you are able to talk your way through most situations, your incentive to actually buckle up would be smaller).

In my games, extra languages/tool proficiences pr. INT modifier is re-introduced. This whole idea of only speaking two languages is very much a syndrome of the game being primarily designed in a country where a major language (English) is spoken as the main tongue.

As I said, Rufus the Brute has a much shorter life expectancy at most tables I've been at. The only thing, I've seen, which is more suicidal than low INT is low WIS (not being able to keep your cool is just majorly bad... not being able to read people or remember details is the icing on your Gateau de Suicide)

[Tanarii]

Longbow on a Battlemaster is a much stronger ranged back-up. The AoE... medium to strong? Your DCs are probably rather weak and you don't get the strong AoE damage before level 13 (I do love Web and Grease though) at which point your contribution with your fireball is probably not worth nearly as much on account of your casters being able to do so much more.Sure, a Str/Dex Battlemaster is probably slightly stronger ranged-backup. But Battle Masters are intended to be Str/Con. EKs are intended to be Str/Int. I'm talking about design intent here.

On AoEs, they are available for every level spell you get. Even Cantrips. Acid Splash is an AoE. And your DCs are fine, because EKs are Str/Int, so your Int is assumed to be no more than 2pts lower than your Str.

What happens (all the damn time, including in this thread) is people try to build a Fighter that goes against the EK's design intent, then complaining that Int isn't useful. If you don't WANT to make a Str/Int EK with magical AoE & Ranged attacks, if you want to make a Str/Con GISH that's defending themselves with magical and making physical attacks only, then yeah, Int seems kinda useless to them.

[Lollerabe]

Are you talking at character creation or throughout the game ? Cause if you wanna argue that INT is as important to an EK as CHA is to a pala or blade lock, I think you might be mistaken.

The problem isn't that people build the EK the 'wrong' way, the problem is that you CAN indeed build an EK that dump stat his INT and is still a super effective EK.

People who claim that EKs need a high INT score have yet to prove it, why would I chose a high INT when I'm constricted to evo/abju and get 3rd lvl spells at lvl 13?

Lvl 1 spells: absorb elements,shield,expeditious retreat, sleep,fog cloud,protection from good/evil - all super viable spells, no INT needed.
Lvl 2 spells: blur, enlarge/reduce, invisible,mirror image, magic weapon, misty step, see invis, spider climb - the same deal.
Lvl 3 spells: fly, haste, counter spell, dispel magic.

And most campaigns don't even make it to lvl 13 (aka 3rd lvl spells) I honestly have a harder time making a EK spell list that relies on my INT with spells that I would want, than one where I'm limited by an 8 INT score.

You can argue that high INT is designer intent, but until lvl 10 (or later) the EKs INT score has very very little influence on how the EK plays in practice unless you are trying to force INT to be important.

But Tanarii even if I WANTED to make a ranged aoe blaster the EK is so awful at it, it's spells are way to delayed for it and it sorely lacks the spell slots and spells known to do that efficiently.

Maybe the intent was indeed for the EK to be very reliant on abju spells (which makes alotta sense seeing as they mesh so well with the fighter) and the designers kind of forgot that INT would have very little value then. Hence my original post, making INT attractive on EKs despite spell choices, giving them a reason to pump INT, beyond trying to make a mediocre aoe blaster concept viable.

[Tanarii]

Are you talking at character creation or throughout the game ? Cause if you wanna argue that INT is as important to an EK as CHA is to a pala or blade lock, I think you might be mistaken.Int is to an EK, as Con is to a Barb, Dex or Str to a Bard, Str to a Cleric, Con to a non-EK Fighter, Int or Cha to a non-AT rogue, Int to an AT, Con to a Sorc, and Dex to a Warlock or Wiz.

No, it's not an explicit secondary like Paladin Cha, or Ranger or Monk Wis. It's just the assumed second stat after the primary. By design. That's why they're listed in the quickbuilds. Because they are very useful and assumed second highest stat for those classes/builds. (I may be off on the Sorc/Warlock/Wizard from the quickbuilds. Going by memory.)


But Tanarii even if I WANTED to make a ranged aoe blaster the EK is so awful at it, it's spells are way to delayed for it and it sorely lacks the spell slots and spells known to that efficiently. You're not supposed to be trying to do it as a primary, using spell slots. It's supposed to be melee + cantrips, plus occasional spell slot use. You've got about enough spell slots for 1 per two fights to one per fight at low levels. (Or you have the option to Nova in a single fight.)

Why do you think they give you Evocation spells? They're one of the two primary schools for EKs for a reason. Thunderwave. Shatter. Fireball. Ice Storm. And that's just AoE. For long range magical attacks you have Chromatic Orb & Scorching Ray.

If you don't WANT to make an Evoker EK, then Int will be far less useful to you. That's when you're making a classical GISH. If you want your Int to chip in at that point, you would have to house rule. That's why I chimed in with my opinion on your house-rules ... I'm taking as a given you don't want to take direct attack spells, so you're trying to house-rule a way to have Int be useful anyway.

[Lollerabe]

Well then my dear friend we are loudly agreeing.

I want to make INT viable without being shoehorned in to a mediocre blaster build.

And I do appreciate your feedback, it's hard to convey tone in writing but I hope that wasn't lost in the debate.

[Tanarii]

And I do appreciate your feedback, it's hard to convey tone in writing but I hope that wasn't lost in the debate.Meh. I get aggressive about trying to communicate my point of view all the time. It's easy to get invested in a point of view. That's why I try, when someone is clearly requesting house-rules for their point of view, to eventually pull my head out of my ass, stop arguing, and help them with the house-rules. :smallwink:

[Saggo]

I really like this idea. It is definitely stronger than Arcane Smash (and the other Arcane Fighting Styles) at lower levels though (but people might just have found Arcane Smash too strong because they thought it was a permanent buff, in which case, it would have been super broken).

It would also give True Strike some play :) My issue with the ability is that it doesn't scale in most instances, and in others become super powerful (Blade Ward). Would you have this feature instead of all other suggestions or in combination with some of them?

Honestly? It was an example, I didn't fully flesh it out on purpose. It was a basic premise, take an existing system and infuse it with an existing theme rather than invent whole new systems.

You'll start with +3 maybe +4 Int, and max out at +5. Battlemaster starts 4 superiority dice and max at 6, 7 if you take the feat. Battlemaster gets +d8 damage and utility, but eventually get +d12. You get +d8 damage and utility, or +d10 and no utility. Both BM and you would have utility the other couldn't replicate. Scaling isn't important, you get Spellcasting as a feature. Quite simply most (not claiming all) balancing problems go away (maybe add "Cantrip must have a target" and "use Int in place of Str or Dex during that attack" clauses).

I think Eldritch Knight is fine how it is. The Fighter chassis is worthy DPR in it's own right. Eldritch Knight is only there to add spells to the Fighter chassis. The thematic problems usually stem from people wanting EK to act like a melee versioned Arcane Archer. In that regard I would say this homebrew is enough for EK.

As an aside, True Strike doesn't synergize with War Magic at all. If you read it, Advantage activates on your next turn, not next attack.