[3.5] Which do you prefer, Eldritch Knight or Spellsword?

[Luccan]

This is, I suppose, more a question for if you could pick just one, since I've seen a few people say that they use both if they use either. I've always liked the Spellsword, ever since I first saw it in Complete Warrior. It seems to do a better job of creating a character who is a warrior-mage, whereas Eldritch Knight creates a wizard who is pretty good with weapons too, but should not be on the front lines.

Both have a +1 to BAB per level, both gain a bonus feat (EK at first and it must be a Fighter bonus feat, SpellS at second and it can be either that or a metamagic feat).

EK has spellcasting progression every level except first, d6 HD, 2+int Skills, a Good Fortitude save and is easy to qualify for by level 6, as a Wizard 5/Fighter 1 or the other way around

SpellS has spell casting progression at levels 1,3,5,7,and 9, d8 HD, 2+int skills, Good Fortitude and Will saves, and can be qualified for at level 7 with a single Fighter level and 6 levels of Wizard.

Spellsword has a few class abilities, which lend itself to the name. Firstly, from 10% armor spell failure reduction at 1st level, which increases for a maximum of 30% reduction by the end. The SpellS can also eventually "charge" a melee weapon with a spell he has prepared. It effects the next target hit with the weapon (and only that target). Eventually, they can channel two spells into a weapon at once, with both spells effecting their next target

So with the basics of the classes laid out, which do you prefer, if you could only pick one?

[Der_DWSage]

Well...not to be a parrot or anything, but 'Thou shalt not sacrifice caster levels.' And EK sacrifices a lot less than Spellsword. Spellsword's not really going to have great armor (Unless you go with the Fey/gith/mistcraft or however that combo goes, it's been a while since I've 3.5'd.) and wizards have enough other defenses that physical armor isn't actually that great for them.

So yeah, Eldritch Knight if anything. If nothing else, you can still get 9th level spells that way. If I wanted a Spellsword, I'd just play a Duskblade.

[Astralia123]

Rule One: If you really want to cheese sth, first ask your DM if he can make it more favourable specially for you.

Be aware that neither of them are actually delicious enough for a player to actually go for them.

A build based on Eldritch Knight will have to lose at least 2 CLs, considering that under this assumption Militia feat is unlikely to be available. So one sacrifices 2 caster levels and a bunch of spellcasting feats in exchange of BAB, and with a still very lame hp. It is hardly a fair trade.

On the other hand, Spellsword costs one more CLs (minimum 3 if one wishes to get Channel Spell), and even more if one wishes to maintain a reasonable physical powerfulness. This PrC has a very interesting class feature that could be utilized in many creative ways, but you can't be called even half a competent spellcaster if you lose 3 or more CLs. This actually makes this ability much less useful.
In short words, Spellsword seems slightly better than Eldritch Knight, but still not a fair trade. A Spellsword based build is neither competent as a spellcaster, nor as a warrior - one loses too much BAB to become a qualified warrior, and still unable to don anything heavier than a normal chain skirt.


If one has more reasonable access to PrCs, however, Spellsword is the only one of the two that one would actually fiddle with, but just one level. And then one goes for other better gishy PrCs like Abjurant Champion.

Seriously, if one really wishes to be a gish with just one PrC, then PrCs with their own spell-list and spell progression would be much better, like Suel Arcanamach. It outperforms anything within the first 4 books of Complete Serious in terms of gishy build.

[Eldariel]

However, if one has sufficient resources so that he can actually try a gishy build, Spellsword is the only one out of the two that one would actually fiddle with. With just one level, Spellsword does not cost you caster levels, so it could serve as a place holder, so you can level up with less cost before you qualify some better, cooler gishy PrCs like Abjurant Champion.
In this consideration, one should always avoid Eldritch Knight if possible, not only because the CL loss at first level, but also because of its lame hp progression. Actually I would say, if you don't have access to powerful PrCs that can be achieved with little or no CL loss, or provide reasonable reward that can cover that loss (like Abjurant Champion or Swiftblade), don't try a gishy build with wizard.

If you have very limited choice among PrCs (like, DMG and earlier Complete Series only, and no more than one PrC), a PrC with its own spell-list like Suel Arcanamach would outperform any gishy PrC that is based on wizard/sorcerer spellcasting in almost all aspects.

Suel Arcanamach vs. a gish built using Eldritch Knight? Really? Eldritch Knight can reach 9s from all Wizard-schools while Suel Arcanamach is stuck with a limited access to 5th level spells. The strongest part about a Gish are always their strongest spells and you'll never get stuff like Simulacrum, Shapechange, Time Stop, Greater Dispel, Polymorph Any Object, Contingency, or even Planar Binding on Suel Arcanamach, as well as earlier access to bread'n'butter like Polymorph, Greater Magic Weapon, Greater Invisibility, etc. For power-reasons, anything with 17+ levels of Wizard casting is going to be a better Gish than anything with less than that. To that end and compared to base classes, Eldritch Knight is adequate if obsolete thanks to the existence of Divine Power (HD is a poor excuse at best - a proper spell list is going to save you way more often than any amount of HP).


On the other hand, Spellsword has one of the most interesting class features that could be utilized in most creative ways. It is hardly possible for PCs to actually put it to any real use, though, for an obvious reason.

It takes some effort and is of course weaker than a straight caster (but fine far as mid tier Gishes go). With enough effort, you can still hit 9s and get the "Channel spell" ability eventually. Sadly Multiple Channel is not reasonably available; you can't lose 5 CL and hit 9s without working a few steps harder.

[Pugwampy]

I dont care for either . This awesome game unfairly rewards specialist classes .

In my opinion the cleric is your least nerfed "fighter / wizard" type .

[Astralia123]

Suel Arcanamach vs. a gish built using Eldritch Knight? Really? Eldritch Knight can reach 9s from all Wizard-schools while Suel Arcanamach is stuck with a limited access to 5th level spells. The strongest part about a Gish are always their strongest spells and you'll never get stuff like Simulacrum, Shapechange, Time Stop, Greater Dispel, Polymorph Any Object, Contingency, or even Planar Binding on Suel Arcanamach, as well as earlier access to bread'n'butter like Polymorph, Greater Magic Weapon, Greater Invisibility, etc. For power-reasons, anything with 17+ levels of Wizard casting is going to be a better Gish than anything with less than that. To that end and compared to base classes, Eldritch Knight is adequate if obsolete thanks to the existence of Divine Power (HD is a poor excuse at best - a proper spell list is going to save you way more often than any amount of HP).



It takes some effort and is of course weaker than a straight caster (but fine far as mid tier Gishes go). With enough effort, you can still hit 9s and get the "Channel spell" ability eventually. Sadly Multiple Channel is not reasonably available; you can't lose 5 CL and hit 9s without working a few steps harder.

Is it really THAT important? I don't suppose any campaign would allow one to wield a 20th level character freely for a long time.
You know, Eldritch Knight build usually reaches and only reaches 9th level spells at 19th or 20th level. Even if a campaign really allows you reach this level, you will only be able to attend one or two fights before the whole campaign ends. Then what's it worth that all the lengthy levels you suffered at which you could have wielded much more powerful spells?
On the other hand, if the campaign goes straight into epic, who cares whether you reach 9th within 20th level or not?
(And one would definitely have much better choices if such a campaign really exists. I doubt anyone can withstand a year-long campaign with only lame PrCs from DMG and CW, especially when he is the DM.)


Rule Two. 99% of the campaigns end prematurely, if not 100%.



BTW, if one can actually compensate the CL loss for getting Channel Spell or is simply single-minded enough to pay the price, I'd suggest Ordained Champion over Spellsword in all cases. You lose 4 CLs (as arcane caster) if you get your Channel Spell that route - not too much difference made. You lose at least 3 if you go Spellsword anyway. And you get a lot more by multi-classing into cleric.

[ExLibrisMortis]

Spellsword for dips of three levels max, Eldritch Knight if taking more than four levels. Just for the casting.

Neither is that good, except Spellsword 1, in some cases.

[Troacctid]

I don't particularly like either of them. I prefer Swiftblade or Jade Phoenix Mage.

[nedz]

Is it really THAT important? I don't suppose any campaign would allow one to wield a 20th level character freely for a long time.
You know, Eldritch Knight build usually reaches and only reaches 9th level spells at 19th or 20th level. Even if a campaign really allows you reach this level, you will only be able to attend one or two fights before the whole campaign ends. Then what's it worth that all the lengthy levels you suffered at which you could have wielded much more powerful spells?
On the other hand, if the campaign goes straight into epic, who cares whether you reach 9th within 20th level or not?
(And one would definitely have much better choices if such a campaign really exists. I doubt anyone can withstand a year-long campaign with only lame PrCs from DMG and CW, especially when he is the DM.)


Rule Two. 99% of the campaigns end prematurely, if not 100%.



BTW, if one can actually compensate the CL loss for getting Channel Spell or is simply single-minded enough to pay the price, I'd suggest Ordained Champion over Spellsword in all cases. You lose 4 CLs (as arcane caster) if you get your Channel Spell that route - not too much difference made. You lose at least 3 if you go Spellsword anyway. And you get a lot more by multi-classing into cleric.

The point about doing a level 20 comparison is not because games reach that high a level, but because it's a benchmark which indicates how your character will measure up throughout mid levels onwards.

[Eldariel]

Is it really THAT important? I don't suppose any campaign would allow one to wield a 20th level character freely for a long time.
You know, Eldritch Knight build usually reaches and only reaches 9th level spells at 19th or 20th level. Even if a campaign really allows you reach this level, you will only be able to attend one or two fights before the whole campaign ends. Then what's it worth that all the lengthy levels you suffered at which you could have wielded much more powerful spells?
On the other hand, if the campaign goes straight into epic, who cares whether you reach 9th within 20th level or not?
(And one would definitely have much better choices if such a campaign really exists. I doubt anyone can withstand a year-long campaign with only lame PrCs from DMG and CW, especially when he is the DM.)

Rule Two. 99% of the campaigns end prematurely, if not 100%.

Completely meaningless points. All other spell levels are gained earlier too and 8s, 7s and 6s all change the game significantly as well. And having to wait until level 12 to even cast Polymorph? I don't think the argument about e.g. Suel Arcanamach is even remotely defensible. It's a fine Tier 3 class but no competition for a proper Gish on any level (except perhaps before you take a single level in a PRC).

EDIT: And in epic this is actually even more important: to qualify for the most important and powerful epic feats, you need to be able to cast 9th level spells. You do get 1 extra level though so for epic play, hitting 9s on level 21 is kinda okay as well. That means you can still pick up Epic Spellcasting and start playing the epic game.

[Âmesang]

Of the two my only experience is with the eldritch knight… and even then it's mostly out of necessary simplicity. I attempted to use Wizards' Conversion Manual to update the shade, Zol Darklock, from WG7 Castle Greyhawk, to 3rd Edition by making him fighter 1/sorcerer 6/eldritch knight 10/shadow adept 4 (effectively making him a FORGOTTEN REALMS® shade who shadow walked/plane shifted to WORLD OF GREYHAWK®).

Since he was originally a fighter 16/magic user 16 I wanted to keep that "essence" to him so I went with eldritch knight because it's in the DUNGEON MASTER'S Guide while tossing in shadow adept for a bit of Faerûnian flavor. At the very least he finishes 20th-level with a base attack bonus of +15 and 9th-level spellcasting, allowing him to take Epic Spellcasting at 21st-level (as an ancient Netherese arcanist studying the Power Magic of the Suel, it felt appropriate to me).

I didn't give him any hard stats beyond that… but I figured most every player would have a DMG and most every FORGOTTEN REALMS® player would have the Player's Guide to Faerûn; hence, the need to keep things simple.

[Cine]

I've seen both in action, and I report that Fighter 1/Wizard 5/EK 6/ >> Duskblade 12 (this was me playing) > Wizard 4/Fighter 2/Spellsword 6.

It was that kind of party, the last guy was a cleric 6/radiant servant 6 who was getting quite annoyed at our antics, and having to make up for the spellsword's suckage all the time.

And getting access to higher-level spells are the single most powerful thing you can do to your build, pretty much.

Spell channel and armor does not make up the difference between 4th and 5th level spells. But the duskblade gets some unique tools that can make up for the relative disparity.

[Necroticplague]

Eldritch knight. You only lose 2 CL (counting the one you lost to qualify). This is much less crippling than all the CL that you lose if you go Spellsword. Yeah, EK is pretty lackluster, and not really worth it, but it's better than spellsword.

[DarkSonic1337]

Spellsword's version of channel spell is actually my favorite form of channeling spells if only because of the shenanigans you can pull off as a result of it's wording. Make long duration area spells inescapable, channel long casting time spells as a move action (hello channeled Geas), ignore targeting restrictions. Its wording is so abusable.

Not worth losing 3 levels of spells of course (maybe a dragonslayer dip will alleviate this if your build has room), but it's a the very lease more INTERESTING than Eldritch Knight. I know in an epic game I would love to fit 4 levels in somewhere.

[Urpriest]

It's just not a comparison anyone needs to make. Eldritch Knight and Spellsword are PrCs supporting a bread-and-butter concept, the gish, without adding any extra frills. They're ingredients, where you take as much of each as you need to get the build you want. If they were intended to be the focus of a build instead of filler they'd have more dedicated flavor and abilities, like Knight Phantom or Swiftblade.