Warlock - Frightening or Sickening Blast?


log in or register to remove this ad




Thanee said:
Not really odd, it prevents self-stacking (obviously the main reason for that limitation).

I understand the reason behind it, I just don't like how it interfaces with the rest of the system.

I mean, I could understand, "A creature affected by the fear-effect part of a Scary Blast (put real name here) may not be subject to the fear-effect part of a Scary Blast (prnh) while the first is still in effect."

That way, it works identically to currently stacking effects - like, being the target of two Cause Fear spells.
 


Thanee said:
Uhm... that's an Invocation, which you can use at 1st level... at will.

Bye
Thanee

I'm aware of how Warlocks work, more or less. But don't most people on these boards keep whining that they're terribly underpowered in terms of damage output at the normal encounter/day rate?

I just think that the way it's stated is very artificial and that something like what Patryn suggested would make it a little more palatable.
 

brehobit said:
When I had the choice, I went with frightening. As noted, the fort saves are often better for the generic baddy. As Warlocks, IME, have a pretty low casting stat, this becomes quite important.

I play a Warlock with a chr 10 who avoids any invocation that requires a save.

OTOH, I could see a Warlock with a high chr who specifically goes for "save or else" invocations.

It really depends on the build. Although Vitriolic Blast is an odds on favorite for Warlocks.
 

I'd always go Frightful blast, purely because if someone else does sling a fear effect, then we get the stacking. And will saves are lower than fort at that level IME.

Plus, it has more style IMHO.
 

It seems that I'm one of the rare proponents of sickening blast. The way I see it, if you're going to keep up your eldritch blast round after round, your target's going to fail a save eventually, so you might as well go for the better effect.
 

Remove ads

Top