Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Felon" data-source="post: 2441090" data-attributes="member: 8158">He gave a major clue I'd say, and it didn't just have to do with dimension door. D&D is largely a game of resource management. Having a class with infinite resources opens itself to vast realms of exploitation and would quickly grow tedious for many DM's. That doesn't change just by banning Flee the Scene. Using that small handful of abilities as many times as you can is pretty much the point of the class, right? If the warlock's not 'porting or flying constantly, or not charming every potential enemy he encounters or throwing chilling tentacles all over the place with wild abandon, it's pretty easy to argue that he isn't getting his money's worth.In his design interview for Complete Arcane, Rich Baker shares his (flawed) logic:Smell the brain fart? If not, look back at Ozmar's post. Rich's little formula falls apart the second you factor in that D&D is not measured entirely in combat rounds. The point of a lot of non-combat obstacles is not to kill the PC's, but rather to force them to expend resources, or to make them do things the hard way for fear of consuming a resource prematurely. The warlock can throw a lot of that out the window. I think the ideal way to circumvent that issue would be to replace limited uses with a built-in potential for backlash with the more abuse-prone invocations (the sending invocation is a good example). Then it's back to being a matter of tactical resource management, but of a kind all its own. So, for instance, the warlock can charm all he wants, but any foe that shakes off the effect instantly becomes murderously hostile towards him. Maybe he can see the unseen all day long, but it shifts his focus off of the visible world and makes spot checks a little harder against non-invisible creatures.</blockquote>

Verification