Playtest: Warlock Updates

[Dannyalcatraz]

No because Warlocks are already on the low end of the damage scale, they are desperately needing a boost back up to other strikers. Due to their inability to get a lot of out of turn or minor action attacks, Warlocks are in no threat of being imbalanced.

Fair enough- it's just that I'm playing a Dwarf Starlock now who is going to be taking the aforementioned Sacrifice to Caiphon, and the addition of more miss effects seems like a big boost in the context of this feat.

 

[bganon]

Sacrifice to Caiphon only works on encounter powers. I don't think they've added miss effects to any of those, just dailies.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Could be- hadn't noticed whether the any of the encounters had them or not.

 

[Mentat55]

Yeah, I didn't see any new Miss entries on the encounter powers.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

That's good news, then. Paraphrasing an old Dominican priest who taught me Biology & Electronics in HS, "It shows they're thinking."

By that I mean that even though they're only considering revising PHB1 stuff (so far) they're also seemingly taking into account material that was published subsequent to that book, so the revised powers won't create more problems in the RW game environment than the "underpowered" standard versions do now.

 

[Spatula]

What are other people's thoughts on the wide-spread removal of "Sustain Minor"? I agree with the article that Curse of the Bloody Fangs (Daily 5) was very confusing, but what was wrong with Curse of the Black Frost (Daily 9) or Summons of Khirad (Daily 9)? Both those had clear and functional mechanisms IMO.

I am assuming they did this so that warlocks could make use of those spells and still have their minor action to place curses.

 

[Ryujin]

I am assuming they did this so that warlocks could make use of those spells and still have their minor action to place curses.

That sounds right. Warlocks tend to be more invested in the action economy, than are most other characters. I know that effects like Daze seriously hobbled my effectiveness; even more than it did the party's Ranger.

 

[Oldtimer]

I am assuming they did this so that warlocks could make use of those spells and still have their minor action to place curses.

Well, you still need to expend a minor action to get any use of the sustained effect of Curse of the Bloody Fangs, so I don't think they did it for that reason. The reason stated in the article was to clear up the language of the powers.

Personally, I think it would be a mistake to change warlock spells for that reason. The action economy is a vital tactical part of combat and sometimes you just don't have actions available to cover everything. Makes for a more interesting game.