Warlock question!

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

That'd have to be a pretty expensive bow to come even close to the same damage.

Not really.

An eldritch blast at that level (7th) does, what, 3d6 points of damage? That's an average of 10.5 per shot, one shot per round.

A Masterwork Composite Longbow (Mighty+3) does 1d8+3, or an average of 7.5 damage per shot, three shots per round. Add in specialization, and it's 9.5 damage per shot, three shots per round.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Certainly. But taking away a warrior's weapons is one of the easiest ways to challenge him, so it's hard to imagine a DM that can't even figure that out coming up with anything more interesting. It's like assuming someone that doesn't know the letter "b" can't read. Sure you can read some things without it, but it's a logical assumption.

I must say that I cannot disagree more. To practically all of your post.

- Take away the warrior's weapons and you don't challenge him, you cripple him. Challenging means give him something that he has to use most or all his abilities to overcome, not to take away his abilities.

- Taking away the warrior's weapon isn't the easiest way to make things difficult for a warrior. The easiest thing is to unleash an even more powerful warrior upon him.

- A DM going to lengths to void the salient abilities of the characters isn't "creative". He's a "bastard"

- As we have said: it's not easy to part a fighter and his weapon, unless you tailor the encounter to the task. Also, most enemies aren't at all good at taking weapons from enemies, except the good old "pray it out of their cold, dead hands" way. It takes a certain amount of intelligence to use tactics like this. Less intelligent (or just really strong) enemies prefer to just kill the warrior.

- I've seen warriors challenged by the DM (sometimes I was the warrior, sometimes I was in the warrior's party, sometimes I was the DM), and in several, often quite creative ways. It was quite rare that this involved disarming warriors or destroying weapons, but nonetheless I never thought that the DM was the most lousy storyteller ever because of that. I rather thought that he was NOT because of that.)

- The real art of challenging characters is not to take away or downplay their advantages. It's to give them encounters where they have to actually use those powers, in the right way, and in combination with those of their allies.


Actually, if the length and breadth of the DM's tricks is "take away the figher's weapon, put the thief in a lighted room with enemies with their backs to the wall, and put the spellcasters into antimagic zones", he's not very creative really. Everyone can take away the others' advantages - with tailor-made enemies designed to do just that. Real Dungeon Masters learn to challenge them despite their strengths, not without them

 

[Kae'Yoss]

OK, things are getting heated up. Several people (me included) need to take a deep breath and double check on the stuff they're writing, watching their manners and so forth.


Can we agree that a grappled warlock is in trouble? And that they're not good at grappling? And that grappling is a favourite thing for many monsters?

Can we agree, too, that a fighter without his weapon is in trouble? Can we agree, that this is a far less popular tactic, though, what with less intelligent creatures not even thinking about the weapon as something you can take away, and many strong creatures thinking that they'd rather just tear the enemy to shreds or beat him to pulp?
Can we agree that a fighter, due to his BAB and high strength, and high quality weapons, is actually quite hard to disarm?

 

[Particle_Man]

Um... no, I didn't say anything about any lack of grapplers. That would be something you just pulled out of your ass. Didn't smell too good, either.

Actually, I was responding on that point to RigaMortis, as he wrote in the above post in this very thread:

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=1986933&postcount=21

I was establishing that grappling, as a tactic, is more likely to be attempted and more likely to be successful vs. warlocks, than disarm, as a tactic, is likely to be attempted, much less successful, vs. fighters. So my hands are quite clean, and smell just wonderful.

You know, it is a very nice thread. I suggest you start at the beginning and read all the way through before your next post.

 

[Eridanis]

Civility, please, on all sides. No need for crass language.

 

[Piratecat]

That would be something you just pulled out of your ass. Didn't smell too good, either.

Keoki, this is absolutely inappropriate.

Folks, please scoot up and reread the rules at the top of every forum; insulting people and picking fights (and believe me, this qualifies!) is strictly forbidden. You're welcome to discuss the subject, but please do so politely.

EDIT: whoops! Eridanis beat me here.

 

[Darkness]

EDIT: whoops! Eridanis beat me here.

I think he forgot to update his custom title.

It probably should read:

Bard 5/Moderator 2/Ninja 1

 

[Keoki]

- Take away the warrior's weapons and you don't challenge him, you cripple him. Challenging means give him something that he has to use most or all his abilities to overcome, not to take away his abilities.

I was talking about taking away a fighter's primary weapon, not all his weapons. Any fighter worth his salt is going to have a back-up weapon, usually a light one.

- Taking away the warrior's weapon isn't the easiest way to make things difficult for a warrior. The easiest thing is to unleash an even more powerful warrior upon him.

That's terribly uncreative. Anyone can just give the enemy more HD and throw him into the fray, and the result is likely to be just a more drawn-out battle of attrition. *Yawn* No special challenge, really - it'll just take longer and use up more hp.

Make the fighter think "out of the box," on the other hand, possibly using features of the environment to defeat his opponent(s), and you have a fight that the players will always remember, especially if you use the Armor as DR rules from Unearthed Arcana, and the fighter's back-up weapons aren't damaging at all. There should always be a way for the fighter to contribute somehow, of course, or you just end up with a frustrated player.

going to lengths to void the salient abilities of the characters isn't "creative". He's a "bastard"

If he does it all the time, I agree. But a DM should certainly do so once in a while, otherwise he's "boring."

if the length and breadth of the DM's tricks is "take away the figher's weapon, put the thief in a lighted room with enemies with their backs to the wall, and put the spellcasters into antimagic zones", he's not very creative really. Everyone can take away the others' advantages - with tailor-made enemies designed to do just that. Real Dungeon Masters learn to challenge them despite their strengths, not without them

I wholeheartedly agree. That's why I stated up front that this is just the beginning, not the end, of ways to challenge players.

 

[Keoki]

Keoki, this is absolutely inappropriate.

Folks, please scoot up and reread the rules at the top of every forum; insulting people and picking fights (and believe me, this qualifies!) is strictly forbidden. You're welcome to discuss the subject, but please do so politely.

EDIT: whoops! Eridanis beat me here.

If anyone thinks I've insulted them, it's entirely in their mind, as my posts have contained no insults. And I'm not the one putting words into others' mouths. That is indeed impolite.

 

[Keoki]

Actually, I was responding on that point to RigaMortis, as he wrote in the above post in this very thread:

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=1986933&postcount=21

I was establishing that grappling, as a tactic, is more likely to be attempted and more likely to be successful vs. warlocks, than disarm, as a tactic, is likely to be attempted, much less successful, vs. fighters. So my hands are quite clean, and smell just wonderful.

You know, it is a very nice thread. I suggest you start at the beginning and read all the way through before your next post.

And I suggest that you pay attention to whom you're quoting and replying to. Saves embarrassment sometimes.