# Forum > Gaming > Roleplaying Games > D&D 5e/Next >  [edit] Fighter X/Wizard Y - what to do

## Arkhios

A simple request of opinion:

Would a Eldritch Knight 12/Scribe 8 be worth the trouble (as in worth the opportunity cost)?

On paper it seems fine as is, getting access to 4th level wizard spells from Wizard 8, spell slots progression of combined 12 levels total, Attack action with two extra attacks, and a slightly gimmicky but without any doubt, an effective low level feature from the Scribe: the Awakened Spellbook.

*EDIT [Dec 20th, 2022]:*
After some feedback and personal processing I've come to reach a conclusion, that I believe most here will agree with: While the Scribe's Awakened Spellbook is certainly a nice ability, it might not be the best wizard subclass option to couple with Eldritch Knight. Although it would be nice to have a special book, it's probably not worth the time. I want the character to feel effective and fun, not just fun at the cost of a flavorful choice. There ARE better options than Scribes, I get that. Scribes have their place at some tables, but to be honest, the subclass works better as single classed wizard, or as the main class of a multiclass build, not the other way around. As mentioned down-thread, War Magic is a good subclass especially with Multiclassing in mind due to it's subclass features, so it's most likely the one I'd go with.

Therefore, I have repurposed this thread to discuss the alternative options (below) instead:

*Since it's somewhat important to know, let's spill the beans:*
The character is already *in-play and not subject to any changes*, at 3rd level (currently a Fighter 2/Wizard 1, so whatever the next level will be, I'll have to choose a subclass).
However, since I want Extra Attack as soon as possible, it's the Fighter subclass that's more important to choose right now and I won't need to worry about the Wizard subclass until 7th or 8th character level (although War Mage is very likely choice).

The race is Reborn (human), and stats that were *rolled* are (after racials): Str 18, Dex 14, Con 18, Int 16, Wis 13*, Cha 10. *Yes, I have planned to take Resilient (Wisdom) as soon as possible.

Alternative options (in no particular order of preference):
Echo Knight 6/War Mage 14; 5 x ASI, spells up to 7th level; two attacks per Attack action; +2 AC and saves while concentrating on a spell (theoretically always)Echo Knight 10/War Mage 10; 5 x ASI, spells up to 5th level; two attacks per Attack action; +2 AC and saves while concentrating on a spell (theoretically always)Echo Knight 11/War Mage 9; 5 x ASI, spells up to 5th level; three attacks per Attack actionEldritch Knight 10/War Mage 10; 5 x ASI, spells up to 5th level, slots up to 7th level; disadvantage on target's next saving throw against a spell after being hit by a weapon; +2 AC and saves while concentrating on a spellEldritch Knight 11/War Mage 9; 5 x ASI, spells up to 5th level, slots up to 6th level; disadvantage on target's next saving throw against a spell after being hit by a weapon; three attacks per Attack action

----------


## Leon

If you think you'll enjoy it play it.

----------


## Petelo4f

What do you mean by worth it?

Admittedly after 11/12 Fighter doesn't really have much to offer until level 17.  So multiclassing out is often a good idea, but what are you trying to do with the build?  I mean Wizard is a great class, but what are you trying to do with the Scribe Wizard subclass in particular?

Is this a ranged build?  A melee build?  Or do you just like being an arcane fighter with a talking book friend?

I think you can make a perfectly serviceable build, but without knowing your aims kinda hard for people to give good feedback.

----------


## stoutstien

It kinda hard to mess up fighter X/class X period so I'll think you'll be fine.

----------


## 5eNeedsDarksun

> What do you mean by worth it?
> 
> Admittedly after 11/12 Fighter doesn't really have much to offer until level 17.  So multiclassing out is often a good idea, but what are you trying to do with the build?  I mean Wizard is a great class, but what are you trying to do with the Scribe Wizard subclass in particular?
> 
> Is this a ranged build?  A melee build?  Or do you just like being an arcane fighter with a talking book friend?
> 
> I think you can make a perfectly serviceable build, but without knowing your aims kinda hard for people to give good feedback.


In the same vein, how do you see a typical combat playing out?  Big, maybe concentration, spell (maybe with Action Surge) then swing away?  You can do more with spells than what might be some people's play style from EK 13 on: Haste = a single attack that triggers a BA attack, then the option to either cast another non-concentration spell or take a full Attack action.  What more do you want to do with the spells if you still want to take the Attack action regularly.
It sounds cool to me; I like Fighter/ Mages, so I'm interested in how you see this playing.

----------


## Arkhios

The idea was quite gimmicky actually;

Mostly a warrior type character (melee/ranged interchangeable as needed) with the potential to make three attacks without extra resource or action expenditure. 12 levels of Fighter only because of the third attack and ASI, though 11 would probably be enough as well, if any 5th level spells were absolutely necessary to learn.

On the flip side, being able to cast several damaging spells from 1st through 4th level, using up to 6th level spell slots, and able to change their damage types as needed without any limit of use (except spells scribed into their spellbook at given levels), thanks to Scribe's Awakened Spellbook.

The gimmick: Since Eldritch Knights knows and casts spells from Wizard spell list, to my reading Awakened Spellbook's damage type changing ability works even with the wizard spells you have learned through Eldritch Knight, even if they're not in your spellbook, because the Awakened Spellbook's ability speaks specifically of having the spells in the spellbook (being prepared not required!) in order to replace damage type of a wizard spell being cast. Obviously you're going to focus spells learned from Eldritch Knight to Evocation or other damaging spells, while learning others (for utility etc.) as a Wizard, saving up some space - and time and money from scribing spells - in the book.
.
.
.
However, if the intent was to lean heavily on concentration spells, I'd go with War Mage 10-11/Eldritch Knight 9-10 instead, because of War Mage's 10th level feature (while concentrating on a spell, you get a +2 bonus to AC and to all saving throws; which stacks with their 2nd level Arcane Deflection: reaction, +2 to AC or +4 to triggering saving throw).

----------


## Zilzmaer

personally, what i'd want to do with a build like that is focus on upcasting _shadow blade_ and attacking, so as to make the most use of Extra Attack. other spells would be used on a case-by-case basis as needed. 

doing that, the ability to change damage types might be occasionally useful, although psychic is a pretty good type already. i might go War Wizard, though; the extra defense of Arcane Deflection could be pretty useful in melee. 

if you're not planning on being in melee most of the time (or using a bow), i question why you'd need the third attack. also, pro tip: if you go EK first and picked up _find familiar_ early, take your first level of Wizard after EK 11 and pick up _find familiar_ as a Wizard spell known (and as a ritual), so when you take EK 12 you can replace it on your EK list.

edit: i think LudicSavant had a build like that posted somewhere, actually; that's probably where i got the idea War Wizard would be good with EK.

----------


## 5eNeedsDarksun

> The idea was quite gimmicky actually;
> 
> Mostly a warrior type character (melee/ranged interchangeable as needed) with the potential to make three attacks without extra resource or action expenditure. 12 levels of Fighter only because of the third attack and ASI, though 11 would probably be enough as well, if any 5th level spells were absolutely necessary to learn.
> 
> On the flip side, being able to cast several damaging spells from 1st through 4th level, using up to 6th level spell slots, and able to change their damage types as needed without any limit of use (except spells scribed into their spellbook at given levels), thanks to Scribe's Awakened Spellbook.
> 
> The gimmick: Since Eldritch Knights knows and casts spells from Wizard spell list, to my reading Awakened Spellbook's damage type changing ability works even with the wizard spells you have learned through Eldritch Knight, even if they're not in your spellbook, because the Awakened Spellbook's ability speaks specifically of having the spells in the spellbook (being prepared not required!) in order to replace damage type of a wizard spell being cast. Obviously you're going to focus spells learned from Eldritch Knight to Evocation or other damaging spells, while learning others (for utility etc.) as a Wizard, saving up some space - and time and money from scribing spells - in the book.
> .
> .
> ...


I'd be thinking about control spells if you're going ranged.  Basically bog them down and fill them full of holes.  Though the Scribes ability to change damage type would be somewhat wasted in this case.  We haven't played a lot into tier 4, but I'm thinking changing damage type on 4th to 6th level slots might have you chucking AOE spells that don't really chew through enough HP often enough to really matter regardless of damage type at level 20.  Reasonable at times, but maybe not a primary tactic.  
This, as all things, depends on what the rest of the party is doing and what the DM is throwing out for foes.  I continue to think this is viable; I also think you'd be having to carefully select spells + tactics to remain relevant, given that you're going to be a generalist.

----------


## Arkhios

Meant to answer before, but for some reason I forgot.:




> What do you mean by worth it?


I mean is it worth the trouble of going as far as 11/12 levels in Eldritch Knight Fighter or as little as 8/9 in Order of Scribes Wizard, knowing that Eldritch Knight, when multiclassed, provides only one-third their level (rounded down) towards the overall spellcasting power; in other words, the more you take EK, the lower your highest spell slots and available spells will be. At a bare minimum, as an Eldritch Knight, IMHO, you should take it to 6th level at the very least (= 2 whole levels towards multiclass spellcasting), which means highest class level you'll get in Wizard could be 14 (which, incidentally, is their subclass' cap-stone level), casting spells as a 16th level full caster, with up to 8th level spell slots, even if only up to 7th level spells.




> Is this a ranged build?  A melee build?  Or do you just like being an arcane fighter with a talking book friend?


I fail to grasp what does it matter, whether its ranged or melee build? For the gimmick I've explained in another reply, it only alters the choice of preferred spells and tactics. Hardly meaningful for discussing the level split.




> I continue to think this is viable; I also think you'd be having to carefully select spells + tactics to remain relevant, given that you're going to be a generalist.


Oh, I don't mind a little micromanagement. In fact, I welcome it, since 5e is a bit "dull" compared to the depth of mechanics in 3.5e, which is still, IMHO, one of the best editions of D&D I've played, and the one I've grown with and love the most.

----------


## Zilzmaer

> is it worth the trouble of going as far as 11/12 levels in Eldritch Knight Fighter or as little as 8/9 in Order of Scribes Wizard


if the primary thing you want to do on your turns is use the Attack action, then yes, it absolutely is worth it to take EK to 11/12.

if you primarily want to cast spells and only occasionally want to take the Attack action, then no, it isn't worth it. don't invest levels towards features you won't use.

----------


## 5eNeedsDarksun

> if the primary thing you want to do on your turns is use the Attack action, then yes, it absolutely is worth it to take EK to 11/12.
> 
> if you primarily want to cast spells and only occasionally want to take the Attack action, then no, it isn't worth it. don't invest levels towards features you won't use.


Basically this; if you're not using the 3 attacks per round most of the time it's pretty hard to justify.  Even something like Haste, which I mentioned upthread can be used to attack once + trigger a BA attack, then cast a spell.  In round 1 that can be Haste, then something non-concentration after, so not much reason if this is a primary tactic to take all those fighter levels.
With EK 11/Wiz 9 or  EK 12/Wiz 8 you're a 12 level caster with max 4th or 5th level spells.  I think the key is checking out those 4th and 5th level slots and figuring out what's worth upcasting.  Upcasted Banishment in round 1 would give you multiple targets to completely remove from a fight before you went in swinging.  Wall of Force is, you know, Wall of Force, so if you stuck with Wizard until 9th, that's worth concentrating on.  If you're a primary melee character, then 1st and 3rd level slots can be reserved for reactions: Shield, SB if available, Absorb Elements, Counterspell; and of course any utility.
I like this idea if you mostly attack.  Then of course you've got that awesome Action Surge 1/SR where you can really bring it.

Edit: one other thought: If you like some 4th and 5th level spells as buffs for a primarily martial character, and they don't upcast well you might consider another option: Keep the 8-9 levels of Scribes Wizard, but look at other Fighter subclasses.  Rune Knight obviously sticks out as a class that gets a lot of spell-like abilities that can be used in conjunction with spells.  Echo Knight is a bit of a one trick pony, but it's a good trick, and in combination with mid-level spells I think it could be viable.

----------


## follacchioso

Out of curiosity, what pushes you towards Scribe Wizard compared to another subclass?

The main strength of Scribe Wizards is the ability to change damage type. But as a multiclass, you will have fewer slots and lower spell DC. You will likely spend your actions attacking rather than casting damaging spells. You may get better returns from other subclasses, for example:
- *Divination* is always reliable, Portent applies to many situations and Expert Divination will save you slots
- *War Magic* gets you a solid reaction, +4 to Saves is good and you don't need to worry about the drawbacks, and the bonus to Initiative also helps
- *Bladesinging* is also strong, although you won't be able to use it with two-handed weapons and shields.

One benefit of Scribe Wizards is that you don't need to worry about losing your equipment, as you can conjure spellbook and weapon quickly. Manifest Mind is also useful but you'll get it late in the game.

----------


## Arkhios

> Out of curiosity, what pushes you towards Scribe Wizard compared to another subclass?
> 
> The main strength of Scribe Wizards is the ability to change damage type. But as a multiclass, *you will have fewer slots and lower spell DC.* You will likely spend your actions attacking rather than casting damaging spells.


Mostly flavor.

*That's not entirely true.* Yes, you will have fewer spell slots of higher levels, but lower level spell slots cap to their maximum amount quite early.

*Lower spell DC* is blatantly incorrect, however; the spell save DC is always 8 + proficiency bonus + spellcasting ability modifier. It is not modified by anything related to your class levels or your spell levels. Proficiency bonus is related to your overall character level, not to your class level. The only limitation I can think of would be if the character was built with point buy and for some reason you're not able to increase two scores to 20 (which is easy, even with five ASI's, considering that it's very likely to have at least one score at 16 and two at 14. The said combination would, however, have six ASI's to use as seen fitting.) However, we never use point buy, because it's boring and too predictable.




> You may get better returns from other subclasses, for example:
> - *Divination* is always reliable, Portent applies to many situations and Expert Divination will save you slots
> - *War Magic* gets you a solid reaction, +4 to Saves is good and you don't need to worry about the drawbacks, and the bonus to Initiative also helps
> - *Bladesinging* is also strong, although you won't be able to use it with two-handed weapons and shields.
> 
> One benefit of Scribe Wizards is that you don't need to worry about losing your equipment, as you can conjure spellbook and weapon quickly. Manifest Mind is also useful but you'll get it late in the game.


I know that other subclasses may be more "powerful" in certain ways, but that's besides the topic of this thread. The topic was and remains about said combination, regardless of my reasons.

----------


## Unoriginal

> The gimmick: Since Eldritch Knights knows and casts spells from Wizard spell list, to my reading Awakened Spellbook's damage type changing ability works even with the wizard spells you have learned through Eldritch Knight, even if they're not in your spellbook, because the Awakened Spellbook's ability speaks specifically of having the spells in the spellbook (being prepared not required!) in order to replace damage type of a wizard spell being cast. Obviously you're going to focus spells learned from Eldritch Knight to Evocation or other damaging spells, while learning others (for utility etc.)


Since the Awakened Spellbook's ability speaks specifically of having the spells in the spellbook in order to replace damage type of a wizard spell being cast, you can *only* replace the damage type with the type of a spell that is in your spellbook, and your Eldritch Knight spells aren't in your spellbook.





> as a Wizard, saving up some space - and time and money from scribing spells - in the book.


Worth noting that 5e has no rules about spells taking space in your spellbook.

----------


## follacchioso

> Mostly flavor.
> 
> *That's not entirely true.* Yes, you will have fewer spell slots of higher levels, but lower level spell slots cap to their maximum amount quite early.
> 
> *Lower spell DC* is blatantly incorrect, however; the spell save DC is always 8 + proficiency bonus + spellcasting ability modifier. It is not modified by anything related to your class levels or your spell levels. Proficiency bonus is related to your overall character level, not to your class level. The only limitation I can think of would be if the character was built with point buy and for some reason you're not able to increase two scores to 20 (which is easy, even with five ASI's, considering that it's very likely to have at least one score at 16 and two at 14. The said combination would, however, have six ASI's to use as seen fitting.) However, we never use point buy, because it's boring and too predictable.


Yes of course, the DC is the same if you can raise both scores to 20. However that's quite difficult unless you rolled for stats. Even so, you need to roll very well, and I would still prefer raising CON to 20 rather than INT because you are still a martial character.

I played a Swords Bard a while ago, and one of the major drawbacks was having to decide whether to use the Action to attack or to cast a spell every turn. Overall, I think it's better to focus on just one thing.

I also have bad opinion of multiclass builds in general, as they are always less powerful than the theory. The Wizard levels will cost you a good amount of max HP, it may be worth taking that into account.

Regarding your question _ is Eldritch Knight 12/Scribe 8_, the answer is that there is only one way to find out... It seems you have already decided.

----------


## MrStabby

I think I am going to jump in on the 'not getting it' crowd.

So yes - I think there is a small but meaningful way in which your spell DC will be lower... possibly.  Magic items.  Depending on access a Wizard might get access to spells that boost their DC, but these are competing with attunement slots with items that boost the fighter side.

I have to also point out that I don't get the attraction of the scribes wizard, so there may be a bit of predjudice here.  

Wizardly quill seems a bit of a ribbon.

Awakened Spellbook casting rituals faster is cool, but thats just once.

The damage substitution seems to come with a MASSIVE opportunity cost.  I see wizards as getting their strength from having the right spell at the right time.  To get good value out of this you kind of need a lot of damage spells.  Damage spells are a) frequently not good, b) overlaping with each other as they basically provite similar changes to game state, and c) overlap with the proposed fighter attack action.  So if you are also a fighter with multiple attacks, fighting styles and so on do you really need a wizard ability that then is focused on some redundant seeming abilities.  I get that sometimes you may want to mix things up a bit, for enemies immune to BPS damage, but this is very niche.  And not only are you filling up your prepared spells with damage spells, you are also filling up you spell-book with them as well.  It is less of a disadvantage in one sense - in that you have lots more time to pick up low level spells through adventuring.

Lining up spell levels for the damage type you want with the spell you want to cast is a challenge in its own right, and if you want a spell of level X that does Y damage type, then the only reason not to take the one you already added to your spell book is because its bad.

Manifest mind is cool for scouting and being a light source and so on, but as you get to the levels where you have your fighter and six wizard levels you are going to be pretty late game where this is probably covered.


Yeah - adding wizard to a fighter has value, but I don't see that scribes actually adds a lot to this at all.  I think I would take enchanment, war and abjuration over this - bladesinger as well if the fighter is dex based - although I would probably prefer a dip.

If for RP reasons you want a wizard, might an artificer offer enough of an overlap?  Sure your spells will be lower level but you can pick up a lot of decent support abilities and things that might mesh nicely with fighter that way?

----------


## Arkhios

> Yes of course, the DC is the same if you can raise both scores to 20. However that's quite difficult unless you rolled for stats. Even so, you need to roll very well, and I would still prefer raising CON to 20 rather than INT because you are still a martial character.


Just to be sure we're on the same page, you do realize that both the Eldritch Knight and Wizard use Intelligence as their Spellcasting Ability, right? So the two "competing" scores are Strength or Dexterity (or arguably Constitution) depending on which one you value the most, and Intelligence. In other words, there's no competing DCs for spells, just one DC for both classes, so it's hardly any more of an issue than it is for paladins or rangers, both of which use one primary ability for weapons and another primary ability for spells. I don't see what's the big problem, here. They, too, need to find balance with their chosen scores.




> I played a Swords Bard a while ago, and one of the major drawbacks was having to decide whether to use the Action to attack or to cast a spell every turn. Overall, I think it's better to focus on just one thing.
> 
> I also have bad opinion of multiclass builds in general, as they are always less powerful than the theory. The Wizard levels will cost you a good amount of max HP, it may be worth taking that into account.


Ok, so you're biased. I get that. It's your experience, albeit based on an entirely different class, even if the playstyle might appear similar on paper.

To be honest, Hit Points matter less than Armor Class (or some other way of avoidance or damage mitigation), in the long run. The less you get hit or the more you can reduce the damage taken, the longer you'll survive. It's a simple fact.




> Regarding your question _ is Eldritch Knight 12/Scribe 8_, the answer is that there is only one way to find out... It seems you have already decided.


Don't mistake questioning someone's reasoning for having decided something. I merely asked if the aforementioned combination would work. I didn't ask whether some other option would be better. You do see the difference of those two concepts, don't you? You see, I made the thread solely for the purpose of discussing one "class/subclass" -combination. It's not about having decided anything; it's about focus. Surely you can respect that?

...

As for the Awakened Spellbook (@Unoriginal and MrStabby), I am aware that it only works when you have the desired damage type in a spell written in your spellbook, but not the other way around. However, my point with the gimmick was to choose and learn the spells I'd be most likely to cast in combat as my EK spells known, and only rely on Awakened Spellbook for utility and versatility on the spells written in the Awakened Spellbook, in terms of the desired damage type depending on the need. Or some other spells I might occasionally need besides damage. To Have the Right Tool for the Job at a moment's notice, and all that.

That aside, having Scribe over any other subclass is mostly for the flavor. In the long run, 8 levels of wizard is only an alternative method of attaining spells of same levels as a pure EK could, except I'd have more leeway and freedom on which spells to choose and prepare, since unlike EK, wizards have no restriction on spells they can learn, and can learn basically unlimited number of spells at that.

The quill is a Ribbon. So what? All classes have ribbons. Why would this one be a problem bigger than the others?




> And not only are you filling up your prepared spells with damage spells, you are also filling up you spell-book with them as well.  It is less of a disadvantage in one sense - in that you have lots more time to pick up low level spells through adventuring


That's just it, though. You don't need many damage spells prepared (or known), only the ones with reasonably different mechanics and tactical value. You only need to have the other spells in your spellbook as a reserve, and as Unoriginal pointed out, 5e doesn't have a rule for spellbook running out of space for spells. Plus, with the ribbon feature you get to scribe 60 spells in the same time some other wizard could, provided you have the coin (and while it doesn't say it directly, technically it could be reasoned with the DM, that the gold cost could be less for each spell scribed, since the Quill doesn't require ink.)

As for taking artificer instead, let's just say there is one already, and I'd rather not steal their fun by having the same class, even through multiclass.

============
NOTE: I have not decided for or against the Scribe yet. I'm only spitballing with the option of what if. I have a character that is currently Fighter 2/Wizard 1 (rolled scores as follows: Str 18, Dex 14, Con 18, Int 16, Wis 13, Cha 10) and I have some time before I need to decide what it's going to be.

Actually, I just came to think of it; Eldritch Knight and Scribe don't really have a synergy other than getting spells from the same class list and using intelligence for them, so it might as well be an Eldritch Knight 6/Scribe 14.

War Mage would have much better synergy, especially between War Magic and Arcane Deflection.
============

----------


## MrStabby

> As for the Awakened Spellbook (@Unoriginal and MrStabby), I am aware that it only works when you have the desired damage type in a spell written in your spellbook, but not the other way around. However, my point with the gimmick was to choose and learn the spells I'd be most likely to cast in combat as my EK spells known, and only rely on Awakened Spellbook for utility and versatility on the spells written in the Awakened Spellbook, in terms of the desired damage type depending on the need. Or some other spells I might occasionally need besides damage. To Have the Right Tool for the Job at a moment's notice, and all that.
> 
> That aside, having Scribe over any other subclass is mostly for the flavor. In the long run, 8 levels of wizard is only an alternative method of attaining spells of same levels as a pure EK could, except I'd have more leeway and freedom on which spells to choose and prepare, since unlike EK, wizards have no restriction on spells they can learn, and can learn basically unlimited number of spells at that.
> 
> The quill is a Ribbon. So what? All classes have ribbons. Why would this one be a problem bigger than the others?
> 
> As for taking artificer instead, let's just say there is one already, and I'd rather not steal their fun by having the same class, even through multiclass.
> 
> ============
> ...


Its absolutely fine to pick scribe for flavour, or for some niche ability.  I totally respect that.  However it does mean we need to be clear on what you mean in the opening post about being "worth the trouble".  Its hard enough opining on mechanical advantage/strength of a character in an unkown campaign, but the question of "worth the trouble" when the motivation is thematic is devilishly hard.

So I guess the question about "worth it" could at least come down to frequency of use (as something you won't use will neither add thematic value or mechanical value).  On a typical combat, what spells would you actually want to use?  Of those you want to use, which do damage?  Then we can at least imagine what you might want to add to your spell book to get extra value from these spells.

The comment about the ability being a ribbon wasn't intended to denigrate the scribes wizard, but more I was running though the abilities and I didn't want to be seen to be skipping over abilities in range.  It isn't a mark against the class, just an observation that the ability isn't a big plus for the class.

My personal view on "thematic" usage (and stressing that this is my own) would be to lean in to a characteristic damage type, or pair of types.  Radiant, if I wanted a paladin-ish holy warrior feel.  Force if I wanted an arcane feel.  Maybe psychic for a horror feel.  Maybe thunder/lightning as another theme.  Something like Shadowblade doing radiant damage for an undead hunter would be cool - but I think you would be looking at mostly using 3rd level spells for that with Spirit Shroud in the spell book.  And if you have spirit shroud, would you really need level 3 shadowblade for radiant damage (yes it has merit, but the marginal value might be less)?


I don't know if you have scope to tweak your character (and some of these would be massive tweaks), but there are some things that might be fun to consider.

1) Other sources of spell - between races and backgrounds there are a number of ways to get spells that are classed as wizard spells.  Some of these will do damage and some might be nice to have... off the top of my head the only ones I can think of that are missing and "good" are Spirit Guardians, armor of Agathys and Dissonant whispers.
2) Other abilities that key off a damage type.  Tempest cleric's knockback.  Dragon sorcerer's damage bonus. Crusher, Slasher, Piercer feats (though as you have fighter levels this doesn't add so much) but I can't really think of many non-cantrip attack roll spells that of level 4 or lower that could trigger it - I guess you could scorching ray for bludgeoning damage if you wanted.
3) Switch your martial side to blade pact warlock.  If you are investing in wizard to swap around spells, you might want to have a class that is able to cast spells more frequently to get better use from it.  It still has the restriction that it stipulates _wizard_ spells, but the extra spell slots could be put to good use.

----------


## 5eNeedsDarksun

> Yes of course, the DC is the same if you can raise both scores to 20. However that's quite difficult unless you rolled for stats. Even so, you need to roll very well, and I would still prefer raising CON to 20 rather than INT because you are still a martial character.
> 
> I played a Swords Bard a while ago, and one of the major drawbacks was having to decide whether to use the Action to attack or to cast a spell every turn. Overall, I think it's better to focus on just one thing.
> 
> I also have bad opinion of multiclass builds in general, as they are always less powerful than the theory. The Wizard levels will cost you a good amount of max HP, it may be worth taking that into account.
> 
> Regarding your question _ is Eldritch Knight 12/Scribe 8_, the answer is that there is only one way to find out... It seems you have already decided.


I don't know if the group as 6-8 encounters per day with a good number of rounds, and a character's spell loadout and plan are sound that the choice to Cast or Attack are in as much of a decision as you suggest.
In theory a Gish character isn't quite as good a caster as a full caster, and isn't quite as good at resourceless damage as a full martial.  However, if round 1 = Cast a big concentration spell and further rounds are Attack, using lower level slots for reactions, then the result is an impactful spell in round 1 with attacks that are superior to cantrips in rounds 2 on.  Further, most Gishes can use the combination of high AC + defensive spells to be the toughest characters in the game.

----------


## follacchioso

Exactly, I think EK works better using spells slots for defensive and utility spells, rather than blasting around. You may start with a good concentration spell at the beginning of the combat, but you are better off using your attacks. A fireball does 8d6 on a area, which is nice, but an EK with spirit shroud and 3 attacks can make much better use of the spell slot. 

Spells slots are limited and I would reserve them for: 
- lv1 shield, absorb elements, silvery barbs
- lv2 misty step, vortex warp, see invisibility
- lv3 dispel magic, counterspell, spirit shroud, summon undead
- lv4 dimension door, greater invisibility, fire shield 
- lv5 far step, bigby's hand, wall of force

So my point is that, for an EK, I wouldn't focus on damaging spells, because there are many good options that improve your durability and manoeuvrability instead, that do not depend on having high INT in most cases, and that would not really benefit from most of the scribe wizard features. 

I think it would be much more worth putting the 18 to CON rather than INT, because you don't really need high save DC, while HP and CON saves are always important, specially for a martial. 

There is also the matter of attunement and magic items - you will probably want to focus on items that increase damage or defense, leaving not much space for items that increase spell save DC or increase spellcasting abilities. Buying spell scrolls to copy them to the spellbook is also expensive, your DM may not be willing to give you so much wealth so easily. 

So for me the answer to the OP question "is EK / scribe wizard worth it" is "not really, other subclasses are much better", but it's still not the worst build, so if one wants to do it for flavour then that's ok.

----------


## 5eNeedsDarksun

> Exactly, I think EK works better using spells slots for defensive and utility spells, rather than blasting around. You may start with a good concentration spell at the beginning of the combat, but you are better off using your attacks. A fireball does 8d6 on a area, which is nice, but an EK with spirit shroud and 3 attacks can make much better use of the spell slot. 
> 
> Spells slots are limited and I would reserve them for: 
> - lv1 shield, absorb elements, silvery barbs
> - lv2 misty step, vortex warp, see invisibility
> - lv3 dispel magic, counterspell, spirit shroud, summon undead
> - lv4 dimension door, greater invisibility, fire shield 
> - lv5 far step, bigby's hand, wall of force
> 
> ...


I agree with questioning the Scribes as a subclass, and said as much in an earlier post, as altering the damage type leans into a type of casting that may be sub-optimal.  At the same time, if other party members are doing AOE, and your upcasted fireball is layered on top of others before you close, then I'm not as convinced that blasting is as suboptimal as seems to be conventional wisdom.  That said, throwing out a Wall of Force with strong concentration before wading in is going to be a solid tactic regularly.

On wizard subclass, the EK provides more slots, but again if the basic tactic is one spell and then close, does the OP need those extra slots?  Yes, it's more Walls of Force or whatever, but would the character get more out of 11 levels of some other fighter subclass?  I see a lot of Fighter/ Wizard builds with the assumption that Fighter subclass is going to be EK, but remain unconvinced that's the best option.  Rune Knight, Echo Knight, and Battlemaster provide a lot if the majority of combat rounds are going to use the Attack action.

I think Fighter 11/ Wizard 9 is 'worth it', but I'd be at least considering other subclasses for both.

----------


## Arkhios

> I agree with questioning the Scribes as a subclass, and said as much in an earlier post, as altering the damage type leans into a type of casting that may be sub-optimal.  At the same time, if other party members are doing AOE, and your upcasted fireball is layered on top of others before you close, then I'm not as convinced that blasting is as suboptimal as seems to be conventional wisdom.  That said, throwing out a Wall of Force with strong concentration before wading in is going to be a solid tactic regularly.


FWIW, I have come to reach a conclusion, that Scribes is not 'worth it' as I put it. Yes, the one early subclass feature forces me to do something that may not be the most optimal in combat, and I understand why you have argued against it (in good faith, I'm sure).




> On wizard subclass, the EK provides more slots, but again if the basic tactic is one spell and then close, does the OP need those extra slots?  Yes, it's more Walls of Force or whatever, but would the character get more out of 11 levels of some other fighter subclass?  I see a lot of Fighter/ Wizard builds with the assumption that Fighter subclass is going to be EK, but remain unconvinced that's the best option.  Rune Knight, Echo Knight, and Battlemaster provide a lot if the majority of combat rounds are going to use the Attack action.


To be fair, the reason for EK/Wizard combination is less about having more spell slots, and more about having higher spell slots. For example, Fighter 9/Wizard 11, you'd have a 7th level spell slot. I know it's not much, but for example Spirit Shroud would benefit from that. As would Shadow Blade. Then again, three attacks with an Action is probably better than dealing one extra d8 damage with fewer attacks.




> I think Fighter 11/ Wizard 9 is 'worth it', but I'd be at least considering other subclasses for both.


I've reverted back to my original wizard subclass option: War Mage. Fighter subclass could still be EK, because Arcane Deflection does have a nice synergy with War Magic (meaning, after using Arcane Deflection, your spellcasting on next turn is restricted to Cantrips only, and War Magic lets you make an attack as a Bonus Action after casting a Cantrip). I realize it's not much, but it's something, and it's achieved relatively early (at minimum, 9th character level). However, on contrary to the topic, I'd probably aim for 10 levels in War Mage, and focus spellcasting on spells with concentration for obvious reasons.

----------


## 5eNeedsDarksun

> FWIW, I have come to reach a conclusion, that Scribes is not 'worth it' as I put it. Yes, the one early subclass feature forces me to do something that may not be the most optimal in combat, and I understand why you have argued against it (in good faith, I'm sure).
> 
> 
> 
> To be fair, the reason for EK/Wizard combination is less about having more spell slots, and more about having higher spell slots. For example, Fighter 9/Wizard 11, you'd have a 7th level spell slot. I know it's not much, but for example Spirit Shroud would benefit from that. As would Shadow Blade. Then again, three attacks with an Action is probably better than dealing one extra d8 damage with fewer attacks.
> 
> 
> 
> I've reverted back to my original wizard subclass option: War Mage. Fighter subclass could still be EK, because Arcane Deflection does have a nice synergy with War Magic (meaning, after using Arcane Deflection, your spellcasting on next turn is restricted to Cantrips only, and War Magic lets you make an attack as a Bonus Action after casting a Cantrip). I realize it's not much, but it's something, and it's achieved relatively early (at minimum, 9th character level). However, on contrary to the topic, I'd probably aim for 10 levels in War Mage, and focus spellcasting on spells with concentration for obvious reasons.


Totally in agreement with War Mage.  I think they work better as multiclasses because of the Arcane Deflection rule.  On EK, I'm not saying it's a bad option, and those few upcasted spells are going to be powerful.  It's just a case of comparing those few more powerful spells to the volume of effects you'd get with some other subclasses.

----------


## Arkhios

> Totally in agreement with War Mage.  I think they work better as multiclasses because of the Arcane Deflection rule.  On EK, I'm not saying it's a bad option, and those few upcasted spells are going to be powerful.  It's just a case of comparing those few more powerful spells to the volume of effects you'd get with some other subclasses.


To be fair, admittedly Eldritch Knight is a bit on the light side in regards to subclass features other than spells, so I get the sentiment of looking at some other subclasses instead. Then again, to me, when multiclassing, it's important that the classes have some kind of synergy. Fighter is, of course, one of the more versatile classes in that regard, but eldritch knight sort of begs to be multiclassed with Wizard (or artificer) since, for the same reason, Eldritch Knight is kind of poorly designed as is. In other words, it could be better.

One of the reasons I am looking for this particular combination is to kind of "redesign" Eldritch Knight. Not as a class per sé, but as a character concept. In 3.5 where I first encountered it, it was painfully obvious that it was supposed to be made from Fighter/Wizard multiclass, and it could get almost just as good caster level as a full wizard, so it begs to wonder, why Eldritch Knight is not at least a half-caster instead, because, let's face it, 1/3-caster feels an insult. Now, I understand that the fighter base class is somewhat balanced against it, but I started to wonder, could it be done otherwise?

_==========
Alternative options (in no particular order of preference):
Echo Knight 6/War Mage 14; 5 x ASI, spells up to 7th level; two attacks per Attack action; +2 AC and saves while concentrating on a spell (theoretically always)Echo Knight 10/War Mage 10; 5 x ASI, spells up to 5th level; two attacks per Attack action; +2 AC and saves while concentrating on a spell (theoretically always)Echo Knight 11/War Mage 9; 5 x ASI, spells up to 5th level; three attacks per Attack actionEldritch Knight 10/War Mage 10; 5 x ASI, spells up to 5th level, slots up to 7th level; disadvantage on target's next saving throw against a spell after being hit by a weapon; +2 AC and saves while concentrating on a spellEldritch Knight 11/War Mage 9; 5 x ASI, spells up to 5th level, slots up to 6th level; disadvantage on target's next saving throw against a spell after being hit by a weapon; three attacks per Attack action
==========_

----------

