Fleshwarper question

[umbergod]

I recall reading somewhere that the artificer's "craft homunculus" ability allows them to qualify for the familiar aspect requirements of the fleshwarper, is that correct or am I imagining things again?

Also, what is the point in requiring 4 ranks in Heal when Graft Flesh requires 7? o.O

[Coidzor]

It's either A. a typo/oversight on their part or B. a hidden screw-you to the player.

But, yeah, I do recall something about that in regards to the artificer now that you mention it, but can't recall any specifics, sorry.

[umbergod]

It's either A. a typo/oversight on their part or B. a hidden screw-you to the player.

But, yeah, I do recall something about that in regards to the artificer now that you mention it, but can't recall any specifics, sorry.

haha thats what I was thinking, time to test out my google-fu and try track down what book says arty's qualify

[umbergod]

google-fu failed me. Oh well, my DM doesnt like it when I make artificers anyways, as I tend to break his games that way haha

[ZardozSpeaks]

In the fleshwarper class description there is an Adaptation section, that suggests artificers could take the class and modify their homunculus.

I've always really enjoyed the fleshwarper, the artificer approach is interesting, since you have a big selection for crafting. Improved Familiar always seemed like the best option, but whether the class features should apply to familiars above and beyond the standard familiar is questionable.

[The Glyphstone]

Just don't let your DM get a hold of Magic of Ebberon, as it turns the entire Fleshwarper class into uselessness with its 'new graft rules'. Sad, as the grafts there are quite fun, and much more tenable for a non-Evil Fleshwarper.

[sonofzeal]

Just don't let your DM get a hold of Magic of Ebberon, as it turns the entire Fleshwarper class into uselessness with its 'new graft rules'. Sad, as the grafts there are quite fun, and much more tenable for a non-Evil Fleshwarper.
New-Style Grafts are a different system entirely from Old-Style Graft, despite accomplishing almost the same thing and using the same vocabulary. New-Style Graft rule are simply not compatible with Old-Style Grafts. For example, New-Style Grafts are limited to one per relevant body slot... but what slot do Silthilar Muscles fill?

It's best to either houserule out the New Graft rules, or to consider them distinct systems each with their own rules. New-Style Graft rules only apply to New-Style Grafts, etc.

(As a corollary - if you separate them, Fleshwarpers are not RAW able to access New-Style Grafts through their class feature intended for that purpose, since Old-Style Grafts were limited by race and New-Style by feats. Another thing to check with your DM.)

[Akal Saris]

The PrC states that fleshwarper is intended to be entered at level 6 by classes with heal, including adepts, however the creator of the PrC forgot the requirements for Craft Graft make that impossible.

[Venger]

graft flesh actually requires a preposterous 10 ranks in heal

it's an oversight on the designers' part, they meant to put 4 for graft flesh but never bothered to errata it since LoM came out so close to when they released 4e. I'd just say to pretend that graft flesh only requires 4 ranks, that was obviously the intent and it's hardly gamebreaking

I like the idea of an artificer fleshwarper. try that "battlefist" item, it goes well with the rest of your stuff if you have a hand slot free that you don't want to turn into an enervating arm or whatever and you can put magic item enhancements on it (plus you get a slam and if you take fleshwarper 10 you become an abberation, qualifying you for soul eater)