Hellfire Warlock

[Scaliburn]

Hello Playground! One of the people in my group and I are in disagreement about the hellfire warlock prestige class. He wants to take 1 or 2 levels in the Incarnate class, from Magic of Incarnum, and binding a soulmeld that reduces all ability damage by one. Can he still use the Hellfire Blast? It says that if you do not have a constitution score or are immune to constitution damage, you cannot use the class ability because the diabolical forces behind the power of hellfire demand part of your essence in exchange for this granted power. What do you all think?

[Psyren]

*Enters kitchen*
*Starts microwave*
*Kernels popping*


Ok, more seriously... this is one of those questions that tends to polarize the playground. I wouldn't expect a consensus; your group may have to decide among yourselves how you want to rule it.

[MeeposFire]

You will never get a clear answer. This is a hotly contested subject with no real answer. Just decide if you want it to be that easy. In some groups it will be no problem and in others it might be. Otherwise they have to take a level in binder to get the same benefit but it works for sure.

May God have mercy on our souls.

:smallsigh:

EDIT: If he is willing to "waste a level or 2" then tell him to go binder and bind naberiuos and there will be no argument as it works.

[CodeRed]

Do you consider reducing stat damage by one (to zero) the exact same thing as immunity? If yes, then the Hellfire won't come. If no, then the Hellfire will come.

Those are the two most well known interpretations. Pick one and then stick with it.

[Shadowknight12]

Up to the DM, since he's the one that decides whether the diabolical forces behind the hellfire find that little trick funny or not.

[Scaliburn]

The dm is actually the one who suggested it, to one of the other players, and I said it wouldn't work. I think it is a little overpowered, but I understand that he could just rule 0 me if he wanted to. I just wanted to get a few other opinions.

[Psyren]

EDIT: If he is willing to "waste a level or 2" then tell him to go binder and bind naberiuos and there will be no argument as it works.

Not to mention Naberius' other benefits. His sign is trivial to hide; he heals ability drain as well as ability damage (more slowly, sure, but still up to 24 points in a day); You can make obscure skill checks untrained, take 10 on Diplomacy and Bluff, AND rush Diplomacy checks (even faster than normal) with no penalty.

[DeAnno]

Flavor wise, as long as the damage is being done the hellfire is being fed, even if the Binder regenerates it next round :smallsmile: The perpetually burning but never being consumed aspect is actually quite flavorful, come to think of it.

As for the Totemist it's pretty difficult to argue you aren't immune to the damage.

[Quietus]

Amusingly, he could have gotten the same effect from feats, without wasting class levels. As mentioned, a level of Binder for Naberius will do a similar thing, but rather than stopping the damage entirely, it effectively gives him Fast Healing (ability damage) 1. So his Con would oscillate back and forth between when he casts and when Naberius kicks in. And I think that he could then qualify for Anima Mage, which would advance both Warlock and Binder?

Regardless. He's using one of the weaker methods for negating this penalty. If it's too strong for your game, tell him so. Really, as noted, you won't get consensus on these boards, and I'll expect a lot of the posts to lean toward it working, simply because these boards are very pro-player. What I'd really be asking is : Will a few extra D6 of damage break the game? How strong are the other players' characters?

[MeeposFire]

Overpowered in something like damage is relative. In some groups like mine the extra damage is no big deal but in yours it could be too much. So what is your group like? Further just realize that losing one or two levels is a lot. Further it is just as possible using binder for that kind of investment which is legal. Lastly the extra damage is not that big unless you use bloodlines and the like.

[Dusk Eclipse]

The dm is actually the one who suggested it, to one of the other players, and I said it wouldn't work. I think it is a little overpowered, but I understand that he could just rule 0 me if he wanted to. I just wanted to get a few other opinions.

In the end it is just damage, which is not that impressive or gamebreaking (if you want to do that with Hellfire Warlock you would need to be a Hellfier Urlock or a Legacy champion) in my opinion.

But you must take into account that the prestige class itself suggest people playing it to find a way to cure the Con damage, Strongheart vest (which be be adquired with ONE feat, no levels needed) and Binding Naberious are just the most efficient way (and Naberious is RAW legal as you do take the damage).

[Tokiko Mima]

The fact that Naberius and Strongheart both work is a technicality. By RAW they *do* work, but you are skirting around a drawback the designers clearly intended to give for using Hellfire. I kind of see both methods as equivalent to a PC abusing Vow of Poverty by giving all his/her acquired wealth to his poverty stricken monkey familiar, and having the monkey 'use' all the magic items he acquires.

My suggestion is for the Hellfire damage to be ability burn damage instead, which becomes regular ability damage ~5 minutes later.

[Dusk Eclipse]

The fact that Naberius and Strongheart both work is a technicality. By RAW they *do* work, but you are skirting around a drawback the designers clearly intended to give for using Hellfire. I kind of see both methods as equivalent to a PC abusing Vow of Poverty by giving all his/her acquired wealth to his poverty stricken monkey familiar, and having the monkey 'use' all the magic items he acquires.

My suggestion is for the Hellfire damage to be ability burn damage instead, which becomes regular ability damage ~5 minutes later.

A drawback that the designers themselves encourage to avoid or minimize? I am not sold on that theory. And both ways vest and naberious have a high opportunity cost a feat or a level (still not sure which has a higher opportunity cost) so I don't think that is in the same realm a s VoP giving money to a familiar...

[Psyren]

The designers' intent for Hellfire, such as it was, can easily be disregarded - because they heavily overvalued both the at-will abilities of the Warlock as well as the extra damage provided by Hellfire Blast. Since their concept of balance is off-kilter to begin with, there is no need to oppose a RAW method of rectifying their error (such as Naberius.)

And as I pointed out, Naberius is not a wasted level at all. His abilities stay relevant throughout the entire campaign, and best of all are not tied to your EBL (save his Disguise and Command.)

Avoiding swingy Con is easy - put an odd number in that score and your modifier won't change with each blast.

[MeeposFire]

The fact that Naberius and Strongheart both work is a technicality. By RAW they *do* work, but you are skirting around a drawback the designers clearly intended to give for using Hellfire. I kind of see both methods as equivalent to a PC abusing Vow of Poverty by giving all his/her acquired wealth to his poverty stricken monkey familiar, and having the monkey 'use' all the magic items he acquires.

My suggestion is for the Hellfire damage to be ability burn damage instead, which becomes regular ability damage ~5 minutes later.

1) Hellfire damage with the vest is nothing to get excited about.

2) Naberious does not work on a technicality. It is 100% legit and there is n argument against it. It is the same as using an ability that required you to deal 2 points of damage to yourself and you took the time to bind buer to get fast healing.

3) You can't give your stuff to our familiar with VoP. You have to give to a charitable cause and cannot give it to your companions or anything like that.

[Talya]

You can't give your stuff to our familiar with VoP. You have to give to a charitable cause and cannot give it to your companions or anything like that.

Fun fact: A VOP character can give his collected loot to a church or temple. There are rules in BOED about building goodwill by donating to churches or temples, and the types of things you can exchange that goodwill for.

By the million or so GP you'll have donated by level 20 (it's more than WBL, since WBL accounts for consumed items), you'll have your sadly missed inherent bonuses from wish spells cast church expense.

[MeeposFire]

Fun fact: A VOP character can give his collected loot to a church or temple. There are rules in BOED about building goodwill by donating to churches or temples, and the types of things you can exchange that goodwill for.

By the million or so GP you'll have donated by level 20 (it's more than WBL, since WBL accounts for consumed items), you'll have your sadly missed inherent bonuses from wish spells cast church expense.

I would think churches and temples would normally be considered a charitable cause.

[NecroRick]

The fact that Naberius and Strongheart both work is a technicality. By RAW they *do* work,

NO. They don't work 'by RAW'. That is the whole reason these debates exist in the first place. If the RAW was clear on this point there would be absolutely no debate.

The RAW is murky, and there are multiple possible interpretations. Don't act shocked. You know it to be true.

@OP -> I agree that it is dodgy, but if the DM suggested it then you're not gaining anything by arguing with them about it. I'd suggest looking into what happens if he is damaged already and he drops below 0 because of con damage... Does his 'healing' still work if he's unconscious?

Alternately, just don't care. Okay, so he gets to roll lots of dice of damage. Eh. Find something else to do with your character. If he (eventually) turns all combats into one sided routs just by himself, go and get yourself leadership and a cohort:

A butler, someone to carry your deck chair, and a bartender to make you pina coladas.

During the first round of initiative, have your NPCs set up the deck chair, then for your actions sit in it and drink your pina~coladas.

If the DM complains that you are making a mockery of the combat, simply reply that someone already beat you to it. :D

[Kalaska'Agathas]

NO. They don't work 'by RAW'. That is the whole reason these debates exist in the first place. If the RAW was clear on this point there would be absolutely no debate.

The RAW is murky, and there are multiple possible interpretations. Don't act shocked. You know it to be true.

The RAW may be somewhat murky on the strongheart vest (because is being effectively immune the same as being IMMUNE?) but I would be interested to see where you think the RAW is unclear with Naberius - you take the damage, then the damage is later healed, just as would happen normally (albeit over a longer period) - seems pretty clear to me.


@OP -> I agree that it is dodgy, but if the DM suggested it then you're not gaining anything by arguing with them about it. I'd suggest looking into what happens if he is damaged already and he drops below 0 because of con damage... Does his 'healing' still work if he's unconscious?

If you drop below 1 Con, you die, so I think this is a non-issue.


Alternately, just don't care. Okay, so he gets to roll lots of dice of damage. Eh. Find something else to do with your character.

Solid advice.


If he (eventually) turns all combats into one sided routs just by himself, go and get yourself leadership and a cohort:

A butler, someone to carry your deck chair, and a bartender to make you pina coladas.

During the first round of initiative, have your NPCs set up the deck chair, then for your actions sit in it and drink your pina~coladas.

If the DM complains that you are making a mockery of the combat, simply reply that someone already beat you to it. :D

Less solid advice.

To the OP:

If my opinion is worth anything to you, then I'll share it: the Strongheart Vest does not in fact make you IMMUNE to the damage, instead, it circumvents a small amount of it (which happens to be enough to negate it) and therefore works.

I'd imagine those of the lower orders who delight in twisting the words of contracts are equally delighted by this.

[Drachasor]

Perhaps the more useful way to look at it would be considering this character compared to the rest of the party. If letting him do this would just keep him even with everyone else, then there's no harm in it. The Warlock isn't a particularly powerful class anyhow.

[NecroRick]

If you drop below 1 Con, you die, so I think this is a non-issue.


You misunderstand. I'm not talking about dropping below 0 con, I'm talking about hit points. Let me walk you through it.

Let's say the 11th level Warlock has 50 hit points.
He has taken 40 points of damage so far, and he's currently on 10 hit points.

Now he does some hellfire thing (pro tip: there's more than one! Not just for Eldritch Blastery!).

He takes a point of con damage....
.... which puts him under a threshold (i.e. moves him to an odd con instead of an even con) ...

So now he has 39 hit points. And has taken 40 points of damage. And is unconscious. Ooops.

-> So the question is; will his combo (to get back the con at some point in the near future) still go off, even though he is unconscious?


Perhaps the more useful way to look at it would be considering this character compared to the rest of the party. If letting him do this would just keep him even with everyone else, then there's no harm in it. The Warlock isn't a particularly powerful class anyhow.

+1 enhancement bonus to QFT: Quoted for truth.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Why bother blowing two levels on Incarnate when you can instead blow one level on Binder and get the same basic effect?

[faceroll]

*Enters kitchen*
*Starts microwave*
*Kernels popping*

http://chan.catiewayne.com/b/src/131122295751.gif


Why bother blowing two levels on Incarnate when you can instead blow one level on Binder and get the same basic effect?

Why bother blowing a level when you can take a feat?

[Fouredged Sword]

Bah, why not just go whole hog and take legacy champion to extend the hellfire progression to something like 33d6 damage.

Then get empower spelllike ability to increase that to 49d6 damage.

Get a wand of truestrike so you won't miss.

Take the binding feat to let you fast heal the damage to your con and you are awsome.

[gkathellar]

The dm is actually the one who suggested it, to one of the other players, and I said it wouldn't work. I think it is a little overpowered, but I understand that he could just rule 0 me if he wanted to. I just wanted to get a few other opinions.

Look, Warlocks really aren't all that powerful, and it's good that there's an easy way that they can stack on enough extra damage to actually be halfway respectable. If the DM actually went out of their way to suggest it, let it go.

[LordBlades]

I see no difference (rule-wise) between healing ability damage via Naberius and healing it naturally(or via Lesser Restoration or the like) for the purpose of Hellfire Warlock. In both cases the damage is being taken, and then healed at a later point.

[CN the Logos]

Bah, why not just go whole hog and take legacy champion to extend the hellfire progression to something like 33d6 damage.

Then get empower spelllike ability to increase that to 49d6 damage.

Get a wand of truestrike so you won't miss.

Take the binding feat to let you fast heal the damage to your con and you are awsome.

You can't bind Naberius with a feat if you want to heal damage with him. The vestige binding feats only give you a single ability from each vestige you take the feat for, and you don't get to pick the ability. If you want to exploit Naberius for Hellfire Warlock, you have to take that one level dip.

That said, not only is that one level dip legal, I think it's fantastic flavor. Naberius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naberius) was, for those not in the know, a lord of Hell in classical demonology. The idea of powering your hellfire with his blessing is awesome... though your group may or may not approve of that bit of flavor.

By itself, Hellfire Warlock only adds +6d6 damage to Eldritch Blasts. I'm pretty sure there are tricks that let you progress damage further. But even if the warlock's doing 50d6 a shot with his blast, he's still hanging out with a well-built barbarian in the "Can do enough damage for the higher tiers to keep me around, but still not actually Tier 3" clubhouse. The warlock might actually graduate to Tier 3 on account of being capable of flight without outside help, assuming he's not an idiot; I can actually envision an evil cleric calling out the doomlock to kill things while the cleric is preparing spells or casting something that takes longer than a full round.

On the other hand a single classed binder with access to the summoner vestige (available for free online!) can cast the highest level summon monster spell available to a sorcerer of his level every four rounds. The summon can't be incorporeal, but that's about all you have to worry about. It's not an exploit if you'd have been more powerful just taking levels in the class you dipped to become stronger.

[Fouredged Sword]

Hellfire warlocks make great dragons for BBEGs. The party has to find a way to face them without risking getting hit. Makes a combat oriented party stop and think for once.

Just make sure they know what he is before the fight to stop complaints of "How much damage dod he just do?"

[Psyren]

Knowing what they are is a DC 10 Knowledge (Planes) check. Recognizing one shouldn't be too hard, by the time the PCs are able to take one on.

[faceroll]

You can't bind Naberius with a feat if you want to heal damage with him. The vestige binding feats only give you a single ability from each vestige you take the feat for, and you don't get to pick the ability. If you want to exploit Naberius for Hellfire Warlock, you have to take that one level dip.

Ah, thanks for pointing that out. Totally missed it.


That said, not only is that one level dip legal, I think it's fantastic flavor. Naberius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naberius) was, for those not in the know, a lord of Hell in classical demonology. The idea of powering your hellfire with his blessing is awesome... though your group may or may not approve of that bit of flavor.

I have always thought binding is what warlocks SHOULD be doing, anyway. Pacts with nefarious or inscrutable entities for great power.


By itself, Hellfire Warlock only adds +6d6 damage to Eldritch Blasts.

It's more like 8d6, thanks to the +3 casting levels of warlock (6d6 hellfire+2d6 eldritch blast advancement).

[Fouredged Sword]

Legacy champion can draw that out to 22d6 extra d6's + normal eldrich blast damage.

You get 11 levels worth of hellfire warlock over 13 levels.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

On the issue of Strongheart Vest: The Vest reduces damage, but does not make you immune, effectively serving as DR or resistance vs. ability damage. If you also rule that cold resistance 5 makes you "immune" to cold damage and that DR 10/magic makes you "immune" to damage from a nonmagical weapon, then yes, I suppose it could be argued that the soulmeld makes you "immune" to Con damage. Otherwise, there's no reason at all that it wouldn't work, by RAW (you're not immune, case closed) or by RAI (warlocks could use the damage boost) or by in-game logic (You're giving the devils the souls of innocent unborn children instead of your own! Win/win!).

[Psyren]

in-game logic (You're giving the devils the souls of innocent unborn children instead of your own! Win/win!).

The so-called "logic" argument is the worst one. If Incarnum was somehow on par with normal souls for fiends, they would be way more gung-ho about getting the stuff than they are, and you could use Incarnum for all the things you can use souls for in BoVD (like paying XP costs.)

Incarnum is generic; I've made this analogy before, but it's like trying to pass off tofu shaped and flavored like a steak, as steak - and to a carnivore, no less. In addition to being generic, it also costs the meldshaper nothing, as opposed to using his own life force.

Allow or ban SV as you choose, but justifying it like that is just flimsy to me.

[MeeposFire]

Legacy champion can draw that out to 22d6 extra d6's + normal eldrich blast damage.

You get 11 levels worth of hellfire warlock over 13 levels.

Would you stop trying to push something that could spawn another argument. It is not even necessary in this case. The player involved is not sure just hellfire might be too much.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

The so-called "logic" argument is the worst one. If Incarnum was somehow on par with normal souls for fiends, they would be way more gung-ho about getting the stuff than they are, and you could use Incarnum for all the things you can use souls for in BoVD (like paying XP costs.)

Incarnum is generic; I've made this analogy before, but it's like trying to pass off tofu shaped and flavored like a steak, as steak - and to a carnivore, no less. In addition to being generic, it also costs the meldshaper nothing, as opposed to using his own life force.

Allow or ban SV as you choose, but justifying it like that is just flimsy to me.

I'm not saying using the Vest needs to be justified with in-game logic, I'm just saying this isn't a situation when the rules say one thing but in-game logic would favor the opposite (such as, for instance, drown healing or fire resistance making you immune to lava or the like). I've seen more DMs complain about the Vest from a "But that's not fair to the devils!" angle rather than a "But you deal too much damage that way!" angle, and was just trying to head that off. A hellfire warlock agrees to trade parts of his life force for hellfire; he loses life force and gains hellfire, the devils grant hellfire and gain some life force. The same thing happens with the Vest, so while the life force may be less tasty/useful/whatever, they're still getting life force in exchange for hellfire--and heck, they may be getting more life force overall because the warlock will be using hellfire blast more often.

[Quietus]

On the issue of Strongheart Vest: The Vest reduces damage, but does not make you immune, effectively serving as DR or resistance vs. ability damage. If you also rule that cold resistance 5 makes you "immune" to cold damage and that DR 10/magic makes you "immune" to damage from a nonmagical weapon, then yes, I suppose it could be argued that the soulmeld makes you "immune" to Con damage. Otherwise, there's no reason at all that it wouldn't work, by RAW (you're not immune, case closed) or by RAI (warlocks could use the damage boost) or by in-game logic (You're giving the devils the souls of innocent unborn children instead of your own! Win/win!).

Well, Fire Resist 6 makes me immune to the effects of standing in a fire. And DR 5/magic would make me immune to non-criticals from a book-statted kobold's spear.

That being said, I think it'd be more interesting to allow strongheart vest to work, and then to later have a devil show up. "Hey buddy, listen. We had a deal, and you're not fulfilling your end of the bargain. You're cut off, until you repay me every last shred of that life force that you owe me.", and then give him a bill written in Infernal, which has a listed amount of motes of life force owed. Then the player has to choose - do they never use hellfire again, or do they start repaying what they owe? If they start repaying, how do they do so? Human sacrifice and dedicating it to the appropriate devil would be worth the appropriate amount of con, but is a decidedly Very Evil Deed. Like, ridiculously so.

[Fouredged Sword]

the issue is that there is a difrence between the status condition "Immune" and the practical level of being immune to something.

The status of "Immunity" allows you to ignore any amount of that effect completely.

Practical immunity is obtained by being able to ignore an effect in significant quantities to ignore an effect.

The first is a cause, the second is a description.

If you need to not have the status condition "immune" they it works, if you need to not have practical immunity then you are not.

Mutablity of english as a language makes picking this apart a job for the DM.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Well, Fire Resist 6 makes me immune to the effects of standing in a fire. And DR 5/magic would make me immune to non-criticals from a book-statted kobold's spear.

Very true. However, there's a difference between "I'm immune to fire" and "I take no damage from that particular fire over there," and being immune to any number of Str 8 kobolds with spears doesn't mean you can shrug off a Str 36 fighter 20's spear thrusts, just as HFW stops working if you're immune to Con damage but works just fine if you're unaffected by the Con damage dealt by that ability.

[Quietus]

Very true. However, there's a difference between "I'm immune to fire" and "I take no damage from that particular fire over there," and being immune to any number of Str 8 kobolds with spears doesn't mean you can shrug off a Str 36 fighter 20's spear thrusts, just as HFW stops working if you're immune to Con damage but works just fine if you're unaffected by the Con damage dealt by that ability.

Fire Resistance of 6+ and strongheart vest makes me immune to nonmagical fire, and immune to the ability damage from Hellfire, for practical purposes. The question is whether the DM in question reads Hellfire's restriction as whether you're denied hellfire if you're simply practically immune, or if you have outright immunity to con damage in general. As Fouredged Sword said, the problem here is the mutability of the English language, because that line can be read either way.

[Fouredged Sword]

There is more levels of complexity than just this.

If you had an ability that caused you to take Cha damage in the place of Con damage from a single sorce once per day. Would you still be considered immune? You aren't takeing Con damage, but there is still an effect from hellfire.

What if you had an ability that gave you a bonus to con in place of the con damage. There is still an effect but it is a good effect. You are not immune per say, but the effect becomes good not bad.

There are lots more complexites to the idea of what immunity is than most people realise.

[faceroll]

Is it possible to make a good warlock/binder build? Something like Warlock7/Anima Mage 10/Hellfire Warlock3 (but not in that order)? That gets you 10th level binding and 20th level warlock stuff. Guess you could use legacy champion to net yourself more anima mage advancement.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Fire Resistance of 6+ and strongheart vest makes me immune to nonmagical fire, and immune to the ability damage from Hellfire, for practical purposes. The question is whether the DM in question reads Hellfire's restriction as whether you're denied hellfire if you're simply practically immune, or if you have outright immunity to con damage in general. As Fouredged Sword said, the problem here is the mutability of the English language, because that line can be read either way.

When it comes to a defined game term, there is no "for practical purposes," the term has a specific rules meaning. A character can be frightened of spiders, in which case he doesn't particularly like them, but if a game effect says he is Frightened by a fear effect, he takes a -2 penalty on all attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. A character can have a lot of toughness, in which case he can survive a lot of pounding, but if a stat block says he has a lot of Toughness, he has 3 extra HP per Toughness feat he possesses.

Likewise, "immunity" is a defined game term. You are not "mostly immune" to Con damage or "immune for all intents and purposes" to Con damage or the like, either you are immune to Con damage or you aren't. Undead are immune to Con damage; constructs are immune to Con damage; someone under the effects of sheltered vitality is immune to Con damage; someone who ignores the first 10,000 Con damage taken from each attack is not immune to Con damage.

If one wishes to houserule that the Vest doesn't work, by all means go ahead; if bunches of d6s of damage every turn would overshadow the other PCs, then that's the responsible thing to do. The fact remains, however, that it does work by the rules, and claiming that the Vest reducing Con damage makes you immune to Con damage is just as much a houserule.

[Fouredged Sword]

I think the issue breaks down to the difrence between "Immune to Con Damage" and "Immune to THE con damage"

I belive that the wording is the first one, and this does support PairO'Dice Lost's statement of in game definition.

DM's will do as they please though, rule zero and all.

[Psyren]

Is it possible to make a good warlock/binder build? Something like Warlock7/Anima Mage 10/Hellfire Warlock3 (but not in that order)? That gets you 10th level binding and 20th level warlock stuff. Guess you could use legacy champion to net yourself more anima mage advancement.

You need to "cast 2nd level arcane spells" to get into AM, so you'll need a dip or a trick to get Warlock into it. No other advancement afterwards besides LC/UT though.

[Quietus]

When it comes to a defined game term, there is no "for practical purposes," the term has a specific rules meaning. A character can be frightened of spiders, in which case he doesn't particularly like them, but if a game effect says he is Frightened by a fear effect, he takes a -2 penalty on all attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. A character can have a lot of toughness, in which case he can survive a lot of pounding, but if a stat block says he has a lot of Toughness, he has 3 extra HP per Toughness feat he possesses.

Likewise, "immunity" is a defined game term. You are not "mostly immune" to Con damage or "immune for all intents and purposes" to Con damage or the like, either you are immune to Con damage or you aren't. Undead are immune to Con damage; constructs are immune to Con damage; someone under the effects of sheltered vitality is immune to Con damage; someone who ignores the first 10,000 Con damage taken from each attack is not immune to Con damage.

If one wishes to houserule that the Vest doesn't work, by all means go ahead; if bunches of d6s of damage every turn would overshadow the other PCs, then that's the responsible thing to do. The fact remains, however, that it does work by the rules, and claiming that the Vest reducing Con damage makes you immune to Con damage is just as much a houserule.

I'd like to point out that I'm playing Devil's Advocate here - in no way is spending a feat to knock out that downside unfair, barring extensive use of Legacy Champion/Bloodline shenanigans. I do, in fact, agree with you, and I can't argue the strict RAW-ness of your argument. That being said, from the perspective of how the ability works, strongheart vest *does* make you immune to the Hellfire Warlock's con damage, because there is no possible way for it to harm you once you have it up.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

I'd like to point out that I'm playing Devil's Advocate here - in no way is spending a feat to knock out that downside unfair, barring extensive use of Legacy Champion/Bloodline shenanigans. I do, in fact, agree with you, and I can't argue the strict RAW-ness of your argument. That being said, from the perspective of how the ability works, strongheart vest *does* make you immune to the Hellfire Warlock's con damage, because there is no possible way for it to harm you once you have it up.

In simple English, yes, it makes you immune. However, immune and IMMUNE (i.e. immune in terms of the English definition and immune in the sense meant by the D&D term immune) are not the same thing. It is imperative that they not be confused, and the confusion and conflation of the two seem to be the basis of your argument as "Devil's Advocate."

[Fouredged Sword]

Exactly. The difrence is if you read THE in the wording, ether RAW or RAI. Saying immune to con damage OR immune to THE con damage.

[LordBlades]

Exactly. The difrence is if you read THE in the wording, ether RAW or RAI. Saying immune to con damage OR immune to THE con damage.

It's heavily debateable whether RAI was for the Con damage to not be able to be mitigated in such way.

Even RP-wise I could see it working: If you're immune (the in-game term) to Con damage, the Devils are getting nothing in return, so no deal. If you're using Strongheart Vest, the Devils are getting Incarnum energy instead of your own energy so (depending how valuable such things are for them) they might still be satisfied.

[Socratov]

Ah, thanks for pointing that out. Totally missed it.



I have always thought binding is what warlocks SHOULD be doing, anyway. Pacts with nefarious or inscrutable entities for great power.



It's more like 8d6, thanks to the +3 casting levels of warlock (6d6 hellfire+2d6 eldritch blast advancement).

ehm, no. yes you get the +6d6 and hellfire as a toy, yes you get invocations as you leveled, but no, extra EB dice are special qualities, so you won't get an extra +2 EB dice.

[darksolitaire]

That's not as straightforward. You get invocations, but Complete Arcane errata says:

Page 8: Invocations and Eldritch Blast
Change this section as follows:
Invocations and Eldritch Blast: Eldritch blast is an
invocation. Other invocations provide a warlock with
the ability to modify his eldritch blast or add new
eldritch attacks.

So you probably get the increased EB die.

[Psyren]

ehm, no. yes you get the +6d6 and hellfire as a toy, yes you get invocations as you leveled, but no, extra EB dice are special qualities, so you won't get an extra +2 EB dice.

Read the text:


Invoking: At each level, you gain new invocations known, increased damage with eldritch blast, and an increase in invoker level as if you had also gained a level in the warlock class. You do not, however, gain any other benefit a character of that class would have gained.

faceroll is correct, 5 levels of HFW advances your EB just as 5 levels of Warlock would have.

[Socratov]

ok, that makes hellfire warlock even more viable :) missed that part completely :)

[faceroll]

You need to "cast 2nd level arcane spells" to get into AM, so you'll need a dip or a trick to get Warlock into it. No other advancement afterwards besides LC/UT though.

Oh damn, it's "arcane caster level" that Warlock qualifies for, isn't it.

[Talya]

The specific wording of Hellfire Warlock does not require you to specifically take damage from the ability, it just requires you to not be completely immune to that particular ability damage in general.