Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cryptos" data-source="post: 4501174" data-attributes="member: 58439">My whole position on Starlock is that I think they made a bad design decision of making a class feature they thought might be too good conditionally (Fate of the Void) and so they forced a straight Starlock build to split their point buy between two primary attack / damage stats as a balancing measure.  True, there's nothing stopping one from taking powers from another pact, but it stands to reason that some people pick Starlock because - shock of shocks - they want the Starlock powers.  If the ability's too good, don't nerf the class, just make that one ability less good.  And never - NEVER - impose a restriction on a build option that affects the character all the time to balance an ability that is only too good conditionally.  That's just silly.They should have simply imposed a limitation on FotV and made Starlocks a single primary attack / damage stat path like Hell-locks and Feylocks.  Why force someone to do contortions to meet a build concept because you feel one feature could be too good in certain circumstances, when you can simply make that one thing more limited?  For instance, limit how the bonus stacks per tier (+1 per die roll per tier, or +2 per die roll per tier with Improved FotV, forcing the player to split up any bonuses between multiple rolls if more than one cursed foe is dropped in heroic, or two in paragon, or three in epic) instead of leaving it so you can apply the bonus for however many cursed foes you can drop in a round to a single die roll, and make Starlocks single stat warlocks like the others.  Seems simple to me.That said, something like your feat would be helpful.  But then the warlock is burning a feat to help address what I see as a design flaw, when they've already had to split their point buy up between two primary stats, throwing good after bad.  I like creating Starlock characters because of the concept... it was one of the big things I wanted to do first when I got 4e.  But when I compare them to other builds I wouldn't want to actually play one.  And if I build a starlock and take fey or hell powers to work around it, I feel I might as well just play a fey or hell warlock.I'd honestly prefer some sort of revision or customization option in the Arcane Power book to the Star Pact as a whole over forcing a character to burn a feat to "fix" their AC, when that pure Star Pact character is already weakened by focusing on two prime stats when the other pacts only need one.</blockquote>

Verification