Oh noes .. more Daggermaster cheese? (Warlock)

[Danceofmasks]

The issue is D&D campaigns such as LFR.
If you sit down at a table, and 3 of the players there have 'rorts' like this on their characters, you'll end up with a head judge being called over.
Now, if the head judge can't settle the issue in a manner that is consistent with the rules, the con is going to suffer.

 

[Arbitrary]

Well look at that, all the pact blades you find are sickles.

edit - Reading Pact Blades they do have a Special: - You do not gain the weapon's proficiency bonus to the attack roll when using a pact blade as an implement. Arguments that you should get the increased critical range when the attack bonus has been stamped right out are probably going to fall on deaf ears.

 

[FadedC]

The issue is D&D campaigns such as LFR.
If you sit down at a table, and 3 of the players there have 'rorts' like this on their characters, you'll end up with a head judge being called over.
Now, if the head judge can't settle the issue in a manner that is consistent with the rules, the con is going to suffer.

Most likely anyone trying to build a character like this is going to attempt to seek official triad permission first to avoid this type of thing. Assuming LFR has triads like LG did. Of course these types of permissions may not apply to other regions.

With that being said, LG had plenty of issues like the warlock daggermaster as well, that just never got fully addressed. The easiest way to avoid it was simply not to to play a character that you knew half the con would consider to be an abuse of the rules. Of course for some people that was half the fun and most DMs will take the path of least resistance and run the player without challenging their rules.

And finally compared to some of the rules abuses I saw in LG, critting on a 18-20 would be small potatoes.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Yes, well .. LG made some rather ridiculous band-aid rulings.
Such as monk's belt being (only) +1 AC that doesn't stack with armour, without changing the price.
Yes, druids were overpowered, and yes, monk's belt made them worse, but LG made a habit of making rulings that were clearly against RAW, seeming at random and without warning, while the players that had invested hard-earned cash in certain items just got shafted.

If the RAW needs fixing, then the best time is before campaigns start.

 

[Goumindong]

You do not gain extra critical range when using a weapon as an implement. You are using a spell through the implement and not using the weapon. Just as you do not receive proficiency bonuses if you are proficient with a weapon when using it as an implement you do not receive any other bonuses dependant on making an attack when using and implement.

When using an item as an implement you only gain the ability to add its +'s to damage and attack. And that is it.

 

[Zurai]

When using an item as an implement you only gain the ability to add its +'s to damage and attack. And that is it.

So all those implements that say they give bonuses to your spells and prayers ... don't?

 

[Danceofmasks]

Here's where custserv fails you ... they reckon an implement has to be wielded in order to cast spells through them.
I think that's where they made their first error, which then leads to the (IMO incorrect) ruling about wands with fear keywords in their powers giving all warlock spells the fear keyword.

There are clauses on holy avenger and pact blade to specifically remove proficiency bonuses as something you get when using them as implements, and while I agree that spiral tower wizards shouldn't get +3 proficiency bonus to all spells, I'm afraid in the current environment, they do.

Needs fixing.

 

[Goumindong]

So all those implements that say they give bonuses to your spells and prayers ... don't?

You mean all one of them?

 

[FadedC]

Yes, well .. LG made some rather ridiculous band-aid rulings.
Such as monk's belt being (only) +1 AC that doesn't stack with armour, without changing the price.
Yes, druids were overpowered, and yes, monk's belt made them worse, but LG made a habit of making rulings that were clearly against RAW, seeming at random and without warning, while the players that had invested hard-earned cash in certain items just got shafted.

If the RAW needs fixing, then the best time is before campaigns start.

Hmm....the monks belt change must have been after my time. Not that I hadn't seen plenty of people become unhittable in other ways.

But honestly I'd rather a living campaign do something like that then ignore a broken rule. Because you know that as much as we might hope otherwise, there will be plenty of broken things when the campaign starts.

 

[Goumindong]

Here is the relavent text

"A warlock wielding a magic rod or wand can use its enhancement bonus to the attack and damage rolls if warlock powers as well as warlock paragon path powers that have the implement keyword"

"A pact blade[...] can also be used as an implement[for those powers]"

It does not say that you get all the properties of the weapon applied to the attack, it does not say you get proficiency bonuses to attack it does not say you get high critical, versatile damage bonuses, damage die, or other properties.

I.E. unless there is a "weapon" keyword you aren't "using the weapon" you're "channeling arcane power through the weapon"