The Knight Phantom PrC from Five Nations

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20050706a&page=4

Is it just me, or is this a bit over the top?

It's like a spellsword who doesn't get the bonus feat at 1st, but gets a
HD upgrade to d8, the ability to cast in light armour, the ability to
summon a phantom steed a number of times/day equal to class level, blur
for a number of rounds equal to class level, a brilliant energy weapon
for a number of rounds equal to class level...

.... for the additional cost of having taken Still Spell, 4 ranks in
ride, and phantom steed as one of his spells known.

I love the concept, because it's like an eldritch knight with flavour,
and good flavour, since phantom steed is very cool and very underused.

But compared to eldritch knight as a baseline, this just seems too much.

BTW, if someone has Five Nations (is it even out yet...?), is there some
way in there to get proficiency with all martial weapons without taking
a martial class (like Militia from PGtF)? An NPC is a wizard 6/knight
phantom 6, and the knight phantom requires proficiency with all martial
weapons...


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jasin Zujovic wrote:
> In article <d_Nye.16219$oJ.12584@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
> mhacdebhandia@yahoo.invalid says...
>
> > > I love the concept, because it's like an eldritch knight with flavour,
> > > and good flavour, since phantom steed is very cool and very underused.
> >
> > Maybe that's why they did it. I guess the question is whether or not the
> > eldritch knight is really competitive?
>
> ... this is probably the key point.
>
> What do you think? A couple of people on RPGnet have said that they
> thought the knight phantom was fine and the eldritch knight was weak.
>
> Eldritch knight seems OK to me. Not great, but not obviously in need off
> powering up. Then again, I was so happy with the inclusion of a Ftr/Wiz
> PrC in the DMG that it might be a case of settling for what I can
> get...?

With Practiced Spellcaster, I think Eldritch Knights are perfectly
viable. Not overpowered, but of average power around level 10. Slightly
weaker than average before level 10, slightly stronger after.

It follows, of course, that I think Knight Phantoms are overpowered.

A quick correction, though: KPs are only _one_ step ahead of EKs,
hitpoint-wise. d8 vs d6.

> > unless there's an Aundairian regional feat which provides martial training to
> > their wizardry . . . but I hope it's a goof.
>
> Why? You think all martial weapon for a feat is too much?

First of all, yeah, I do. If a character wants to be adept with _all_
martial weapons, they should take a level in an appropriate class. If
you just want a mage who can swing a greataxe, buy MWP: Greataxe.

I'm not fond of feats that strictly obsolete other feats (unless
there's a good reason), and a feat that grants all MWPs does just that.

> IMO, it's just about right, if it weren't for the fact that it screws
> with PrCs that use the "must be proficient with all martial weapons" as
> a mechanism to force multiclassing out of the obvious primary class
> choice for the PrC and into a martial class.

And this I agree with. Lately, WotC seems to be throwing around
prerequisite-avoidance feats a bit too carelessly (Precocious
Apprentice is a pretty glaring one).

Laszlo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <1120649390.949831.318010@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu says...

> > Eldritch knight seems OK to me. Not great, but not obviously in need off
> > powering up. Then again, I was so happy with the inclusion of a Ftr/Wiz
> > PrC in the DMG that it might be a case of settling for what I can
> > get...?
>
> With Practiced Spellcaster, I think Eldritch Knights are perfectly
> viable. Not overpowered, but of average power around level 10. Slightly
> weaker than average before level 10, slightly stronger after.
>
> It follows, of course, that I think Knight Phantoms are overpowered.
>
> A quick correction, though: KPs are only _one_ step ahead of EKs,
> hitpoint-wise. d8 vs d6.

Of course, my mistake.

What would your suggestion be, for an as simple and quick a fix as
possible? Would decreasing the hit die to d6 be enough? I'd imagine not
if you think EK is of above average power at later levels (which I'm not
sure I agree with, but then, I haven't actually seen one in action at
high levels)...


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jasin Zujovic wrote:
> In article <1120649390.949831.318010@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu says...
>
> > > Eldritch knight seems OK to me. Not great, but not obviously in need off
> > > powering up. Then again, I was so happy with the inclusion of a Ftr/Wiz
> > > PrC in the DMG that it might be a case of settling for what I can
> > > get...?
> >
> > With Practiced Spellcaster, I think Eldritch Knights are perfectly
> > viable. Not overpowered, but of average power around level 10. Slightly
> > weaker than average before level 10, slightly stronger after.
> >
> > It follows, of course, that I think Knight Phantoms are overpowered.
> >
> > A quick correction, though: KPs are only _one_ step ahead of EKs,
> > hitpoint-wise. d8 vs d6.
>
> Of course, my mistake.
>
> What would your suggestion be, for an as simple and quick a fix as
> possible? Would decreasing the hit die to d6 be enough? I'd imagine not
> if you think EK is of above average power at later levels (which I'm not
> sure I agree with, but then, I haven't actually seen one in action at
> high levels)...

Well, this is not a simple fix, but I'd probably leave their hit dice
alone, make their special abilities more powerful, and have them lose
more caster levels. That way, they could fill their own niche, rather
than stealing the Eldritch Knight's.

As for a simple fix... well, d6 HP isn't enough, but it's a good start.
I'd just go with that and accept the fact that the Eldritch Knight is
now obsolete, and the Knight Phantom is a powerful (but not really
unbalanced) PrC.

Laszlo

 

[Joseph]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote in
news:1120649390.949831.318010@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

>
>
> Jasin Zujovic wrote:
>> In article <d_Nye.16219$oJ.12584@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
>> mhacdebhandia@yahoo.invalid says...
>>
>> > > I love the concept, because it's like an eldritch knight with
>> > > flavour, and good flavour, since phantom steed is very cool and
>> > > very underused.
>> >
>> > Maybe that's why they did it. I guess the question is whether or
>> > not the eldritch knight is really competitive?
>>
>> ... this is probably the key point.
>>
>> What do you think? A couple of people on RPGnet have said that they
>> thought the knight phantom was fine and the eldritch knight was weak.
>>
>> Eldritch knight seems OK to me. Not great, but not obviously in need
>> off powering up. Then again, I was so happy with the inclusion of a
>> Ftr/Wiz PrC in the DMG that it might be a case of settling for what I
>> can get...?
>
> With Practiced Spellcaster, I think Eldritch Knights are perfectly
> viable. Not overpowered, but of average power around level 10.
> Slightly weaker than average before level 10, slightly stronger after.
>
> It follows, of course, that I think Knight Phantoms are overpowered.

I think so too, especially with a Fighter 1, Wizard 5, Knight Phantom 3
with the feat Battle Caster. Just increase your arcane spellcasting
levels from than on, and great power one has. Is Wotc starting to balance
prestige classes with role-playing prerequisites again? It has very good
flavor though.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <1120727776.699283.129780@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu says...

> As for a simple fix... well, d6 HP isn't enough, but it's a good start.
> I'd just go with that and accept the fact that the Eldritch Knight is
> now obsolete, and the Knight Phantom is a powerful (but not really
> unbalanced) PrC.

It actually crossed my mind that this might just be the idea,
considering the similarity in spellcasting/BAB/save progressions, and
the name: the knight phantom might be intended to be the
Eberronian/Aundairian version of the eldritch knight.

That's one of the main advantages of having the eldritch knight in the
DMG, as opposed to a Raumathari battlemage or even a spellsword: it's
ubergeneric, making it easier to tweak to represent specific
organizatons, techniques or what have you.


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Christopher Adams wrote:
> Jasin Zujovic wrote:
> > mhacdebhandia@yahoo.invalid says...
> >
> >> Maybe that's why they did it. I guess the question is whether or not the
> >> eldritch knight is really competitive?
> >
> > ... this is probably the key point.
> >
> > What do you think? A couple of people on RPGnet have said that they
> > thought the knight phantom was fine and the eldritch knight was weak.
> >
> > Eldritch knight seems OK to me. Not great, but not obviously in need off
> > powering up. Then again, I was so happy with the inclusion of a Ftr/Wiz
> > PrC in the DMG that it might be a case of settling for what I can
> > get...?
>
> Well, the eldritch knight sees a lot of use in "gish" character builds, but
> consider the alternatives. How many builds have one level of spellsword for the
> spell failure chance reduction?

All of them, since there's no reason not to take it.

> How many builds have more than that one level?

Basically, none of them.

> How many builds have that one level and go the distance with the eldritch
> knight?

Most of them.

> My gut feeling without ever having seen one played is that the eldritch knight
> is roughly equivalent to the mystic theurge, in that it's flexible but lacks the
> punch of a single-classed wizard - and it's clearly a very different beast from
> a straight-out fighter.

I've seen Eldritch Knights played, and they're not really like a Mystic
Theurge, for a number of reasons.

Firstly, EKs lose only two caster levels, not three. This is
significant.

Secondly, cleric/wizard is an especially horrible combo. The abilities
of the wizard and the cleric don't complement each other at all well.
On the other hand, gish have synergy: for instance, a Polymorphed
Eldritch Knight can make good use of his BAB; True Strike + Archery is
always nice, and Tenser's Transformation (as well as other buffing
spells) can make the EK a formidable force in melee, as well.

Mystic Theurges are underpowered. Eldritch Knights are not.

> For instance, I'm not at all sure that it's an efficient trade for a
> warrior-type to give up feats for wizardly spellcasting, and I don't think it's
> a coincidence that the warrior-style requirements are so much easier than the
> arcanist-style requirements.

Not as much as you'd think. Sure, you need 6 levels of spellcaster
(technically, only 5 if you're a wizard, but there's absolutely no
reason not to take the sixth level), but the 6 levels only give a -3 to
BAB. Effectively, the EK only loses 3 levels of Fighter, not 6.

> How many eldritch knight builds are all about
> making a sturdier wizard rather than an arcane-empowered warrior?

EK? Sturdier wizard? I don't think I've ever seen a character like
that, and IMO it's a horrible idea. Losing two caster levels for a
couple more HP? Why not just take Improved Toughness? It gives more HP.


> I don't think
> the latter's switching of always-usable feats for a limited number of spells
> each day is competitive on the exact same ground as a fighter, though it's
> possible that it has a genuine role of its own to play.

It does. Eldritch Knights are effective and fun to play, and have much
to offer a party.

Laszlo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Joseph" <void@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:Xns968BF25BFA9B8619void@199.45.49.11...

> I think so too, especially with a Fighter 1, Wizard 5, Knight Phantom 3
> with the feat Battle Caster.

What does Battle Caster do, and what book is it in?

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jasin Zujovic" <jzujovic@inet.hr> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d35b2307d11aa64989756@news.iskon.hr...
> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20050706a&page=4
>
> Is it just me, or is this a bit over the top?

It is certainly tough. The weird thing I notice, and I hope this is
corrected in the book, is that the caster level (or "must be able to cast X
level spells") is not listed under Entry Requirements, which is irritating.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jasin Zujovic wrote:
> mhacdebhandia@yahoo.invalid says...
>
>> Maybe that's why they did it. I guess the question is whether or not the
>> eldritch knight is really competitive?
>
> ... this is probably the key point.
>
> What do you think? A couple of people on RPGnet have said that they
> thought the knight phantom was fine and the eldritch knight was weak.
>
> Eldritch knight seems OK to me. Not great, but not obviously in need off
> powering up. Then again, I was so happy with the inclusion of a Ftr/Wiz
> PrC in the DMG that it might be a case of settling for what I can
> get...?

Well, the eldritch knight sees a lot of use in "gish" character builds, but
consider the alternatives. How many builds have one level of spellsword for the
spell failure chance reduction? How many builds have more than that one level?
How many builds have that one level and go the distance with the eldritch
knight?

My gut feeling without ever having seen one played is that the eldritch knight
is roughly equivalent to the mystic theurge, in that it's flexible but lacks the
punch of a single-classed wizard - and it's clearly a very different beast from
a straight-out fighter.

For instance, I'm not at all sure that it's an efficient trade for a
warrior-type to give up feats for wizardly spellcasting, and I don't think it's
a coincidence that the warrior-style requirements are so much easier than the
arcanist-style requirements. How many eldritch knight builds are all about
making a sturdier wizard rather than an arcane-empowered warrior? I don't think
the latter's switching of always-usable feats for a limited number of spells
each day is competitive on the exact same ground as a fighter, though it's
possible that it has a genuine role of its own to play.

> However, somehow I got the feeling that it isn't a goof. Perhaps because
> another NPC is Ftr1/Wiz5/knight phantom. Not that that proves anything,
> I just kind of got the impression that if they were aware of the
> necessity of a Ftr level for one guy, they'd also be aware of it for the
> other...

That sort of thing can be funny, though. The reference to the Second Warlord is
a bit of a throwaway line.

>> unless there's an Aundairian regional feat which provides martial
>> training to their wizardry . . . but I hope it's a goof.
>
> Why? You think all martial weapon for a feat is too much?
>
> IMO, it's just about right, if it weren't for the fact that it screws
> with PrCs that use the "must be proficient with all martial weapons" as
> a mechanism to force multiclassing out of the obvious primary class
> choice for the PrC and into a martial class.

Well, that's exactly why. Anything that lets a wizard take a hybrid prestige
class with one extra level of spellcasting is, to my mind, too good.

(This is a separate issue, of course, from whether or not any given hybrid
prestige class is actually that good.)

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you
understand?
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigeclasslist.html
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatelist.html

Berawler: Is there any sanity or light left in this shrivelled husk of a world?
SingingDancingMoose: There was, but we had to trade it in for the internet.
Berawler: That is quite possibly the best response to any question ever.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
>
> Secondly, cleric/wizard is an especially horrible combo. The abilities
> of the wizard and the cleric don't complement each other at all well.
> On the other hand, gish have synergy: for instance, a Polymorphed
> Eldritch Knight can make good use of his BAB; True Strike + Archery is
> always nice, and Tenser's Transformation (as well as other buffing
> spells) can make the EK a formidable force in melee, as well.

Hmm. Polymorph is a suspect reference point, but still. As I said, just a gut
feeling.

> EK? Sturdier wizard? I don't think I've ever seen a character like
> that, and IMO it's a horrible idea. Losing two caster levels for a
> couple more HP? Why not just take Improved Toughness? It gives more HP.

I didn't mean it in the limited sense of "wizard with more hit points". You're
right, though, it's a bit of any iffy proposition without ye olde spellsword to
make armour possible. Forget I said anything.

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you
understand?
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigeclasslist.html
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatelist.html

Berawler: Is there any sanity or light left in this shrivelled husk of a world?
SingingDancingMoose: There was, but we had to trade it in for the internet.
Berawler: That is quite possibly the best response to any question ever.

 

[Joseph]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in
newsMWdndsHwuxrAVPfRVn-3g@comcast.com:

>
> "Joseph" <void@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns968BF25BFA9B8619void@199.45.49.11...
>
>> I think so too, especially with a Fighter 1, Wizard 5, Knight Phantom 3
>> with the feat Battle Caster.
>
> What does Battle Caster do, and what book is it in?
>

Battle Caster is in Complete Arcane. And if you are able to ignore arcane
spell failure from armor, you are able to wear armor one category heavier
than you normally can wear while still avoiding the chance of arcane spell
failure.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> "Joseph" <void@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns968BF25BFA9B8619void@199.45.49.11...
>
>> I think so too, especially with a Fighter 1, Wizard 5, Knight
>> Phantom 3 with the feat Battle Caster.
>
> What does Battle Caster do, and what book is it in?

It's in Complete Arcane, and allows a caster who can already ignore the
spell failure chance from one grade of armour to also ignore it from the
next category up (i.e. if you can ignore spell failure from light armour,
you're then able to ignore it from light or medium armour). You can't take
it more than once, fortunately.

--
Mark.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Mark Blunden" <m.blundenATntlworld.com@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:3j7lhnFoh8taU1@individual.net...
> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> "Joseph" <void@verizon.net> wrote in message
>> news:Xns968BF25BFA9B8619void@199.45.49.11...
>>
>>> I think so too, especially with a Fighter 1, Wizard 5, Knight
>>> Phantom 3 with the feat Battle Caster.
>>
>> What does Battle Caster do, and what book is it in?
>
> It's in Complete Arcane, and allows a caster who can already ignore the
> spell failure chance from one grade of armour to also ignore it from the
> next category up (i.e. if you can ignore spell failure from light armour,
> you're then able to ignore it from light or medium armour). You can't take
> it more than once, fortunately.

Still, that covers Mithril Full Plate.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> "Jasin Zujovic" <jzujovic@inet.hr> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1d35b2307d11aa64989756@news.iskon.hr...
>> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20050706a&page=4
>>
>> Is it just me, or is this a bit over the top?
>
> It is certainly tough. The weird thing I notice, and I hope this is
> corrected in the book, is that the caster level (or "must be able to
> cast X level spells") is not listed under Entry Requirements, which
> is irritating.

Presumably, it's considered to be covered by "Ability to cast Phantom
Steed".

--
Mark.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Mark Blunden" <m.blundenATntlworld.com@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:3j7lmeFogattU1@individual.net...
> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> "Jasin Zujovic" <jzujovic@inet.hr> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.1d35b2307d11aa64989756@news.iskon.hr...
>>> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20050706a&page=4
>>>
>>> Is it just me, or is this a bit over the top?
>>
>> It is certainly tough. The weird thing I notice, and I hope this is
>> corrected in the book, is that the caster level (or "must be able to
>> cast X level spells") is not listed under Entry Requirements, which
>> is irritating.
>
> Presumably, it's considered to be covered by "Ability to cast Phantom
> Steed".

Fair enough.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <3j7ajcFm1gkpU1@individual.net>,
m.blundenATntlworld.com@address.invalid says...

> >> BTW, if someone has Five Nations (is it even out yet...?), is there
> >> some way in there to get proficiency with all martial weapons
> >> without taking a martial class (like Militia from PGtF)? An NPC is a
> >> wizard 6/knight phantom 6, and the knight phantom requires
> >> proficiency with all martial weapons...
> >
> > This is very likely to be a goof (though easily fixed - giving him
> > one fighter level whether or not you subtract a level of knight
> > phantom won't break much), unless there's an Aundairian regional feat
> > which provides martial training to their wizardry . . . but I hope
> > it's a goof.
>
> There's a reference in the Aundair flavour text to Aundairan citizens
> training with both simple and martial weapons, so it's possible. Or maybe
> they'll include regional substitution levels or something similar - given
> the arcane flavour of the Aundairan military, a wizard substitution level
> exchanging martial proficiency for, e.g., familiars and/or Scribe Scroll,
> wouldn't be out of the question.

I think that would be pretty cool. OTOH, it does screw with the class
prerequisites, which is never a good thing...


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr