Is this an umbalancing feat?

[Dusk Eclipse]

I was wondering if a feat that lets you add eldritch damage to unarmed strikes damage would be too umbalancing for a warlock who has improved unarmed strike or multiclasses to monk/unarmed swordsage.

I was thinking on maybe having to spend your swift action to this, also the attacks would be still normal attacks.

I based this ideda from the feat eldritch claws in dragon # 358

so any thoughts?

[Innis Cabal]

Is it unbalanced adding sneak attack to unarmed damage?

[Dusk Eclipse]

Is it unbalanced adding sneak attack to unarmed damage?

not really but I was kinda hopping to use it in a shadow pouncing build....

[jguy]

I don't think so since Eldritch blast is a touch attack while if you want to use it through a fist would be a normal attack required to hit. Also means you need to be in melee so you are being put in danger. Only way it can be very unbalanced is when combined with multiple attacks but that seems to balance the danger

[Flickerdart]

Not really, considering that a TWF Rogue will still be outdoing you in terms of damage and attacks per round.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Ok so.. something like



Eldritch Strike
Pre-requisite: Eldritch Blast 2d6, Improved Unarmed Strike
Definition: You have learned to channel your eldritch powers through your body.
Benefit: By spending s swift action you can add your eldritch blast damage to all your unarmed attacks.

[FinalJustice]

If it's a normal attack, not a touch, I'd ditch the Swift Action and let it count 'as part of an attack action'. Compare to Eldritch Glaive, you get reach, touch, and AoOs. Doesn't seem imbalanced, unless you consider Glaive imba to begin with.

It will get nasty with Hellfire Warlock, but that comes with a price, as you are hurting your Con in melee range.

[Seatbelt]

You need a duration like "For X rounds" or "For this round." As written, and using D&D logic, I spend a swift action once and I always have it up, until something drops me and the buff ends.

[Dusk Eclipse]

I'll take that into account, If the DM says no... well I can ask for eldritch claws...

[Anasazi]

It seems like what you're asking for is to allow the combination of your eldritch with fury of blows, which, yes is very over powered, even if it does make sense. theres a reason why the spellsword only allows for one spell at a time to be included in its attacks.
if you where to limit to one attack per round, then yes, that would be somewhat balanced but it would still need a downside added into the setup.

Its sounding more like a PrC than anything at this point, skip the feat, build the PrC, I'm sure it would be popular, if not a bit broken.

[Dusk Eclipse]

It seems like what you're asking for is to allow the combination of your eldritch with fury of blows, which, yes is very over powered, even if it does make sense. theres a reason why the spellsword only allows for one spell at a time to be included in its attacks.
if you where to limit to one attack per round, then yes, that would be somewhat balanced but it would still need a downside added into the setup.

Its sounding more like a PrC than anything at this point, skip the feat, build the PrC, I'm sure it would be popular, if not a bit broken.

never hombrewed anything except one or two feats, so I don't know were to start ^_^U

[Piedmon_Sama]

It doesn't seem that overpowered to me at all. IMC, I've heavily altered the monk to make her competitive with the other frontliners (allowed Flurrying as a partial attack, given her the Fighter's class AC bonus on top of her WIS mod) but there's still no getting around the fact she can barely do damage. Our party would probably be considered very unoptimized by this board, but the monk gaining +2d6 or 3d6 to damage would even things out, not give her a huge advantage.

[weenie]

As long as you don't let people use items, that boost your eldritch blast damage, I think it should be OK, because more EB = less BaB and other martial goodness.

[Starbuck_II]

Doesn't it nullify Hideous Blow? That is what it does.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Doesn't it nullify Hideous Blow? That is what it does.

AFB but isn't hideaous blow restricted to one attack?

[Olo Demonsbane]

It seems like what you're asking for is to allow the combination of your eldritch with fury of blows, which, yes is very over powered, even if it does make sense. theres a reason why the spellsword only allows for one spell at a time to be included in its attacks.

This is not overpowered. The Spellsword is underpowered. Additionally, those are spells, this is an eldritch blast. HUGE difference.


if you where to limit to one attack per round, then yes, that would be somewhat balanced but it would still need a downside added into the setup.

Like...the fact that you are using a standard attack instead of a touch attack?


Its sounding more like a PrC than anything at this point, skip the feat, build the PrC, I'm sure it would be popular, if not a bit broken.

This is in no means overpowered as a feat. It is underpowered compared to an ascetic rouge...and ascetic rouges are not that powerful. Unless you are jacking up your unarmed damage, you will easily do less damage than a glaivelock, which can power attack for full and still have a better chance of hitting.

If I were your DM, I would allow it. I would also allow it as a Least invocation.

[tyckspoon]

It seems like what you're asking for is to allow the combination of your eldritch with fury of blows, which, yes is very over powered, even if it does make sense. theres a reason why the spellsword only allows for one spell at a time to be included in its attacks.
if you where to limit to one attack per round, then yes, that would be somewhat balanced but it would still need a downside added into the setup.


You can already do a Full Attack of Eldritch touch attacks, at reach, with high Power Attack returns by way of Eldritch Glaive. Trading that down to normal attack rolls, with a class that is not known for achieving high to-hit bonuses, without reach (and neither Monks nor Warlocks hold up very well if they eat a monster's Full Attack in trade) seems like a pretty fair trade for a feat.


Doesn't it nullify Hideous Blow? That is what it does.

Hideous Blow nullifies Hideous Blow. There is no reason to attempt to protect the niches of uselessly weak abilities.

[Seatbelt]

theres a reason why the spellsword only allows for one spell at a time to be included in its attacks.


Because you can do things like bestow negative levels, or get up to 10D6 in damage that also acts as magical healing, or status effect/you loose spells.
This is less like the spell sword and more like the TWF rogue with sneak attack.

[Dusk Eclipse]

well maybe MY intention makes it a bit OP I think, I thought of this feat when I was trying to build a shadow pouncer build, that could attack with eldritch blast damage.

[Gnaeus]

The real question to ask in response to "is this overpowered" is "Overpowered compared to whom?"

Is it overpowered compared to tier 1-2 casters? Clearly not. I can think of very few situations in which I would rather have a Monklock than a cleric, druid or wizard. (WLD, maybe, or some scenario where you get captured and your spell components are taken away. I still think I'd go with the druid.)

Is it overpowered compared to optimized melee? Also no. An ubercharger laughs at your damage. A lockdown build can neutralize opponents and still probably comes close to your damage. A TWF rogue has as much utility as you do and as mentioned can still probably beat your damage, especially if tricks like flask rogues are allowed. You won't steal the game from any ToB character, or a Psi Warrior, etc...

Is it overpowered compared to vanilla monk, or a typical sword and board or TWF fighter? Yes.

So what does your group look like and how good are their optimization chops?

[Dusk Eclipse]

The idea initially came when a friend invited me to a high level adventure, since I haven't played that one I don't know much about the other players, except the friend who invited me plays a wizard who abuses shapechange, so I think I'll be right on that game.

The other is that I want to try this on a PbP game, so I am not sure on the optimization level of the game, or even If I am accepted.

[The Shadowmind]

Edit:Missed the Op already knowing that.
Doesn't really seem all that overpowering to me.

[Critical]

You can flurry with Eldritch by RAW! Eldritch Glaive invocation + Shou Disciple.

[Escheton]

there is a invocation that lets you apply the blast to a single weaponhit, use that and keep it at 1 hit.
What you are trying to do is overpowered and you know it, you just want validation from other powergaming cheeseheads.

edit: ok maybe a bit harsh, and perhaps you are a new player and truely wonder if your idea is balanced.
It's nifty, but no, no it is not

[lvl 1 sharnian]

there is a invocation that lets you apply the blast to a single weaponhit, use that and keep it at 1 hit.
What you are trying to do is overpowered and you know it, you just want validation from other powergaming cheeseheads.

It would certainly more overpowered than something that would allow you to change your eldritch blast into a reach weapon that hits with a touch attack and let Power Attack apply to it as a full attack

[Math_Mage]

there is a invocation that lets you apply the blast to a single weaponhit, use that and keep it at 1 hit.
What you are trying to do is overpowered and you know it, you just want validation from other powergaming cheeseheads.

edit: ok maybe a bit harsh, and perhaps you are a new player and truely wonder if your idea is balanced.
It's nifty, but no, no it is not

It's overpowered compared to the invocation. It's not overpowered compared to, say, Eldritch Glaive. And it's underpowered compared to the Shapechange-abusing wizard in his party. Everything is relative.

[Escheton]

just read up on eldritch glaive, they really beefed up the warlock there.
And after reading that I figure you could make a unarmed version of it, sure.
But damn, thats a tiershift right there.

[Tinydwarfman]

just read up on eldritch glaive, they really beefed up the warlock there.
And after reading that I figure you could make a unarmed version of it, sure.
But damn, thats a tiershift right there.

Yay, it goes from tier 4 to low 3! That is, before you factor in the levels of monk he is taking. Not exactly revolutionary. And try to be less insulting next time. For reference, Hideous Blow (the invocation you're talking about) is ridiculously bad. One melee attack, and you still take an AoO?!? I don't know anybody who would have actually picked it. This actually requires that you take IUS or levels in monk, and is not as good as the glaive anyway for making full attacks.

[Flickerdart]

there is a invocation that lets you apply the blast to a single weaponhit, use that and keep it at 1 hit.
What you are trying to do is overpowered and you know it, you just want validation from other powergaming cheeseheads.

edit: ok maybe a bit harsh, and perhaps you are a new player and truely wonder if your idea is balanced.
It's nifty, but no, no it is not
Hideous Blow is not well-balanced by any means. By that logic, all classes except Truenamer are unbalanced because they are vastly more powerful than the Truenamer. Warlocks are fairly weak as-is. Monks are even weaker. Making a feat that lets you combine the two more effectively is not overpowered by any stretch of the imagination. The ability to add 1/2 HD of d6es to every attack you make already exists, on the Rogue. With the cost of a feat, the Monklock will be able to do the same thing, but less effectively. Rogue is not even an especially powerful class.

So how is taking two weak classes and making them pay a price to be almost as good as another fairly weak class overpowered?

[FlamingKobold]

I don't have the exact text on hand, so I'm not entirely sure if this works. In dragon 355, there's a feat called beast strike. It lets you add claw damage to unarmed damage. Your claw attacks deal unarmed damage + eldritch blast damage. So, with beast strike, you have 2x unarmed damage + eldritch blast damage and it's flurry-able.

Is this legal? Even if it is, would any DM ever allow it?

[Escheton]

how is hideous blow not balanced?
you change a ranged touch attack (subject to sr) into a normal weaponhit(subject to sr) with weapondmg added in. Perfectly balanced right there. You hit less but get weapondmg to offset that. The abuse or clever ruleuse or whatever that follows unbalances it.

Eldritch glaive, what basicly gives you a brilliant energy glaive that deals eldritch dmg(subject to sr). That I find unbalanced as is.
And making a version of it that could apply eldritch dmg many times in 1 round to an opponent (not counting AoO nonsense) goes agains the concept of the warlock. Which is doing 1 blast per round and use his other sly invocations to mess with people. While getting more resilient as lvls increase Yes some shapes add weapondmg or give 2 such attacks. But that is regardless of bab or whatknot.

Dipping monk lvls doesnt make you weaker, they are good at what they do, and you take lvls in that class if that is what you want to do better.

Rogues are a skillbased class with a situational damagebonus that makes the class at least somewhat usefull in combat, but is not meant for open combat.
Balanced, unless your party never bothers with balancechecks, traps or taking time to scout and use the surroundings and situation to your benefit. And such things. Powercombatplay basicly...

I'm prolly still missing a point or 2, but this is way to many words to elaborate on an already made point.
If needed Ill add more later

[Krazddndfreek]

I don't have the exact text on hand, so I'm not entirely sure if this works. In dragon 355, there's a feat called beast strike. It lets you add claw damage to unarmed damage. Your claw attacks deal unarmed damage + eldritch blast damage. So, with beast strike, you have 2x unarmed damage + eldritch blast damage and it's flurry-able.

Is this legal? Even if it is, would any DM ever allow it?

Beast Strike allows you to add the damage from your natural attack damage to your unarmed strike damage. Eldritch blast or any refluffed eldritch essence can never be a natural attack as they are supernatural abilities.

EDIT: @^ What the hell have you been smoking? Warlock has his crappy average Bab already making it very difficult to hit vs. touch. On top of that, a warlock is already MAD by requiring CHA and dex, why penalize the character further and make him more MAD? In addition, because of the average bab and difficult to acquire STR, he has a very low attack bonus, that will likely be even lower than the TWF rogue, and he gets more attacks too. Even a fighter would be a better option than hideous blow.

And when has the concept of the warlock ever been, "Even though the only thing I can do is fire pink lazor beams can cast spells like a cheap wizard knockoff I can't be good at it"?

Dipping monk levels would also make you much weaker as a warlock because you lose out on your main class feature in place of something you shouldn't even be using.

[FlamingKobold]

Krazddndfreek: like I said, no exact text on hand. However, I thought that beast strike explicitly said "claw or slam" rather than natural attack. And Eldritch claws says it gives you two "claw attacks." Also, aren't all claws natural weapons? I'm not sure. If someone has the exact text of both, could you clarify?


how is hideous blow not balanced?
you change a ranged touch attack (subject to sr) into a normal weaponhit(subject to sr) with weapondmg added in. Perfectly balanced right there. You hit less but get weapondmg to offset that. The abuse or clever ruleuse or whatever that follows unbalances it.

Eldritch glaive, what basicly gives you a brilliant energy glaive that deals eldritch dmg(subject to sr). That I find unbalanced as is.
And making a version of it that could apply eldritch dmg many times in 1 round to an opponent (not counting AoO nonsense) goes agains the concept of the warlock. Which is doing 1 blast per round and use his other sly invocations to mess with people. While getting more resilient as lvls increase Yes some shapes add weapondmg or give 2 such attacks. But that is regardless of bab or whatknot.

Dipping monk lvls doesnt make you weaker, they are good at what they do, and you take lvls in that class if that is what you want to do better.

Rogues are a skillbased class with a situational damagebonus that makes the class at least somewhat usefull in combat, but is not meant for open combat.
Balanced, unless your party never bothers with balancechecks, traps or taking time to scout and use the surroundings and situation to your benefit. And such things. Powercombatplay basicly...

I'm prolly still missing a point or 2, but this is way to many words to elaborate on an already made point.
If needed Ill add more later

...

this is ridiculous. Hideous blow is less likely to hit, when you're already MAD and have average BAB. It provokes an attack of opportunity, and limits you to a single attack. How is this in any way good?

Eldritch glaive isn't unbalanced. It makes the warlock almost useful. If you're in a part of monks and CW samurais, sure. But if you're with reasonably intelligent players that think survival is good, you'll still be sub-par.

You're "concept of the warlock" is a guy that fails at everything, does less damage than anyone, and has a few invocations that can't be used in the same round that he tries to deal damage and probably arent that helpful in combat anyway? You should say that at the beginning...

Monks aren't good at anything. Unless you're Sir Giacomo or haven't played this game very often, you know that monks are really bad. At everything. UA swordsage is drastically superior in every aspect.

Rogues should be sneak attacking all the time, if you're intelligent.

Your "point" is wrong. This would be a step towards making the warlock useful in a world that isn't S+B fighters, healbot clerics and blaster wizards. With monks as superstars.

[Kylarra]

Actually, monk as a 2/4 level dip isn't horrible. Taking straight monk is, of course, suboptimal, but small dips are not inherently.

[Krazddndfreek]

Natural weapons are weapons that are physically a part of a creature.
Last I checked claws made of conjured eldritch energy wasn't ever actually a part of a creature. And besides, does Eldritch Claw say they're natural attacks? If it does, then they're natural attacks, if it doesn't, then they're not.

EDIT: Never dip more than one level in monk. Two if you absolutely have to, but never more.

[FlamingKobold]

Last I checked claws made of conjured eldritch energy wasn't ever actually a part of a creature. And besides, does Eldritch Claw say they're natural attacks? If it does, then they're natural attacks, if it doesn't, then they're not.

EDIT: Never dip more than one level in monk. Two if you absolutely have to, but never more.

That's what I'm not sure of... Also, do you know if beast strike explicitly says natural attack? I think it just says claw or slam damage.

[Volthawk]

Just to clarify, the PbP game is one I'm DMing, and it's gestalt.

[Krazddndfreek]

Huh, it looks like you're right. However, it shouldn't really be an issue as most Dragon material is frowned upon by DMs.

EDIT: ...CHA is for their invocation saves

[Escheton]

what have you been smoking?
a warlock doesnt even need cha.
ya could, if you are bent on being suave and want specific invocations.
But otherwise, no need whatsoever.
int ya dont need.
wis and dex only if thats the only source of ac and because you prefer ranged attacks.
Making a str based warlock with a greatsword or a monkdip totally works.
And works in any situation, even when the guards confiscated your gear or whatever situational discomfort.
It's not as powerfull as other things might be, but its always on. something that might have been forgotten here and there.

edit, seeing it seems there was a reaction to the post I undeleted it and so it now jumped 1 spot

[FlamingKobold]

Well, the DM's in this thread. Why not ask him now?

Volthawk: Would beast strike combined with eldritch claws be okay? It's not cheesy by any stretch of the imagination, and is easily outdone by a blaster caster, which is immensely subpar. It wouldn't ruin the game at all.

Ignore everything Escheton has said. He has no sense of balance or how people use strategy in combat, so his point of view is, regrettably, insufficient for a normal gaming group.

Keep in mind that, if it becomes overpowered, you can always talk to your players aabout it. Also, it will cost him two feats, which is a significant burden.

Edit: Escheton, you further my views that you don't understand normal gameplay with warlocks. Please keep blatant insults to a minimum, as it's not anything we want to see on this forum.

You just said that warlocks used their invocations a lot as part of your "concept of a warlock" thing, but don't know what stat the save is keyed off of.

Warlocks need Cha (for saves), Dex (AC and ranged attacks) and con (d6 HD, i think. Also, you want to go into melee? With a class that doesn't lend itself to high AC? Have fun dying. Add Str to that, you're at 4 stats. Now you add monk and need wis. Also, you want skill points, so a moderate int is good too. And you don't think they're MAD...

[Volthawk]

Well, I don't have access to Dragon 355, so no.

[FlamingKobold]

Okay, then here's a homebrew feat:

Eldritch Fist [General]
Prerequisites: Eldritch Blast 2d6, Improved Unarmed Strike
Benefit: You may add your eldritch blast damage to your unarmed strike damage.
Special: This may be used with abilities such as the monk's flurry of blows ability.

Not overpowered at all. It makes a monklock sort of decent. Like, about half of a glaivelock.

[Volthawk]

Okay, then here's a homebrew feat:

Eldritch Fist [General]
Prerequisites: Eldritch Blast 2d6, Improved Unarmed Strike
Benefit: You may add your eldritch blast damage to your unarmed strike damage.
Special: This may be used with abilities such as the monk's flurry of blows ability.

Dusk had alreay made it...



Eldritch Strike
Pre-requisite: Eldritch Blast 2d6, Improved Unarmed Strike
Definition: You have learned to channel your eldritch powers through your body.
Benefit:You can add your eldritch blast damage to all your unarmed attacks.

[Krazddndfreek]

Yes, but FlamingKobold's looks nicer :smallwink:

[Volthawk]

Yes, but FlamingKobold's looks nicer :smallwink:

Yeah, but I was just saying that it was already done.

[Escheton]

Well, the DM's in this thread. Why not ask him now?

Volthawk: Would beast strike combined with eldritch claws be okay? It's not cheesy by any stretch of the imagination, and is easily outdone by a blaster caster, which is immensely subpar. It wouldn't ruin the game at all.

Ignore everything Escheton has said. He has no sense of balance or how people use strategy in combat, so his point of view is, regrettably, insufficient for a normal gaming group.

Keep in mind that, if it becomes overpowered, you can always talk to your players aabout it. Also, it will cost him two feats, which is a significant burden.

Edit: Escheton, you further my views that you don't understand normal gameplay with warlocks. Please keep blatant insults to a minimum, as it's not anything we want to see on this forum.

You just said that warlocks used their invocations a lot as part of your "concept of a warlock" thing, but don't know what stat the save is keyed off of.

Warlocks need Cha (for saves), Dex (AC and ranged attacks) and con (d6 HD, i think. Also, you want to go into melee? With a class that doesn't lend itself to high AC? Have fun dying. Add Str to that, you're at 4 stats. Now you add monk and need wis. Also, you want skill points, so a moderate int is good too. And you don't think they're MAD...

No, I dont think they have to be.
you only need charisma if you choose specific invocations just like a caster doesnt really need a high abilityscore if he just targets allies and himself. Casters just have extra benefits from their "main" score that warlock doesnt have so a low cha warlock works fine.
There are many ways to boost ac, wis and dex is one of them. Indeed the class is intended as a ranged blaster with relative low ac. There are many ways to fix that. If you feel like mixing things up you prolly know the standard way of playing something and how to work the strengths and weaknesses.
Stating you dip monk to me says exactly that.

[Alleine]

Its really only imbalanced if you play the way the designers seem to intend D&D to have been played, where wizards are blasters, strength is the best stat, and damage is the name of the game.

Unfortunately that isn't always so, especially if anyone makes use of tactical spells that can turn an encounter into a cakewalk. Granted this still requires preparing the right spells at the right times.

[Math_Mage]

No, I dont think they have to be.
you only need charisma if you choose specific invocations just like a caster doesnt really need a high abilityscore if he just targets allies and himself. Casters just have extra benefits from their "main" score that warlock doesnt have so a low cha warlock works fine.
There are many ways to boost ac, wis and dex is one of them. Indeed the class is intended as a ranged blaster with relative low ac. There are many ways to fix that. If you feel like mixing things up you prolly know the standard way of playing something and how to work the strengths and weaknesses.
Stating you dip monk to me says exactly that.

Escheton, you appear to be focusing solely on the argument that the warlock is MAD, and ignoring the argument that Eldritch Glaive is balanced. Killing your saves (and thus reducing the utility of the warlock's already-limited spell list) to make minimal extra use of a class feature that isn't broken is...possibly unbalanced, but not in the direction you seem to think it is.

[Sliver]

Making a str based warlock with a greatsword or a monkdip totally works.

If you want to go to melee with a greatsword and str focus you also need 3 stats: Str, Dex and Con. You have lower AB then a normal warlock because you decided that you prefer normal attacks rather then touch, and you suffer an AoO for every attack you deal due to hideous blow, so in a one on one battle you get 2 attacks (minimum) for every attack you deal. You will easily find yourself against an opponent with higher BAB then you, so he will have more attacks and with your low AC, he will probably be hitting more. You also can't PA as good as the Gleavelock, but you think it's too powerful so it doesn't matter.

If you take a monkdip then you need: Str, Dex, Con and Wis. Your AC isn't higher then the Greatsword warlock user because he at least could use light armor. You won't be using flurry because the hideous blow doesn't let you, you will be getting the AoO, you deal lesser damage then the greatsword hideous blow warlock because you get lesser benefits from the Str investment and the dip doesn't give you enough damage to catch up to a weapon wielder, not to mention that you delay your blast damage. You could take WF to use Dex instead of Str to hit, but then you reduce your low damage even further.

So both your suggestions are pretty weak, and it is obvious you are playing in a low powered low optimization party. Thinking it is the standard is OK, but saying that everybody who aren't playing like that are powergaming cheeseheads is... Kinda rude I guess.

Tactical movement, using movement hindrances like grease and marbles to force balance checks and other common tricks is smart combat. You can frown on it as much as you want, but around here, you should assume that people actually care about the rules of the game they are playing and want to do more then just "I blast him, durrr"