Warlock/Binder

[Starbuck_II]

I currently play a Warlock/Binder/Swordsage in PbP on OotS Website.
I use Binding as defense (fire aura from Aym), Warlock as nifty benefits (flight, see invisible, summon swarm, etc).

I never use EB because I have average (10 or 12) dex. I'm more a melee dude.

I don't have Dragon Magic that adds that Eldritch Glaive invocation or I'd have made that a choice.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Ok...so you're going to be a Warlock...primarily, at least.

What is this PC supposed to be like? What kind of personality are you trying to model?

I ask because Binder might not even be the class you want to MC with. The stats that work best for the Warlock also synergize nicely with the Sorcerer, Battle Sorcerer, WarMage and, to a certain extent, the Marshal. Any of which could add an interesting wrinkle...if it fits the PC's backstory.

 

[Dandu]

Hellfire Warlock is an EVIL class, so if your party is not EVIL, then it likely would need reflavoring.

Incorrect!

Entry Requirements

Skills: Intimidate 6 ranks, Knowledge (the planes) 12 ranks, Spellcraft 6 ranks.

Language: Infernal.

Warlock Invocation: Must know brimstone blast or hellrime blast.

Nothing evil in the requirements.

Most hellfire warlocks whom the PCs encounter have likely already succumbed to the temptations of evil. Usually minions in the service of an infernal cult, they lead groups of thugs or devils against good organizations or to hunt down and destroy adventurers. Only in the rarest circumstances does a hellfire warlock resist these temptations and use her power to advance the cause of good.

While mostly evil, as with most warlocks, there can be good Hellfire Warlocks.

And finally, a quote from the top of the page:

"It is not the weapon that is evil, but the wielder."
-- Galena Todrick, hellfire warlock

In conclusion, though evil people wield hellfire, wielding hellfire isn't evil.

 

[Theroc]

Incorrect!



Nothing evil in the requirements.



While mostly evil, as with most warlocks, there can be good Hellfire Warlocks.

And finally, a quote from the top of the page:


In conclusion, though evil people wield hellfire, wielding hellfire isn't evil.

Hm... seems I heard otherwise somewhere, and got confused. You're right. It's not inherently evil, just primarily so.

 

[irdeggman]

Along Irdeggman's line, make sure to check with your DM about Hideous Blow.

If your DM rules it does not provoke AoO's, then it could be rather nice to stack onto a pounce-based build.

Casting the invocation does provoke an AoO, as does anytime you use a spell-like ability. Making the attack should not, but I have heard some people say it does (I can't fathom their logic though).

 

[Theroc]

Casting the invocation does provoke an AoO, as does anytime you use a spell-like ability. Making the attack should not, but I have heard some people say it does (I can't fathom their logic though).

That may be RAW, but not all DM's agree with the RAW ruling, seeing the intent of the invocation that of removing the chance of an AoO on the use of the Eldritch Blast in close proximity.

So, consulting one's DM is something that is a good idea if a Warlock intends on entering melee combat.

The games I am playing a Warlock in(thus far) have ruled that Hideous Blow at no point incurs an AoO. This will obviously vary by DM.

 

[Dandu]

Fortunately, Eldritch Glaive exists, which is better than Hideous Blow in many ways.

 

[irdeggman]

That may be RAW, but not all DM's agree with the RAW ruling, seeing the intent of the invocation that of removing the chance of an AoO on the use of the Eldritch Blast in close proximity.

So, consulting one's DM is something that is a good idea if a Warlock intends on entering melee combat.

The games I am playing a Warlock in(thus far) have ruled that Hideous Blow at no point incurs an AoO. This will obviously vary by DM.

Well each DM is different but no where in the description of the invocation does it imply that the point is to remove the AoO. It states that it adds the invocation's damage to that of the weapon used. To me that is clearly the intent.

It functions similarly to how shocking grasp works - casting the spell provokes an AoO making the actual attack does not.

And I agree with the above thaat Eldritch Glaive is far superior - albeit a "reach" weapon, it does allow the warlock to be "armed" until his next turn and can thus make AoO as well as a full-attack.

From the FAQ

Does hideous blow provoke an attack of opportunity?

Yes. As a spell-like ability, using hideous blow provokes
attacks of opportunity just as any other spell-like ability would.
A warlock who relies on this invocation should consider
investing ranks in the Concentration skill so that he can use it
defensively.

Note that the act of using the invocation, not the act of
making the attack, draws the attack of opportunity, since the
warlock delivering hideous blow is considered “armed” (just
like a spellcaster delivering a touch spell).

and

Does a warlock’s hideous blow invocation (CAr, page
134) require one standard action to use the hideous blow
and another round to strike with a melee weapon, or can
the hideous blow and the melee weapon attack be done as a
single standard action?

Making an attack with hideous blow is considered part of
the same standard action as using the hideous blow invocation
(much like the casting of a touch spell allows an attack to be
made as part of the spell’s casting).

 

[Theroc]

Well each DM is different but no where in the description of the invocation does it imply that the point is to remove the AoO. It states that it adds the invocation's damage to that of the weapon used. To me that is clearly the intent.

It functions similarly to how shocking grasp works - casting the spell provokes an AoO making the actual attack does not.

And I agree with the above thaat Eldritch Glaive is far superior - albeit a "reach" weapon, it does allow the warlock to be "armed" until his next turn and can thus make AoO as well as a full-attack.

From the FAQ



and

Irdeggman, I don't really want to open the(Hideous Blow AoO?) can of worms, but if I recall, somewhere the original author of the class stated that Hideous Blow provoking an AoO was stupid and not his intention.

I may, however, have a confused memory after researching a 40 some page thread about Warlocks on WotC's boards like 4 months ago.

Suffice it to say that some DM's do not agree with Hideous Blow provoking an AoO, which was why I recommended Bachman check with his DM.

Also, I hadn't meant to say that the intent was indeed what I said, I meant to say that the DM's saw that as the intent(whether or not it is could be debated, I suppose). I was attempting to avoid that discussion here, as it's only partially relevant to Bachman's question.

 

[irdeggman]

Irdeggman, I don't really want to open the(Hideous Blow AoO?) can of worms, but if I recall, somewhere the original author of the class stated that Hideous Blow provoking an AoO was stupid and not his intention.

I may, however, have a confused memory after researching a 40 some page thread about Warlocks on WotC's boards like 4 months ago.

Suffice it to say that some DM's do not agree with Hideous Blow provoking an AoO, which was why I recommended Bachman check with his DM.

Also, I hadn't meant to say that the intent was indeed what I said, I meant to say that the DM's saw that as the intent(whether or not it is could be debated, I suppose). I was attempting to avoid that discussion here, as it's only partially relevant to Bachman's question.

Well (avoiding the debate) - Hideous Blow is still a very weak invocation (Eldritch Glaive is much superior). HB still only allows a single attack (since it uses a standard action to activate) and the warlock must be in melee, usually not a good idea for the class. And it vanishes after the attack so the warlock can't use it for any AoO (where Eldritch Glaive specifically states it can be).

So even if the DM allows it not to generate an AoO it is still a very weak invocation.