multiclass warlock question

[Nifft]

What rules?

The rules on page 104, and stop being snarky.

The only thing I can find is what's written in the book, and that wording is completely ambiguous. (Specifically, "use" could refer to either placing the effect or getting the extra damage.)

Disagree. Use implies activity. "Gain the benefit of" would be ambiguous. However, that's semantic quibbling: ambiguity is impossible because of mechanical restrictions.

If "use Hunter's Quarry" means "gain extra damage from Hunter's Quarry", than the entire ability is worthless, because then nothing allows you to place a Hunter's Quarry.

The table also references "designate prey" for the ranger, which should be Hunter's Quarry. (And as official "real" errata for Warrior of the Wild: it should be "once per encounter UNTIL THE END OF YOUR NEXT TURN, you can use the ranger's Hunter's Quarry feature". Just like Sneak of Shadows, it's meant to give the extra striker damage for 1 round per encounter. )

With all due respect to WotC_Miko, this is a poor revision. WotC, please train your editors as though they were working in a highly technical field (such as legal, medical, software or finance). Because it turns out they are working in a highly technical field, where every word is pored over by sharp and twisted minds.

I've seen this kind of disappointing failure in earlier errata, too (such as the "fix" for Arcane Thesis).

While I can see what WotC_Miko is trying to say, changing the ability so that it works as she seems to indent would require more than just the insertion of that clause. Specifically, she needs to change:
1/ How often the ability to designate may be used; and
2/ How often the ability results in extra damage.

Cheers, -- N

 

[melkoriii]

The rules on page 104, and stop being snarky.

Disagree. Use implies activity. "Gain the benefit of" would be ambiguous. However, that's semantic quibbling: ambiguity is impossible because of mechanical restrictions.

If "use Hunter's Quarry" means "gain extra damage from Hunter's Quarry", than the entire ability is worthless, because then nothing allows you to place a Hunter's Quarry.

With all due respect to WotC_Miko, this is a poor revision. WotC, please train your editors as though they were working in a highly technical field (such as legal, medical, software or finance). Because it turns out they are working in a highly technical field, where every word is pored over by sharp and twisted minds.

I've seen this kind of disappointing failure in earlier errata, too (such as the "fix" for Arcane Thesis).

While I can see what WotC_Miko is trying to say, changing the ability so that it works as she seems to indent would require more than just the insertion of that clause. Specifically, she needs to change:
1/ How often the ability to designate may be used; and
2/ How often the ability results in extra damage.

Cheers, -- N

WotC_Miko is sniffing something.

Changing it to be 1/Encounter for ONE turn is worthless.

Moving the Multi-classing rules even more to the side of

Heroic MCing seems to be the same as "I took a 2 hour class on Glass blowing so Im a profesional glass blower"

 

[MindWanderer]

WotC_Miko is sniffing something.

Changing it to be 1/Encounter for ONE turn is worthless.

First of all, be respectful.

Second of all, this is no worse than getting Sneak Attack for one attack. It's a little less damage but isn't situational. You effectively waste it on a miss, but you actually get it for 2 rounds (ends at the end of your next round). So it seems about right.

 

[Mouseferatu]

WotC_Miko is sniffing something.

Changing it to be 1/Encounter for ONE turn is worthless.

Nonsense. It's the only way to make it not overpowered, compared to the other MC feats. And remember, the MC feats also grant training in a skill.

The first MC feat is just that--the first. It's step one, not meant to indicate full-fledged multiclassing by itself.

 

[Nifft]

First of all, be respectful.

Agreed.

Second of all, this is no worse than getting Sneak Attack for one attack. It's a little less damage but isn't situational.

You are very wrong. Sneak Attack has a precondition that is repeatable, that does not cost any actions, and you don't use use up the 1/encounter ability until you actually gain extra damage.

With WotC_Miko's proposed revision, it would be easy to waste both your Minor action and your 1/encounter extra damage to no benefit, if you miss on that specific attack. That is poor design.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Khaim]

If "use Hunter's Quarry" means "gain extra damage from Hunter's Quarry", than the entire ability is worthless, because then nothing allows you to place a Hunter's Quarry.

Now who's being snarky? What I meant was that "use" could mean both "place" and "gain the benefit of". Which seems to be what WotC_Miko was trying to say.

With all due respect to WotC_Miko, this is a poor revision. WotC, please train your editors as though they were working in a highly technical field (such as legal, medical, software or finance). Because it turns out they are working in a highly technical field, where every word is pored over by sharp and twisted minds.

I have to agree with you here. There are a number of such ambiguities in what I've seen.

 

[Khaim]

You are very wrong. Sneak Attack has a precondition that is repeatable, that does not cost any actions, and you don't use use up the 1/encounter ability until you actually gain extra damage.

With WotC_Miko's proposed revision, it would be easy to waste both your Minor action and your 1/encounter extra damage to no benefit, if you miss on that specific attack. That is poor design.

That's a decent point. If the intention is to allow you to only gain the bonus damage once per encounter, it should simply say so.

 

[Nifft]

Now who's being snarky? What I meant was that "use" could mean both "place" and "gain the benefit of". Which seems to be what WotC_Miko was trying to say.

There's nothing snarky in what I wrote. The clearest interpretation of "use" is "take a minor action to designate one critter as my quarry", and then follow all the rest of the text in the Ranger write up regarding Hunter's Quarry. It's obvious, and it's why practically everyone who read the feat recognizes that it's amazingly strong.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Blackeagle]

With all due respect to WotC_Miko, this is a poor revision. WotC, please train your editors as though they were working in a highly technical field (such as legal, medical, software or finance).

You must not have much experience with these fields. The standard writing quality in some of them is pretty atrocious.

 

[Samurai]

Nonsense. It's the only way to make it not overpowered, compared to the other MC feats. And remember, the MC feats also grant training in a skill.

The first MC feat is just that--the first. It's step one, not meant to indicate full-fledged multiclassing by itself.

Well, since under the RAW you'd almost have to be crazy or willing to sacrifice significant powers and abilities for the sake of character concept to take anything beyond the initial feat (especially the MC Paragon Path), yeah, for many people, the initial feat WILL be all the multi-classing they do, unless they have a DM willing to houserule the later stuff into a usable form.