An errata for Warlocks?

[Sir ThornCrest]

two words ranged sunder, no more archer!

You are trading off one attack that will probably hit vs. multiple attacks. Invisibility not being that hard to get around, archers can bring warlocks "down to earth" in fairly short order.

Of course, my experiences might be slightly different as my DM has fumble rules.

 

[Rystil Arden]

You are assuming a conventional build, and that's your problem. It's entirely possible to build a warlock that ditches dex and cha, focussing on strength and con. For such a character, hideous blow is a good deal. Such a character might move on to other melee tactics - a few sneak attack dice, bleeding wound, staggering strike, shock trooper, elusive target etc.

Sure hideous blow isn't for a high dex, low strength, range oriented character. Neither is, say, weapon focus (greataxe). Simple solution: don't take it.

If you have high Strength and Con, with no good Dex and Cha, you shouldn't be a warlock with Hideous Blow. If you want d6 hit dice, 3/4 BAB, and extra damage dice on your melee attacks without going for the ranged touch attacks, you are correct in your side-note for suggesting sneak attack. If your strength is high enough, there's no point in bothering with the eldritch blast when it eliminates iterative attacks; just go rogue or a warrior-type. Its only in that shadow realm where your weapon damage isn't quite enough to warrant iterative attacking but you are still good enough to risk going toe-toe (generally between 14 and 16 Strength, with 14 or higher Con if you want to live) that Hideous Blow becomes an option at all.

You argument is like saying, "Buying the feats for Medium and Heavy Weapon Proficiency is great for the low-dex high-con Rogue who doesn't use Dex-based skills such as Hide" or "Crossbows are good for the low-Strength Barbarian." Sure, if you try hard enough, you can make a character that can use any option, but they would be better off with another class.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I think there are some multiclassed Warlock concepts that would make sense, and for them Hideous Blow is reasonable.

What I like about the Warlock is not the damage dealing, which is okay, but some of the weird effects you can eventually hit two or more opponents with. Little things like nauseated and knocked down add up over time to really help your front rank specialists.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I think there are some multiclassed Warlock concepts that would make sense, and for them Hideous Blow is reasonable.

What I like about the Warlock is not the damage dealing, which is okay, but some of the weird effects you can eventually hit two or more opponents with. Little things like nauseated and knocked down add up over time to really help your front rank specialists.

Saev said that he ditched Charisma, so there's really no way the enemy is going to fail the save on those special effects, leaving me with only damage to deal with in my analysis.

 

[Particle_Man]

two words ranged sunder, no more archer!

But you need str 13 to take that one, and a pure warlock couldn't get that feat before 9th level (at which point the bad guys start getting the nasty anti-warlock stuff out). Still, it is one "Defensive option" feat. I use my "Defensive option" feats vs. grapples, but different strokes for different folks.

 

[juliaromero]

Why would you need the ranged sunder feat at all? Couldn't you just attack a held object from a distance?

 

[Anthelios]

Maybe its just the world.. Low magic world, with little "monster" combat. Most of their fights involve pirates, merchant ships or fully armored samuari. So it could just be that..