D&D 4th Edition Proposal: Delete Eldritch Strike house rule.





+ Log in or register to post
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. #1

    Proposal: Delete Eldritch Strike house rule.

    The house rule:

    From Player's Handbook Heroes Series 1 (miniature pack). Amendment: Warlocks can choose Eldritch Strike in place of either Eldritch Blast or their pact at-will. (Discussion here and here)
    Because less house rules are always better and many classes (see new essential ones) have now a fixed power choice, I propose to delete the option to choose eldritch strike instead of the pact at-will. This will change the house rule to the current rules, making it unnecessary.

    Or will we house rule similar options for the warpriest clerics, ...
    Last edited by Walking Dad; Thursday, 18th November, 2010 at 12:51 PM.
    Signature

    Hi I'm a comic and rpg nerd. Don't hurt me, please.

    PS: English is NOT my native language!

    May the 4th be with you!

    PbPs

    Invisible Castle

    http://www.d20srd.org/
    Pathfinder SRD (Pathfinder_OGC)


    My Houserules

    I am SpiderClan

 

  • #2
    No. Getting rid of house rules for the sake of getting rid of house rules is silly. I can't imagine that some new player is really going to get confused by this one. The expertise house rule? Sure, that's a little wonky, and I honestly wouldn't mind seeing it go. But this one's pretty simple. Nobody's going to accidentally create a L4W-illegal warlock because of this rule. Oh, and it prevents Cha-Int Starlocks from having a worthless at-will.

    Also, I thought the Warpriest could take normal cleric at-wills. Is this not correct?

  • #3
    NO same reasoning as THB.

  • #4
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoHeadsBarking View Post
    ...

    Also, I thought the Warpriest could take normal cleric at-wills. Is this not correct?
    No, they cannot:

    You also gain the blessing of wrath power, storm hammer power, create water power, and thundering steel power.
    You see, Blessing of Wrath has to be their power. They could take others if they use the human extra at-will.

    That the Starpact warlock lacks a CHA pact at-will should not be the reason for a house rule. Better to let them choose the ability they use for their attack, like dragonking warlocks can.

    Giving them both E.Strike and E.Bolt would make them the only class with two class at will's that replace both MBA and MRA.
    Signature

    Hi I'm a comic and rpg nerd. Don't hurt me, please.

    PS: English is NOT my native language!

    May the 4th be with you!

    PbPs

    Invisible Castle

    http://www.d20srd.org/
    Pathfinder SRD (Pathfinder_OGC)


    My Houserules

    I am SpiderClan

  • #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Walking Dad View Post
    Giving them both E.Strike and E.Bolt would make them the only class with two class at will's that replace both MBA and MRA.
    Ignoring the part where human warlocks could already do this, where hexblades will still be able to do this, and that sorcerers can also do this (Ensorcelled Blade), why is this a problem? Is it really different from a fighter chucking around a Farbond bastard sword, or a Brutal Scoundrel throwing his dagger?

  • #6
    Ok, this was a weak argument.

    But why do we need the house-rule? Just because the starpact power is fixed to Con?
    Last edited by Walking Dad; Monday, 22nd November, 2010 at 02:12 PM. Reason: spelling
    Signature

    Hi I'm a comic and rpg nerd. Don't hurt me, please.

    PS: English is NOT my native language!

    May the 4th be with you!

    PbPs

    Invisible Castle

    http://www.d20srd.org/
    Pathfinder SRD (Pathfinder_OGC)


    My Houserules

    I am SpiderClan

  • #7
    Registered User
    Myrmidon (Lvl 10)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    montreal
    Posts
    3,834
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Mal Malenkirk
    Quote Originally Posted by Walking Dad View Post
    But why do we need the houserule? Just because the starpact power is fixed to Con?
    The house rule exists to accomodate a player who no longer game here. I can't remember the name, but the PC was TsiRi, a githyanki infernal warlock (I DMed her so she is in my library). She loved being in melee so she took the eldtritch strike power but she prefered the Eldritch blast to the Hellish Rebuke pact power. So she asked and obtained an houserule so that she could take both eldritch strike and bolt instead of picking one and being forced to use Hellish Rebuke. I am pretty sure no one else ever did that.

    I was not a big fan of that feature; as a result of foregoing Hellish rebuke, the most 'Infernal' thing about that infernal warlock was her fiery bolt power. Not much fire and brimstone in her otherwise. She literrally did more cold than fire damage in the big fights. The pact power is a signature power; I feel every warlock should have it.

    On the other hand, we are not here to tie players hands and give them lectures about the importance of themes, so I understand why it was allowed.
    Last edited by Mal Malenkirk; Sunday, 21st November, 2010 at 10:38 PM.

  • #8
    elecgraystone IIRC

  • #9
    So, the proposal get to NOs?

    To keep a houserule that takes away flavor and no one currently uses

    Fine by me, I have no direct interest in forbidding the option, I only wanted to reduce possible house rule bloat.
    Signature

    Hi I'm a comic and rpg nerd. Don't hurt me, please.

    PS: English is NOT my native language!

    May the 4th be with you!

    PbPs

    Invisible Castle

    http://www.d20srd.org/
    Pathfinder SRD (Pathfinder_OGC)


    My Houserules

    I am SpiderClan

  • #10
    I personally feel it doesn't take away from flavour. Really, the pact power isn't that big a thing IMO. The curse is more flavourful. Hell, the fact that tiefling's make better Feylocks make's no sense, but that's the way it is. Also, PC's are free to select whatever other powers they want, so really an infernal'lock can grab all Fey'lock powers... should we also police that? Really, I don't care what a player wants to select.

    i.e. just to take Mal's example the other way. Say T'siri took hellish rebuke, but no other fire powers...is she now "better" or more "flavourful"?

    Also, it's the only class that requires you to have a power. I think that's silly. Illusion-focused Mages aren't required to take Illusory Ambush, pyromancers aren't required to take scorching burst... yet nobody rails about their lack of flavour? I can go right now and make a pyromancer without any fire powers... make any sense? No... but I can.

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Proposal: Alter Expertise Related House Rule
      By Oni in forum Living 4th Edition
      Replies: 59
      Last Post: Thursday, 11th March, 2010, 04:45 AM
    2. Proposal: Repeal the house rule on Icy Sweep
      By JoeNotCharles in forum Living 4th Edition
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: Saturday, 15th August, 2009, 06:53 AM
    3. Proposal -- YAFDHR (Yet Another Falling Damage House Rule)
      By Jeff Wilder in forum D&D and Pathfinder Rules & Discussion
      Replies: 51
      Last Post: Monday, 1st December, 2008, 11:20 AM
    4. Sure strike and careful strike, my house rule.
      By Kitirat in forum D&D and Pathfinder Rules & Discussion
      Replies: 16
      Last Post: Tuesday, 29th July, 2008, 01:33 AM
    5. Proposal: 1e Potion Miscibility Rules as a House Rule
      By VirgilCaine in forum D&D and Pathfinder Rules & Discussion
      Replies: 2
      Last Post: Monday, 9th August, 2004, 03:07 AM

    Posting Permissions

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