Proposal: Warlock At-Wills - Page 5





+ Log in or register to post
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 69
  1. #41
    Registered User
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)

    Atanatotatos's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Europe.And the pbp boards
    Posts
    3,296
    Blog Entries
    1

    Ignore Atanatotatos
    Losing eldritch blast means in my experience 95% of the time you deal JUST a d6 vs a d10.
    ...and you're not a target in return. That's the tradeoff. Either more damage, ore more survivability. Sounds fine to me.
    Current PBP
    DM in:
    Ata's 4e PPvPP Arena


    Playing:
    Koryo of the Tiger's Rest in Voda Vosa's "Path of Enlightment"
    Belleros Arkeion in Sparky's "Thorantar"
    Thormir Brassbeard in EvolutionKB's "Lost-Eberron-4eStyle"
    Anostor Duran in covaithe's "Death's Reach"

    In L4W:
    Alexander Duran, Proud member of the MMC
    in:
    Phoenix8008's "The Captain's Caper"
    "Redblade's Riches"
    Hadarai Polemarkos
    in:
    KenHood's "TURTLEDOME!:Battle Bone"

    In LEB:
    Thusk Tharashk Duran

    Come join us in the Shifting Seas and Transitive Isles of Living 4th Edition, amazing adventures and great fun guaranteed!
    Then to play community 4e in Eberron join us in LEB too! Give life to your characters and contribute to the living settings!



    Please excuse my poor English. It is not my first language.

 

  • #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Atanatotatos View Post
    ...and you're not a target in return.
    No. If you are DAMAGED, big difference. If we changed it to 'targeted before your next turn' is might be slightly more useful. This is what happens for me.

    #1 it does d6 damage. move to next round.
    #2 I'm in melee. If it deals a d6 damage I get free damage from a OA. Still have to wait to see in extra damage kicks in. If I'm 'lucky' I take double damage and he gets an extra d6.
    #3 it does d6 damage and I have to go out of my way to provoke attack. Either I'm missed and get no extra damage or I'm hit and take more than I deal in extra damage.

    In #1-#3 there was no reason to use it instead of Eldritch blast. So it sits unused in my sheet. Unlike all the other at wills, for me it's NEVER a better option, in ANY situation, to use it instead of Eldritch blast. As I said before, I'd spent a feat to swap to another warlock at will. I hate having this useless 'vestigial limb' taking up space.

    The reason for the proposal is really a secondary concern though. You agreed with covaithe saying 'I just really dislike messing with the basic mechanism of the class like this' right? But didn't we already do that by including the new at will? I'm just asking for it to be expanded to include replacing either of your starting at wills. Either way changes the basic mechanism of the class. And the patron HAS the at wills to give. I just can't believe every infernal pact is a carbon copy of each other.

    I hope you don't mind my debating you a bit since you just showed up. I just want to be sure I understand why you said no. Is it JUST because it alters the mechanics? I don't see anything mechanically unbalancing with this and I don't see fluff getting in the way.

    If it's just mechanics, don't we alter, change and ban those in every proposal? Granted it's normally to change the unbalanced to balanced, but is that a reason block a proposal that's balanced?

    let me post something from covaithe since you seem to agree with him on changing mechanics and it's about mechanics. it's from the 'Weapon Training Feats are not Multi-Class Feats' proposal thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Atanatotatos View Post
    I confess I don't understand why WotC have used the Multiclass keyword on feats so much. I don't understand why, say, having some spellscar powers, bought with feats as usual, would prevent you from being able to learn to use a whip in combat. Maybe it was originally for balance because most of the feats in the PHB sucked, but in practice I think there are enough good feats out there now that spending a lot of feats for power swaps is just not that big a problem. I dunno, maybe I'm missing something.

    I'm strongly tempted just to vote yes on the original proposal and stop thinking about it. Can someone give me a concrete example of an overpowered build that would be made possible if we did this?
    This is altering the mechanics because you 'don't understand why WotC' did something. I don't understand why a warlock can't replace his pact at will. No one has shown me 'a concrete example of an overpowered build that would be made possible if we did this'. No one has said why it makes sense from a mechanical standpoint and WotC themselves has said they don't give a flying 'fudge' about the fluff. Is it just because it's about feats instead of a class? that doesn't make much sense to me.

  • #43
    After seeing how strongly elecgraystone feels about this, I sympathize. Normally I'm not swayed by, "I really really really want this for my character," because there are other options. In this case, though, the problem is a forced choice, and being forced to make a choice you don't want just isn't fun.

    So, YES to allowing all warlocks to pick any 2 of Eldritch Blast, Eldritch Strike and their pact power. (In fact, YES to allowing Warlocks to pick any 2 at-wills, regardless of pact, just like other classes.)

  • #44
    Thanks JoeNotCharles. I acknowledge it's a pet peeve of mine. It irks me so!

    And I hope you don't think I was badgering you in my last post Atanatotatos. If this proposal doesn't pass I just wanted to know exactly what it was that made you vote no so I'd know for my next proposal. I rather make a proposal everyone says yes to.

  • #45
    Registered User
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)

    Dunamin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,149

    Ignore Dunamin
    Wow, this one is a pretty tough cookie.

    I’m generally very disinclined to alter a fundamental class mechanism like this, so my initial reaction is to vote no.
    As shocking as this may sound, I don’t find Hellish Rebuke horrible, either. I’ve had tons of fun playing an infernal warlock as is, and found my at-will powers equally useful. Considering that they’re Con-based and receive temp hp from their pact boon, the infernal build would seem to have the best staying power among warlocks which made Hellish Rebuke feel just right to me.

    On the other hand, I do find the warlock at-will restriction a bit unnecessary, when seen in relation to other Player’s Handbook classes.
    I also seem to recall discussion of how warlocks generally are a bit “mechanically inferior” compared to other strikers, so perhaps this measure of added flexibility could offset that somewhat.

    I’m still undecided, so I’ll hold onto my vote and give it some more thought. Just wanted to throw some personal pondering into the mix, even if it may be reiteration of previous comments.

    Will probably vote within the next 36 hours or so, though, to potentially affect the current outcome.

  • #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Dunamin View Post
    As shocking as this may sound, I dont find Hellish Rebuke horrible, either.
    No, not shocking at all. I've had people that like it. It seem strange to me, but to each his own.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dunamin View Post
    Ive had tons of fun playing an infernal warlock as is, and found my at-will powers equally useful. Considering that theyre Con-based and receive temp hp from their pact boon, the infernal build would seem to have the best staying power among warlocks which made Hellish Rebuke feel just right to me.
    I LOVE my infernal warlock. My experience with Hellish Rebuke is quite the opposite from your it seems. I put it in the same category as careful strike vs twin strike. It's almost never better [IMO] to use [or take] careful strike when you can use [or take] twin strike. Same with Hellish rebuke vs Edritch Blast. At least the ranger gets no NOT pick careful strike.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dunamin View Post
    On the other hand, I do find the warlock at-will restriction a bit unnecessary, when seen in relation to other Players Handbook classes.
    This is the real crux of my argument. I can't see the reason for it. As you said, if anything the warlock is a bit on the weak side for a striker. It didn't need the handicap. I may be all alone in HATING Hellish Rebuke but if I'd have played any other class I could pick and choose what i liked. It's quite irksome.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dunamin View Post
    Im still undecided, so Ill hold onto my vote and give it some more thought.
    Okie dokie! Thanks for the input and consideration.

  • #47
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeNotCharles View Post
    So, YES to allowing all warlocks to pick any 2 of Eldritch Blast, Eldritch Strike and their pact power.
    Well if I'm not mistaken, this technically passed 48hours after this post, or 6:50PM on the 19th.

    However, since this happened when the site was down, what is the protocol? Does it still pass. Do we give a grace period after the site is back up? I don't want to jump the gun, but as soon as this is decided, I can finish updating my character from 2nd to third.

    Oh and what happens if Dunamin comes later and votes no? That changes this from a pass to a push but do votes after a pass count [if this IS a pass]. This is annoyingly complicated.

    Of course this'll be very simple if Dunamin wants to vote yes.

  • #48
    Registered User
    Acolyte (Lvl 2)

    Dunamin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,149

    Ignore Dunamin
    This is a serious problem in regards to L4W procedure. The outcome of a proposal should not be decided on a "well-timed" crash of EN World for 2 days or so (as has just happened).

    Since I'm already on the fence about this proposal and to prevent potential fuss, I'm voting YES.

    I'll put forth a separate proposal in a little while, however, to adress this issue so that it doesn't happen again.

  • #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Dunamin View Post
    Since I'm already on the fence about this proposal and to prevent potential fuss, I'm voting YES.
    I could hug you right now!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dunamin View Post
    This is a serious problem in regards to L4W procedure. The outcome of a proposal should not be decided on a "well-timed" crash of EN World for 2 days or so (as has just happened).
    Agreed, especially since you'd already said you'd planned to vote before the 48hr deadline. It wouldn't have upset me if we'd have postponed the deadline till tomorrow. I wouldn't want anyone to feel like I was trying to 'slip' it in without your vote. I wasn't sure if anything like this had happened before. {I guess not}

    Quote Originally Posted by Dunamin View Post
    I'll put forth a separate proposal in a little while, however, to address this issue so that it doesn't happen again.
    Sounds good. I think a 24hr extension after the boards are up and running would be acceptable if a major shutdown happens during the 48hr countdown. That seems fair to both sides.

  • #50
    So, if I'm not mistaken, we have 2 votes for not changing anything, 2 for allowing Warlocks to pick any 2 of Eldritch Blast, Eldritch Strike, and their pact at-will, 1 (mine) for either that or allowing any 2 powers, and 2 that just said "YES". Can Dunamin and Ozy clarify - what's that YES for? If it's for 2 of the 3, it's passed (5 to 2) - if it's for any 2, we're still deadlocked, since we only have 3 votes in favour and 2 against.

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Replies: 32
      Last Post: Wednesday, 12th August, 2009, 12:18 PM
    2. Proposal: Star Pact Warlock additions from Dragon 366
      By JoeNotCharles in forum Living 4th Edition
      Replies: 72
      Last Post: Tuesday, 3rd March, 2009, 07:02 PM
    3. Warlock at-wills..
      By Oompa in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 7
      Last Post: Wednesday, 12th November, 2008, 05:05 AM
    4. Warlock At-Wills, How Many?!
      By Ashrem Bayle in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 6
      Last Post: Monday, 23rd June, 2008, 08:05 PM
    5. Warlock At-Wills
      By RigaMortus2 in forum D&D and Pathfinder
      Replies: 6
      Last Post: Monday, 16th June, 2008, 05:37 PM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •