Implement Vs. AC = No No, correct?

[Mr. Teapot]

My main concern are certain powers in a 3rd party product.

Well, there's your problem.

Seriously, those powers are too fiddly. But the adding your Int mod to the attack roll is a nice idea for a mechanic to compensate for the worse attack roll. (Though it could swing the issue the other direction: making these attacks extra accurate instead of inaccurate).

 

[Mirtek]

Errr.....Healing Word? Sounds useful.....

Well, if he need to sustain the weapon he can convert his moveaction to a healing word and still attack with the spiritual weapon and a standard action for two attacks

 

[Pickles JG]

Grr quote is being unhelpful.

I agree with you. The powers are a bit fiddly & not strong enough to compensate for the penalty or sufficiently likely to trigger. The last one for example should be 5 +int ongoing. Why add a new mechanic for the sake of 2 points of damage? (or maybe it's the timing...)

The first one is like a fair few utilities (without the damage). I might take it as a rogue encouner power as they are not about the damage but not a warlock.

The second one is sort of an interrupt & also weird - assuming you have not paraphrased it if it triggers on an opponent having CA rather than attacking with CA. You can react to the CA before the attack happens which is weird if they are flanking & it's not their turn...

It's the most interesting though again a bit bitty (mind you Warlock powers are fiddlier than most & they have the PHB level 5 attack vs AC Curse of the Bloody Fangs - which I guess is supposedly super high possible damage & so is balanced by being vs AC but looks iffy to me.) Phew that was a long sentence.

 

[DracoSuave]

ENcounter, Warlock Attack 11, Range 5, Con vs. AC; 2d8+Con dmg, slide target 3, target is immobilized (save ends, with -3 to save). Effect: Each time target fails immobilization save, it takes 5+Int damage. Successful save, 3+int damage.

Fixed:

ENcounter, Warlock Attack 11,
Arcane, Implement Range 5,
Attack: Con vs. reflexes
Hit: 2d8+Con dmg, slide target 3 squares, and target is immobilized and has ongoing damage 5+Int mod(save ends both).
Aftereffect: Target takes 3+Int mod damage.

Still, weak. These powers read terribly and just look like 'Let's take all the things other powers have and stick them in there for no real reason!'

 

[Rechan]

Well, there's your problem.

It's not really a "problem". I'm wanting to review the product I got. I'm not worried about the product in my game, but I want to give a good foundation to the argument, mechanics wise.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No, implement vs AC powers are legit, as are weapon vs non-AC. They're just a bit less or more likely to hit, in general, and that's figured into balancing the power. Spiritual Weapon, for instance, forces it's target to grant combat advantage, whether it hits or not. That it hits a little less often than it would if it were vs REF is not a major downside with that benefit added on. /Especially/ if there's a rogue in the party who prefers ranged combat.


Conversely, there are powers like Piercing Strike, Shadow Wasp Strike (erratted to be vs REF), and Furious Smash that would be 'too weak' if they went vs AC.

 

[Rechan]

No, implement vs AC powers are legit, as are weapon vs non-AC.

Oh, I know they're legal. I was just asking if they're a bad idea.

 

[MarkB]

Oh, I know they're legal. I was just asking if they're a bad idea.

That will depend on whether the 3rd-party publisher in question was aware of the relevant pros and cons. From your examples above, I'd tend towards a tentative "not entirely".

Aside from the proficiency issue, I'd consider it a bit of a waste and a poor balance for too many warlock powers to target AC. Having the ability to target a range of defenses between them is part of a party's strength - and the other strikers are already primarily AC-focused, so the fact that he's targeting other defenses is one of the warlock's defining features.

 

[CapnZapp]

Not if it's designed with the intent that the power hits less often.

This.

And stop with the 'nads, will you?

Generally I have found the most useful stance regarding 3rd party products is to ignore them. They are on average of a much lower quality balance-wise.

 

[CapnZapp]

Aside from the proficiency issue, I'd consider it a bit of a waste and a poor balance for too many warlock powers to target AC. Having the ability to target a range of defenses between them is part of a party's strength - and the other strikers are already primarily AC-focused, so the fact that he's targeting other defenses is one of the warlock's defining features.

Yes, especially that any warlock that targets AC will effectively be four levels behind.

Unless AC-targeting Warlock powers do something extraordinary, you'd best skip them.

And yes, I can easily see how this makes the class feel as having fewer options)