Warlock Pre-Errata.

[Staffan]

Quicken SLA has an additional caster level prerequisite depending on the spell level of the SLA. For a 1st-level spell, that prereq is also 10th level. If you have fireball as an SLA, you must have it at caster level 14 in order to use Quicken SLA with it.
Not sure where the table for this is in the MM, because I just looked it up in the SRD.

 

[RigaMortus]

I found the chart you mention in the MM, and when I read it, it all makes sense now. I have become enlightened.

 

[Sithobi1]

You don't seem to understand the difference between spell level and caster level.
Spell level is the slot that wizards must prepare it in, and generally determines the power of the spell.
Caster level is how good you are at casting spells/invocations, and most spells(of any spell level) get more powerful/last longer the higher caster level you have

 

[RigaMortus]

You don't seem to understand the difference between spell level and caster level.
Spell level is the slot that wizards must prepare it in, and generally determines the power of the spell.
Caster level is how good you are at casting spells/invocations, and most spells(of any spell level) get more powerful/last longer the higher caster level you have

Well that is fine for Wizards, but since Warlocks don't cast spells, why would one of their powers have a spell level? They have nothing to "prepare" like a Wizard does.

 

[UltimaGabe]

Well that is fine for Wizards, but since Warlocks don't cast spells, why would one of their powers have a spell level? They have nothing to "prepare" like a Wizard does.

Each Invocation, however, has its own equivalent spell-level- that is, when you use that Invocation, it counts as an Xth level spell for purposes of feats like this, or whether it penetrates a Globe of Invulnerability. In this instance, an Eldritch Blast (unmodified by any Blast Shape or Eldritch Essence Invocations) is effectively a 1st-level spell.

 

[apesamongus]

Spell level is also needed to set saving throws - which doesn't matter with a raw EB, but does matter once you add essence invocations. Everyone keeps mentioning the globe limitation, but I think this is a much larger "nerf" from this errata (I use "nerf" poorly there as I don't think it's that horrible, but I couldn't think of a better word.)

Before this errata, a level 20 Warlock's EB would be a level 9 ability, so the saving throw against his frightening blast would be 19+cha bonus. Now it's 12+cha bonus. Even worse, is the fact that there are no level 9 essence or shape invocations, so no EB effect ever has a save of better than 18+cha bonus. If you want to hit undead or anything further than 20' away, it's 16+cha bonus max.

 

[Trainz]

Spell level is also needed to set saving throws - which doesn't matter with a raw EB, but does matter once you add essence invocations. Everyone keeps mentioning the globe limitation, but I think this is a much larger "nerf" from this errata (I use "nerf" poorly there as I don't think it's that horrible, but I couldn't think of a better word.)

Before this errata, a level 20 Warlock's EB would be a level 9 ability, so the saving throw against his frightening blast would be 19+cha bonus. Now it's 12+cha bonus.

Well, it's a least invocation. Of course the save DC should be low, like any low level spell from a cleric or wizard.

Now, compare it with an Utterdark Blast, and you've got yourself a save DC of 18+cha bonus. Much better.

 

[Diirk]

Well you could shape it, but making it into a cone or area effect might not necessarily be very convenient ...

 

[apesamongus]

No it's not.

Actually, yes it is.

I said "frigntening blast". Had I meant "chained frigntening blast" or "coned frigntening blast" I would have said so.

Yes, you can add a shape to make the save harder, but that depends on A. taking the shape invocation and B. the higher level shape being usable in the current circumstances - and all of the higher level shape invocations have negative aspects compared to a naked EB. As it stands now, the change represents a drop in power (versatility-wise) for Warlocks (who are already not the most versatile characters around). I'm not saying that it's a good or bad thing (in some ways it's more parallel the way other caster classes work), but it's still a very significant change.

 

[Trainz]

Actually, yes it is.

I said "frigntening blast". Had I meant "chained frigntening blast" or "coned frigntening blast" I would have said so.

I realized that after reading your post again. You will note that your reply to me came 4 minutes after I edited my post (the "No, it's not" is gone).