[3.5] Binder/Warlock Theurge

[Thurbane]

Is there such a thing? I know I've seen a homebrewed PrC that advances Soul Binding and Incarnum use, but I don't think I've seen one for Binder/Warlocks...

[Mangles]

the combination of binder and warlock can be broken all too easily, i was looking into it and even though im not an experienced player could see many ways of breaking the game

[Thurbane]

Would it break it any more than Anima Mage?

[keilyn]

I think I've seen one - I may have it printed off somewhere. I'll search my piles of paperwork and see what I can find, but it might be a while, work calls.

[Omegonthesane]

the combination of binder and warlock can be broken all too easily, i was looking into it and even though im not an experienced player could see many ways of breaking the game

Post some. Like how in all the "Wizards are broken" threads they mention Shapechange shenanigans and Time Stop.

[PId6]

the combination of binder and warlock can be broken all too easily, i was looking into it and even though im not an experienced player could see many ways of breaking the game
Um, huh? Please tell, how? Neither binders nor warlocks are particularly powerful, and theurges tend to be weaker than their parts. How can this be broken?

Edit: Ninja!

[Mangles]

There is a particular prestige class (though i guess you could just not take it) called the Hellfire Warlock. Its a 3 level prestige where the downside is you take temp con damage in order to really amp up your regular damage. There is a binder level one (can't remember which sorry). That heals you 1 point con damage per round thus negating the whole thing. That being said in comparison to pure wizard and give the fact its theuge probably not such a problem

[Omegonthesane]

There is a particular prestige class (though i guess you could just not take it) called the Hellfire Warlock. Its a 3 level prestige where the downside is you take temp con damage in order to really amp up your regular damage. There is a binder level one (can't remember which sorry). That heals you 1 point con damage per round thus negating the whole thing. That being said in comparison to pure wizard and give the fact its theuge probably not such a problem

Oh no, blaster warlocks can finally keep up! :smalltongue: You could ban taking Hellfire Warlock and "Binding Warlock" if you really want.

[Eldan]

Found it in the extended homebrewer signature thread:
Archon of the Forsaken (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4483757#post4483757)

Good thing I remembered that name from somewhere.

[Thurbane]

Found it in the extended homebrewer signature thread:
Archon of the Forsaken (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4483757#post4483757)

Good thing I remembered that name from somewhere.
Thanks kindly! :smallsmile:

[deuxhero]

Ughh, what was going though the creators head? You can't acess the class untill your 7th level and you don't progress untill the second level? Even the core theurge doesn't have that issue.

[Stycotl]

Ughh, what was going though the creators head? You can't acess the class untill your 7th level and you don't progress untill the second level? Even the core theurge doesn't have that issue.

good question.

lots of things were going through my head.

not being able to enter a prc till 7th level is pretty standard.

1st level being a dead level as far as invoking and binding advancement is concerned came after some critique by others. i'd certainly rather have full progression, but i needed to make some cuts somewhere for balance purposes, or so i was informed. if you feel that it is not justified, then feel free to make the argument and i'll change it if convinced.

on an unrelated note, i'm happy that eldan remembered this thing. an unholy abomination if there ever was one. some words of advice to the op: this prc is very campaign-specific; if you don't want to deal with (or your dm doesn't want to deal with) armagedden, imprisoned outer gods, and other atrocities, change the fluff text around and just make him some kind of run-of-the-mill cultist.

however, if you are in the mood for the end times, please tell me how this class and the story behind it plays out.

aaron out.

[Thurbane]

Thanks - I might try to refluff it a little for use in my game. Wanting to use it for a BBEG. :smallsmile:

[DragoonWraith]

Does it require Warlock 4/Binder 3 to enter? Seems to, you don't get a Lesser Invocation until 4 (not 3 as in spellcasters). Entering at 8 is rough. Being a Warlock 4/Binder 3 is a lot rougher. Father to Son is a penalty, not a bonus, so that's no justification for the lost advancement on first level, being a Warlock 4/Binder 3/Bonus Feat 1 is even worse. If it needs to lose a level of advancement (not convinced that it does, at all), it shouldn't be at 1. You're behind the curve enough as it is by level 1. Maybe when you get that Dark Invocation equivalent, that'd be a good time to lose a level, but even then, yeah, not convinced.

[Thurbane]

Would it be broken if I just took plain old Mystic Theurge and changed it from Arcane and Divine spells to Vestiges and Invocations?

[DragoonWraith]

Almost certainly not, since Mystic Theurge is weak with a Wizard/Cleric entry (read: Tier 1/Tier 1). I really don't think there's anything about Binder or Warlock that is suddenly going to break it.

[Stycotl]

Does it require Warlock 4/Binder 3 to enter? Seems to, you don't get a Lesser Invocation until 4 (not 3 as in spellcasters).

it has been a while since i have even looked at this guy, but yes, it was something along those lines. it was meant to be taken at 7th level. i might have to go back and look to make sure i did my math right.


Entering at 8 is rough. Being a Warlock 4/Binder 3 is a lot rougher. Father to Son is a penalty, not a bonus,

at lower levels, yes. at higher levels, it is a bonus.


so that's no justification for the lost advancement on first level, being a Warlock 4/Binder 3/

no, it was justification for the class as a whole, not a specific level.


Bonus Feat 1 is even worse.

bull crap. a bonus feat is never optimal, but it *never* makes things worse. a dead level is still worse by far.

i realize that a bonus feat there wasn't a popular idea (as seen in the thread), and i have actually been considering adding something else of late, but to say that a bonus feat makes it worse is hyperbole at best and downright ridiculous deceit at worst.


If it needs to lose a level of advancement (not convinced that it does, at all), it shouldn't be at 1. You're behind the curve enough as it is by level 1. Maybe when you get that Dark Invocation equivalent, that'd be a good time to lose a level, but even then, yeah, not convinced.

i actually prefer them at 1st level.

like i said, if people can persuade me that it shouldn't lose a level of invoking/binding, i'd be happy to change it. i have tried a few playtests, but so far, as always happens in pbp, the games never get off the ground. i have built a few of these guys for a campaign that i am planning on running, but that hasn't quite developed yet either.

so yeah, if people want to play devil's advocate and persuade me to put full binding/invoking in there, go ahead. i certainly want it for my npcs.

[DragoonWraith]

it has been a while since i have even looked at this guy, but yes, it was something along those lines. it was meant to be taken at 7th level. i might have to go back and look to make sure i did my math right.
I am, admittedly, not intimately familiar with Warlocks, I just noticed this when I looked up to see how many Invocations they usually get so I could try to judge how balanced giving them another three was.


at lower levels, yes. at higher levels, it is a bonus.

no, it was justification for the class as a whole, not a specific level.

bull crap. a bonus feat is never optimal, but it *never* makes things worse. a dead level is still worse by far.

i realize that a bonus feat there wasn't a popular idea (as seen in the thread), and i have actually been considering adding something else of late, but to say that a bonus feat makes it worse is hyperbole at best and downright ridiculous deceit at worst.
No, you misunderstand me. I'm commenting on what it would be like to actually play this class at level eight. At level 8, you have the binding of a 3rd level Binder, the invocations of a 4th level Warlock, a penalty (Father to Son), and a bonus feat. I'd rather be a 7th level character with 4th level invoking and 3rd level binding than I would like to be an 8th level character with the same invoking/binding, an extra penalty, and a bonus feat. You increase in power by gaining your 8th level (marginally), but you're now supposed to be fighting encounters of a CR higher than you were - and I don't think you've gained enough in the transition from 7 to 8 to be as good against CR 8 monsters at 8 as you were against CR 7 encounters at 7. Your powers have barely improved, while your enemies' have considerably more so.

The usual reason for losing an advancement level early is to prevent dipping that avoids the loss. This is a non-issue for theurgic classes, because anyone doing them has already committed themselves to the class. Even if you have to endure a level without advancement, presumably no other class is going to offer anything that really improves your unique build.


i actually prefer them at 1st level.
Why? Some types of things, this is good (Tome of Battle maneuvers, for example; gaining a new maneuver at a higher level is better, so giving up a maneuver known early is better than giving up one late), but not for most things. This is such a case: if you're going to lose a level of advancement, after 10 levels it's all the same, but before you've lost it, you're doing better off. Since you are substantially behind the curve at 8, losing it then is a bad idea. You should lose that level at the point where you would have pulled ahead of the curve - which is not the case at the 1st level of the PrC. It might be at the 4th level, when you gain a fairly powerful class feature (effectively an extra Greater Invocation), or it might be at 9th level, when you gain a very powerful class feature (an extra Dark Invocation), or maybe at 10th level, when you gain what seems to be an extremely powerful class feature (potentially; I'm not really sure how powerful that is, but as a capstone it should be). That's my argument.


like i said, if people can persuade me that it shouldn't lose a level of invoking/binding, i'd be happy to change it. i have tried a few playtests, but so far, as always happens in pbp, the games never get off the ground. i have built a few of these guys for a campaign that i am planning on running, but that hasn't quite developed yet either.

so yeah, if people want to play devil's advocate and persuade me to put full binding/invoking in there, go ahead. i certainly want it for my npcs.
Unfortunately, while I am sorely tempted to doubt it, I'm not familiar enough with either Binders or Invokers to say. I simply suspect that those features are only barely worth losing 3 levels of invoking and 4 levels of binding, and certainly not worth losing 4 and 5.


However, I suspect we should move these posts to the other thread... I should have posted in the other thread to begin with...

[PId6]

I am not too familiar with binders (apart from Naberius dips), but I know more than enough about warlocks to say that 3 least invocations, one lesser, and a 2d6 eldritch blast is far from enough to get by at level 7, much less 8. And since I know that binders get much better vestiges as they level up, I absolutely agree with DW that the class gives entry way too late and that the dead level is certainly not necessary.

Right now, the class is virtually unplayable at 7-8 and takes a long time to catch up. You're better off just requiring a single least invocation for binder 3/warlock 1 entry and just get rid of the dead level. It's highly unlikely that such would be overpowered.

Edit: Yeah, moving over to the other thread is probably a good idea.

[Eloel]

An advice I'd have is, move invoker-progression L1 to L1.
You still have 9/10 progression for both, with invoker having L2 empty, and binding having L1 empty. No more dead level, not a majorly better class, but still solves the 'CR8 at 8th level will be damn hard' problem.

[Stycotl]

discussion moved to archon of the forsaken thread.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6900985#post6900985