Is there any practical reason to take Eldritch Knight / Arcane Trickster as a subclass?

[Quadsword]

Seems like all you're doing is making yourself... not necessarily the worst, but definitely the most mediocre of both worlds. Especially in the case of Rogues - the extra bonus action granted by Thief is just too good to pass up.

I like playing battlemage type characters, but that doesn't really seem viable long term.

[brendan_in_china]

Depends how they implement spellcasting rules. If they go correct TT 5E, only the EK and AT can cast wizard scrolls, BMs and Thieves cannot.

[Mijj]

Now that we know multiclassing is a thing in the game what is the point of these subclasses? I do not know very well the 5edition, if someone can enlight me? Why would I pick up Eldritch knight instead of doing warrior/wizard?

[Quillithe]

Originally posted by Mijj:

Now that we know multiclassing is a thing in the game what is the point of these subclasses? I do not know very well the 5edition, if someone can enlight me? Why would I pick up Eldritch knight instead of doing warrior/wizard?

You generally sacrifice a bit less in the way of warrior abilities than going heavily multiclass (since you still get all the core class features and health pool), and tend to get a bit more in the way of wizard abilities than just dabbling a tiny bit (like 1 level of wizard).

If you want to be more of a wizard, multiclass is the way to go, but if you want to be a fighter with a tiny bit of magic EK is likely better.

[Hobocop]

Eldritch Knight is more about making yourself a better Fighter than a true mix of magic and weapon mastery. You generally just don't have the stat spread or spell slots to fully support both.

Same goes for Arcane Trickster. You're still going to do general Rogue things, but with a better mage hand and spells to support that.

[Jinkaru]

Hybrid classes benefit from the utility of two classes. For example, a fighter may have "good enough" stats for what you are doing. For example, you may want the utility of Thunderwave to knock back enemies while you heal, or witching bolt to get rid of a pesky mage that you can't reach with your sword.

[Harukage]

Well, Thief do get the ability to use scrolls, but only at lvl 13 when he gets Use Magic Device. But at early levels Arcane Trickster can do A LOT of things with his utility spells and Thief can not. And if you add melee cantrps to the mix AT is far from bad.
Eldritch Knight is about having different damage types for the right occasion with his spells plus some utility. Also Battle Magic, that allows you to use cantrip and follow it with an Atack. Higher version of that allows you to use full spell.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

I'm not a fan of either of those subclasses.

[Aldain]

People underestimate having spells in the back pocket far too much imo.

They'd be much more impactful were it not for Larian allowing everyone to use scrolls, normally they're unique because of that.

[Jinkaru]

Originally posted by Aldain:

People underestimate having spells in the back pocket far too much imo.

They'd be much more impactful were it not for Larian allowing everyone to use scrolls, normally they're unique because of that.

Not to mention, some single classes are overkill for the content you are doing. Then there's party synergy, buffs, ect. DnD often times emphasizes on "over kill" lol.

[cl656]

No. Battle master is better no matter how you look at it. You can replenish the resource on a short rest, you can apply things like fear, push back, and prone, and don't have to spread your attribute points out to be effective.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Originally posted by cl656:

No. Battle master is better no matter how you look at it. You can replenish the resource on a short rest, you can apply things like fear, push back, and prone, and don't have to spread your attribute points out to be effective.

Champ is better than either!

[Harukage]

Champion is probably the single worst fighter subclass.

[Indure]

In terms of power I would think some blend or wizard/sorcerer/warlock + fighter would be stronger than an EK. It's signature features aren't particularly good unless Larian screws up the action system and allows abilities like Eldritch Strike to be used on the same turn.

The one thing that EK has going for it, is that in terms of playing a magic fighter, it will blend the two more smoothly than multi-classing. Honestly, if you started as fighter you would want to get to 5 or 6 before switching to wizard and at that point you would need to get to ~lvl 9 before you actually start to surpass an EK in terms of spell slots and levels. Which might be 2/3 of the game spent just trying to due what the EK does naturally during leveling.

[RealDealBreaker]

Originally posted by Quadsword:

Seems like all you're doing is making yourself... not necessarily the worst, but definitely the most mediocre of both worlds. Especially in the case of Rogues - the extra bonus action granted by Thief is just too good to pass up.

I like playing battlemage type characters, but that doesn't really seem viable long term.

1) an extra bonus action for thief is a Larian homebrew that grossly warps the balance of the subclass. Admittedly thief was the weakest subclass for rogue, but giving it an extra bonus action goes too far. If you were wondering, RAW (rules as written) the thief is supposed to just get access to different actions through the cunning action class feature (specifically open a lock, disarm a trap, or use an item as a bonus action rather than an action).
2) You take Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster when you want to have only a small splash of magic in your otherwise normal fighter or rogue. And you probably are looking to add spells that a specifically those that do not require an attack roll or force a saving throw (because your intelligence, and thus spell attack modifier and spell save DC, are probably a bit low).
3) The other subclass features are attractive to you for one reason or another (e.g., an eldritch knight cannot be disarmed when wielding their bonded weapon and can summon it to them from anywhere so long as it is on the same plane of existence).

[Aldain]

Originally posted by Jinkaru:

Originally posted by Aldain:

People underestimate having spells in the back pocket far too much imo.

They'd be much more impactful were it not for Larian allowing everyone to use scrolls, normally they're unique because of that.

Not to mention, some single classes are overkill for the content you are doing. Then there's party synergy, buffs, ect. DnD often times emphasizes on "over kill" lol.

Also, aside from Wizard they're the only two classes that actually utilize Int as a stat for anything other than skill checks.

So if you don't have a Wizard/Gale following you around they'll be the only class that can make use of their Int and Int related items in a meaningful way.

...That's one of 5e's biggest problems imo, aside from Wizard, Artificer (which isn't even in BG3) and these two subclasses Int really isn't used by anyone.