Warlock question!

[Andur]

n/m

 

[Diirk]

There seems to be little point spending a round to get an extra 3d6 damage when you could instead spend that round on another 4d6 blast... That raises your damage to 14 per round ! And SR applies to that, I think? Away from my books...

The warlock isn't high damage, especially multiclassed. It does have staying power, tho.

 

[RigaMortus]

For the record, my warlock has already been grappled once, and my previous character (a fighter) never, ever lost her weapon.

Guess your are lucky then, or your DM was being leinient. Just because it hasn't happened in your case doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

My group loses weapons all the time in combat, mainly do to fumbling them on a roll of a nat 1. But sometimes they get disarmed as well.

I just started playing a Warlock, so I can't comment on this yet. I "plan" to never put myself in a situation to get grappled. But hey, if the DM is out to get you, I guess you are gonna get grappled no matter what.

 

[RigaMortus]

I've been seeing this a lot lately. A Warlock cannot use Sudden Still Spell with a spell-like ability. Sorry, but a Warlock is truly, truly screwed by grappling.

You should really familiarize yourself with the rules before making incorrect statements such as this.

A side effect of this paragraph is that warlocks, in theory, could also use Energy Subtitution, Black Lore of Moil, and Born of the Three Thunders, and none of them require modified spell slots.

No, because they are not "Sudden" metamagic feats, which that paragraph explicitly covers.

 

[Caliban]

No, because they are not "Sudden" metamagic feats, which that paragraph explicitly covers.

I think his point is that because of how the paragraph is worded, it implies that the only reason you can't use a normal metamagic feat on a spell-like ability is because it uses a spell-slot.

The paragraph in question states that Sudden feats don't use spell-slots, so they work on pell-like abilities. This implies that any metamgic feat that doesn't use a spell-slot could also be used on a spell-like abilities.

I'm not sure if that was what they intended, but does follow logically from what they stated.

 

[RigaMortus]

I think his point is that because of how the paragraph is worded, it implies that the only reason you can't use a normal metamagic feat on a spell-like ability is because it uses a spell-slot.

The paragraph in question states that Sudden feats don't use spell-slots, so they work on pell-like abilities. This implies that any metamgic feat that doesn't use a spell-slot could also be used on a spell-like abilities.

I'm not sure if that was what they intended, but does follow logically from what they stated.

Oh, I see...

I guess you have a point there. I'd say it might be allowable if the feat in question makes sense (ie works as well with Invocations as it does spells). You can't (for example) use Energy Substitution with Eldritch Blast... Hmmm, then again I suppose you could if you used an essense on it and changed that changed it to fire or acid or cold...

 

[kenobi65]

My group loses weapons all the time in combat, mainly do to fumbling them on a roll of a nat 1. But sometimes they get disarmed as well.

You do, then, recognize that fighter-types in your campaign probably drop their weapons a *lot* more often than those who play in a campaign with only the "stock" rules?

 

[Kae'Yoss]

A Warlock would most certainly be in trouble if he was grappled, but the fighter is up front in melee and the Warlock is not (or should not be). So there should be less of a chance the Warlock does get grappled.

I think the chance of a warlock being grappled is higher than a fighter losing his weapon. To make the fighter lose the weapon, you usually have to disarm him. He gets to roll his attack bonus against yours. They usually have a good attack bonus.

And standing back doesn't mean that one of the enemies thinks "screw that. I'm going to get past that fighter and grapple that damn warlock". And then he has to roll a grapple check, something warlocks aren't usually too good at. Sudden still spell (which still requires a concentration check IIRC) works once, grapple works several times...

Still, I would find it more common for a Fighter to lose his weapon (disarm, sunder, fumble on a nat 1) than for a Warlock to get grappled.

Fumble doesn't make him lose the weapon, not in the regular rules. As said above, disarming a fighter isn't too easy (especially if he uses it two-handed and has the whole weapon focus chain for it), sunder isn't used all that often (mainly because it takes time to sunder that big, magical weapon the fighter uses, which might even be made out of adamantine. In the time you need to destroy the weapon - remember, that's usually the main investment for the fighter - he hacks you to pieces)

I just started playing a Warlock, so I can't comment on this yet. I "plan" to never put myself in a situation to get grappled. But hey, if the DM is out to get you, I guess you are gonna get grappled no matter what.

So, if the DM uses a special rule to lose your weapon and has enemies disarming and sundering all the time, that is alright and the usual thing (as I said, both aren't too effective, especially if the fighter in question uses a large, durable weapon), but enemies trying to grapple a warlock (which seems a very viable move), he's "out to get you"?


If we're going to compare things, we should assume that our sample characters adhere at least a bit to the usual stereotypes:
Figher: Strong, has feats to improve his combat prowess (he has feats coming out of every orifice, after all), like weapon focus, combat expertise and all the follow-ups (improved disarm for example), often uses two-handed weapon, which is his most expensive piece of equipment (so it's probably made of a special material - adamantine is always nice due to its durability - and is magical, so you have a big piece of metal with sky-high hardness and more hig points than the party wizard). This means: Hard to disarm, hard to sunder.

Warlock: Not too strong (cause he's usually focused on his type of magic and ranged attacks), and not the best BAB out there - therefore in trouble when grappled, cause he's not too good at it and it screws up most of his powers.

This means that the average enemy will think twice before trying to disarm the fighter or sunder his weapon, unless he's very specialized in that move. The average enemy will know that he can probably pee off that warlock big time in a grapple, and the chance to succeed in said grapple is high.

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

warlocks vs the fighter, yeh there is balance but the warlock sure has advantages

Our parties warlock is a 7th level Warlock human his invocations (two bought with feat extra invocation) 1) flight 2) the dead walk 3) invisibility 4) eldricht spear -his 4d6 goes 250' instead of the 60' usual. 5) blinssense or demons sight 6) empowered spell ability

he flies around inviso blasting with his empowere 4d6 elricht blast, and he will make a bunch of zombies everyonce in a while to protect other pcs or just slow down the enemy...
VERY POTENT PC, VERY POTENT!!

 

[Kae'Yoss]

If you overdo a combo like that, eventually your enemies will catch on and devise a counter-strategy. I don't mean that as soon as you do a potent combo once in the deepest part of god-forsaken wilderness you can find, all your future enemies will see it in that popular "Heroes" TV-show or find you out by watching the Instant Tape of the current adventure, but if your arch-nemesis is a whole organization and you fight its members most of the time, their leaders will hear of it and instruct their minions sooner or later.