PDA

View Full Version : Combat Casting



Human Paragon 3
2007-09-30, 07:51 PM
With skill focus: Concentration or Combat Casting, and even a mediocre CON bonus, avoiding attacks of opportunity from spell casting is ridiculously easy, so easy that it makes me wonder why spellcasting even provokes an attack of opportunity to begin with.

Is there a fix for this? Taking the threatening creature's BAB into account might help, making it an opposed roll might help, or just raising the DC by creating a sliding scale might help. I get the feeling that somebody's done this already, but I'd sure like to see the fix.

Also, psions can manifest in a grapple? Holy crap, that seems unbalanced. Even DC 20+Level Concentration check is shockingly easy past level 10.

technomancer
2007-09-30, 07:59 PM
Don't sweat it. Fighters can fight when other people and standing next to them, so why can't spellcasters cast when other people are standing next to them?

Besides, once you get to the levels where you can consistently make the concentration check, if you're in melee with someone, you're doing it wrong. Fly is a pretty low level spell that pretty much negates AoOs from casting in melee.

Human Paragon 3
2007-09-30, 08:00 PM
Also levitate. But flying enemies fix that, ditto for low ceilings.

As for why spellcasters can't cast spells while people are standing next to them, they can. It just provokes an attack of opportunity, since you're standing their waving your arms and chanting. Unless you cast defensively, which, thankfully for mages, is easy as pie.

Mavian
2007-09-30, 08:04 PM
There's a feat... I wanna say Mage Slayer, from the Complete Arcane.

Makes it so that if you threaten, people can't cast defensively. Combine it with Stand Still from EPH, which allows you to stop them from 5-foot steppin away from you.

Arbitrarity
2007-09-30, 08:10 PM
There's a feat... I wanna say Mage Slayer, from the Complete Arcane.

Makes it so that if you threaten, people can't cast defensively. Combine it with Stand Still from EPH, which allows you to stop them from 5-foot steppin away from you.

Stand still doesn't block 5 ft steps. You mean Thicket of Blades (Crusader 3, Stance)?

Mavian
2007-09-30, 08:12 PM
That mighta been what I was thinkin, my mind has a tendency to wander. Or of course, you could always just use a Spike Chain, so that if they do 5-foot, you can still whack'em when they try to cast.

Arbitrarity
2007-09-30, 08:16 PM
Very true.

Spiked chain: The only exotic weapon it's actually worth spending a feat on!

Clementx
2007-09-30, 10:03 PM
I recently came to the same conclusion, and by adding the highest BAB among the threatening creatures, casting defensively has become a desperation tactic. As is, after lvl10 or so, just maxing out Concentration means you can autoavoid AoOs on your highest level spells on a roll of 1 (assuming a moderate Con score or a really cheap Conc bonus item). Using BAB as a modifier means that being next to a tank-like opponent of equal CR (Dragons, for example) leaves you with only a 30%ish non-optimized chance of making your best spell defensive. PC races are a bit more forgiving when it comes to BAB, but still not absolute. So you either have casters sucking it up and taking Skill Focus (Conc), spending more spell slots on redundant defenses, dealing with the threat with lower-level spells, or sucking it up and using the Withdraw action.

All good things in a world where casters blow melee out of the water.

Kurobara
2007-09-30, 11:22 PM
Honestly, unless you're really concerned about the low levels (before you meet the prereq - I want to say it's 6 ranks?) or are going core-only, I'm inclined to say Steady Concentration from Races of Stone is better than either Combat Casting or Skill Focus (Concentration) if you're going to bother sinking a feat into Concentration at all. I like getting to take 10 and not even having to worry about those rolls that I can fail if I roll like a 2.

Human Paragon 3
2007-09-30, 11:30 PM
I think you mis-heard the original complaint, Korubara. I'm actually worried that it's too easy to make your concentration checks.

Jasdoif
2007-09-30, 11:51 PM
Also, psions can manifest in a grapple? Holy crap, that seems unbalanced. Even DC 20+Level Concentration check is shockingly easy past level 10.You can also cast a spell while grappling, provided you have its material component/focus (if any) in hand and it doesn't have somatic components (say, casting dimension door (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/dimensionDoor.htm) to get out of the grapple).

Also, consider that freedom of movement makes you immune to grappling, period. And comes in your choice of spell, power or ring form. You'll want to address that somehow, before worrying about the ability to cast/manifest in a grapple.

Draz74
2007-10-01, 01:12 PM
I say Defensive Casting shouldn't even exist as a default option. Make it so the Combat Casting feat lets casters have the option of Casting Defensively.

That, plus something to nerf 5-foot-steps, should make things much more interesting. Any suggestions on how to keep the almighty 5-foot-step?

Mike_G
2007-10-01, 01:19 PM
I think all casting in melee should provoke an attack of opportunity. If even throwing a punch provokes an AoO, then weaving your fingers and chanting sure should.

If an enemy actually gets through to the wizard, they should get some free noogies in. It's frustrating to actually make the saves and evade stuff and tumble past the guards and get in stabbity range of the wizard to have him still get to cast his way out of things with a wussy Con check.

Jasdoif
2007-10-01, 01:31 PM
That, plus something to nerf 5-foot-steps, should make things much more interesting. Any suggestions on how to keep the almighty 5-foot-step?That might be going overboard, as other characters then casters can make use of 5-foot-steps too.

That said, perhaps a rule that when making a 5-foot-step, you are still considered to be in your starting square for the purpose of determining if you are subject to AoOs for distracting actions taken during the same turn. We'll call it "en passant" :smalltongue:

ocato
2007-10-01, 02:06 PM
Well, if the wizard is dopey enough that your options are 'they roll or get an AoO when casting' or 'they are rightfully afraid to be near you and therefore rain death from above while flying', I'd rather lose the AoO and keep the option of whomping him on my turn.

Sure! Cast defensively! But on my turn, Power Attack's a comin' and you ain't got the HPs to survive it. Hope your scorching ray was worth it.

Again, this is all assuming a dopey wizard who thinks walking around next to fighters and barbarians is fine and dandy.

Frosty
2007-10-01, 02:12 PM
That's why I <3 Beguilers. They are casters with Tumble as a class skill! Tumble away, and then cast!

Roderick_BR
2007-10-01, 03:53 PM
The problem with defensive casting is that for every 2 levels you rise, you can gain 2 ranks to Concentration, while rising 1 spell level. At level 17, you are casting level 9 spells, a DC of 19, and you're likely to have 20 ranks in concentration, before even adding Con, focus, etc.
I think I saw someone saying that to make the roll harder, you could add the effective caster level. Casting a 9th level spell at level 20 would be a DC 39. With 23 ranks, you'd still need to roll only a 16. Add Skill Focus, and a good Cons (let's say +4), you'd need to roll a 9. With Combat Casting, a 5. Almost too easy.

I say Defensive Casting shouldn't even exist as a default option. Make it so the Combat Casting feat lets casters have the option of Casting Defensively.
I think that would be an interesting nerf for casters. Keep the +4 bonus, like others feats (Improved Disarm, Improved Bull Rush) do.

(...)Besides, once you get to the levels where you can consistently make the concentration check, if you're in melee with someone, you're doing it wrong. Fly is a pretty low level spell that pretty much negates AoOs from casting in melee.
And what if you can't move away? Monsters that pop out of nowhere right close to you, something you suddenly meet when making a turn in a corridor (yeah, you're likely to send the druid first, I know), anything that cancel the use of flight (AMF, strong winds, dispells, low ceiling).
Sometimes whatever buff you have will vanish exactly when an enemy strikes. That's a bit situational, but happens all the time.

(...)I'm inclined to say Steady Concentration from Races of Stone is better than either Combat Casting or Skill Focus (Concentration) if you're going to bother sinking a feat into Concentration at all. I like getting to take 10 and not even having to worry about those rolls that I can fail if I roll like a 2.
That's a very powerful feat. At level, let's say, 7, you are casting 4th level spells. DC 14. You'll have 10 ranks in Concentration. Take 10 means you'll have a roll of 20. Enough to cast even level 9 spells.

Mike_G
2007-10-01, 03:59 PM
Well, if the wizard is dopey enough that your options are 'they roll or get an AoO when casting' or 'they are rightfully afraid to be near you and therefore rain death from above while flying', I'd rather lose the AoO and keep the option of whomping him on my turn.

Sure! Cast defensively! But on my turn, Power Attack's a comin' and you ain't got the HPs to survive it. Hope your scorching ray was worth it.


The thing is, his Otto's Irresistible Dance or Tasha's Hideous Laughter against your crappy Fighter Will save will be worth it, even if his Scorching Ray isn't

"Congrats, by careful use of terrain, tactics, skill and blind luck you got through to melee range of the BBEG caster. Too bad he rolled a 2 on his Concentration check. Now make a save or ..oh, wait, you don't get a save. Go roll up a new PC. Why not try and roll up a caster next time?"

Chronos
2007-10-01, 05:37 PM
Any suggestions on how to keep the almighty 5-foot-step?The way I'd fix the 5-foot-step is to allow it to be taken as an immediate action (i.e., on someone else's turn). The wizard just stepped away from you to cast a spell? You take your step to follow him. This also works for stepping away to use a bow, or any other AoO-provoking action.

Which still doesn't fix the problem that it's too easy to make concentration checks, but hey, one problem at a time.

GoC
2007-10-02, 02:13 PM
The problem with defensive casting is that for every 2 levels you rise, you can gain 2 ranks to Concentration, while rising 1 spell level. At level 17, you are casting level 9 spells, a DC of 19, and you're likely to have 20 ranks in concentration, before even adding Con, focus, etc.
I think I saw someone saying that to make the roll harder, you could add the effective caster level. Casting a 9th level spell at level 20 would be a DC 39. With 23 ranks, you'd still need to roll only a 16. Add Skill Focus, and a good Cons (let's say +4), you'd need to roll a 9. With Combat Casting, a 5. Almost too easy.

At lvl 20 you're altering reality at your whim!
I'd say he shouldn't even provoke an AoO at that level (instead of forcing him to use a quickened dimension door).
There should probably be a spell that creats a 5 inch thick Wall of Force around your square only, rendering you immune to melee/touch attacks or grapples for the duration...

Keld Denar
2007-10-02, 03:17 PM
The only 2 things I can think of that a player (or NPC) can do to prevent 5' steps is via the knight 3 ability (bulwark of defense) or the stone dragon prestige class stance (which makes a small hill under you which is difficult terrain out to 5 feet.

A would-be meleer can also take a 5' step as part of a readied action, provided he hasn't already moved that turn. This is only moderatly useful, because it involves either starting your turn adjacent to the caster, or getting side-by teleported (via friendly mages dim door or teleport). My occult slayer character uses a combination of a ring of invisibility and flying to scout and as such usually starts encounters in ambush position to take the best advantage of readying a vicious strike (DC 60+ concentration check). Only been burned by see invis a couple times! ;)

Draz74
2007-10-02, 05:53 PM
The way I'd fix the 5-foot-step is to allow it to be taken as an immediate action (i.e., on someone else's turn). The wizard just stepped away from you to cast a spell? You take your step to follow him. This also works for stepping away to use a bow, or any other AoO-provoking action.

Which still doesn't fix the problem that it's too easy to make concentration checks, but hey, one problem at a time.

So, someone charges at you, and you use your 5-foot step as an immediate action and move to where the charge can't hit you? This is only one of many problems that would be caused by this Immediate 5 Foot Step ruling. Seems abusable IMHO.


At lvl 20 you're altering reality at your whim!

But should you be? (Answer: yes, but not without limits or in a way that makes you dominate the battle over the rest of your party.)


I'd say he shouldn't even provoke an AoO at that level (instead of forcing him to use a quickened dimension door).

Wait, since when is forcing overpowered casters to burn their limited resources a bad thing? It's bad enough that they don't usually run out of those limited resources as it is. Making it so they don't even need to use up those resources is madness.


There should probably be a spell that creats a 5 inch thick Wall of Force around your square only, rendering you immune to melee/touch attacks or grapples for the duration...

You can always Forcecage yourself or Otiluke's Resilient Sphere yourself. (Or Prismatic Sphere ...) People just usually don't because it prevents your offense just as much as it helps your defense. :smalltongue:

F.L.
2007-10-02, 06:48 PM
The thing is, his Otto's Irresistible Dance or Tasha's Hideous Laughter against your crappy Fighter Will save will be worth it, even if his Scorching Ray isn't

Otto's Irresistable Dance allows no save. Alas, my desire to have an arcane spellcaster learn Otto's Irresistable Dance Party will be forever out of reach.

Though I suppose with a PRC that turns it into a ray, and a metamagic rod of chain spell, it could work...

Tyger
2007-10-03, 07:43 AM
The problem with defensive casting is that for every 2 levels you rise, you can gain 2 ranks to Concentration, while rising 1 spell level. At level 17, you are casting level 9 spells, a DC of 19, and you're likely to have 20 ranks in concentration, before even adding Con, focus, etc.

<stuff>

At level, let's say, 7, you are casting 4th level spells. DC 14. You'll have 10 ranks in Concentration. Take 10 means you'll have a roll of 20. Enough to cast even level 9 spells.

Except the DC, just for the record, is 15+ the spell level, not 10+ spell level. So 9th level spells have a DC for Defensive Casting of 24. And 4th have a DC of 19.

It doesn't invalidate your point at all, (at 17th level, you can have 20 ranks, +CON so still a no-brainer) though it did bear qualification.

Personally, I've never had a real problem with Defensive Casting. If that warrior can swing his oversized spiked chain around his head enough to get the mobility he needs to do damage with it while still dodging blows, the mage can easily twist his fingers into a complicated pattern and say Shazam! while doing it. We don't even make the warrior roll anything.

GoC
2007-10-03, 10:21 AM
But should you be? (Answer: yes, but not without limits or in a way that makes you dominate the battle over the rest of your party.)
Attempting to make the characters that can alter reality asweak as the ones who can't isn't going to work. Just give up already.


You can always Forcecage yourself or Otiluke's Resilient Sphere yourself. (Or Prismatic Sphere ...) People just usually don't because it prevents your offense just as much as it helps your defense. :smalltongue:
I meant that there should be a high-level spell that allows you to do just that.
Or at least a self-forcecage with immediate action casting time.

Draz74
2007-10-03, 10:41 AM
Attempting to make the characters that can alter reality asweak as the ones who can't isn't going to work. Just give up already.

Oh really? In that case, let's duel over it.

Wizard beats Fighter, sure, that's been abundantly proven, and I never really doubted it. But you seem to be claiming that any caster beats any nonmagical character. No matter what house rules or system or anything is being used.

So, Truenamer vs. Warblade? (Custom items not allowed.) :smalltongue:
You can use a Warlock instead of a Truenamer if you like. Or an Adept.

Kaelik
2007-10-03, 12:32 PM
So, Truenamer vs. Warblade? (Custom items not allowed.) :smalltongue:
You can use a Warlock instead of a Truenamer if you like. Or an Adept.

I'll take you up on that challenge with a Warlock. Just to be clear, do Warblades make good ranged fighters? For example, do they have maneuvers that work with ranged weapons?

If the answer is no, I'll be nice and even stay on the ground.

Also, said dual better take place above level 8. I think we all know that a level 1 Warlock isn't going to win without some heavy advantages. (Can we start 300 ft away?)

Draz74
2007-10-03, 12:53 PM
I'll take you up on that challenge with a Warlock. Just to be clear, do Warblades make good ranged fighters? For example, do they have maneuvers that work with ranged weapons?

If the answer is no, I'll be nice and even stay on the ground.

Also, said dual better take place above level 8. I think we all know that a level 1 Warlock isn't going to win without some heavy advantages. (Can we start 300 ft away?)

Well, I was actually bluffing to make my point, especially since I don't actually own Tome of Battle. (The real question is, how's caster/noncaster balance going to turn out in my homebrew system?) But hey, why not? I think the Warblade has a pretty good chance. As long as you're planning to fight as a Warlock the way Warlocks normally fight, rather than using some obscure cheesy trick. Since I don't have enough Tome of Battle prowess to build a super cheese-optimized Warblade.

Since you already made the offer about not flying, though, I don't think you're trying to fight dirty. (Warblades don't have much good ranged stuff, except for one 8th-level maneuver. So I would have had to be a Raptoran, or carry some Potions of Fly or similar items if you hadn't made the offer.)

Anything in the Level 9-14 range or so sounds fine to me. (Above that, characters just get too complicated.) 28-point buy? Allowed sources: SRD, PHB II, Complete Arcane/Warrior/Adventurer, Tome of Battle; anything else you need access to? Is multiclassing allowed? How about PrC's? No custom items.

Who's willing to DM? (And I probably won't be able to seriously work on my character design until sometime on the weekend at least.)

Roderick_BR
2007-10-03, 02:31 PM
Except the DC, just for the record, is 15+ the spell level, not 10+ spell level. So 9th level spells have a DC for Defensive Casting of 24. And 4th have a DC of 19.

It doesn't invalidate your point at all, (at 17th level, you can have 20 ranks, +CON so still a no-brainer) though it did bear qualification.

Personally, I've never had a real problem with Defensive Casting. If that warrior can swing his oversized spiked chain around his head enough to get the mobility he needs to do damage with it while still dodging blows, the mage can easily twist his fingers into a complicated pattern and say Shazam! while doing it. We don't even make the warrior roll anything.
Oh, you are right. I need to take that in consideration when checking DCs.

Reinboom
2007-10-03, 02:45 PM
Warblade and the maneuvers have been released publicly. No need to debate without actually reading based on just not owning the book.

Warblade (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060802a&page=2)
Maneuvers (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20061225a)

===

As for the current discussion:
Don't forget you can use concentration checks of +50 (IIRC) to cast while grappled despite somatic materials. :smalltongue:

Kaelik
2007-10-03, 02:49 PM
Well, I was actually bluffing to make my point, especially since I don't actually own Tome of Battle. (The real question is, how's caster/noncaster balance going to turn out in my homebrew system?) But hey, why not? I think the Warblade has a pretty good chance. As long as you're planning to fight as a Warlock the way Warlocks normally fight, rather than using some obscure cheesy trick. Since I don't have enough Tome of Battle prowess to build a super cheese-optimized Warblade.

Since you already made the offer about not flying, though, I don't think you're trying to fight dirty. (Warblades don't have much good ranged stuff, except for one 8th-level maneuver. So I would have had to be a Raptoran, or carry some Potions of Fly or similar items if you hadn't made the offer.)

Anything in the Level 9-14 range or so sounds fine to me. (Above that, characters just get too complicated.) 28-point buy? Allowed sources: SRD, PHB II, Complete Arcane/Warrior/Adventurer, Tome of Battle; anything else you need access to? Is multiclassing allowed? How about PrC's? No custom items.

Who's willing to DM? (And I probably won't be able to seriously work on my character design until sometime on the weekend at least.)

To be perfectly honest the way Warlocks fight is cheesy. Typical strategy involves flying where no one can hit you and eldritch blasting, I think that since we sort of want this to be about part usefulness, and since both characters are probably going to be doing damage to kill each other that I should stay grounded and build for max damage per round rather then hiding really well.

Invocations are pretty shorthanded so I'd say include Dragon Magic and Complete Mage too. I think I should probably not go Eldritch Disciple, that's about half Warlock, Half Clericzilla. And that isn't what we are trying for.

The thing is you've been suckered in because a badly optimized warlock is like a better monk (survivability but better damage contribution, though still not Fighter or Rouge good) however a well optimized Warlock is quite powerful.

I'm thinking source wise, for me, Complete Arcane, Complete Mage, Dragon Magic, Hellfire Warlock (Online here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20061207a&page=3)), Tome of Magic for a one level Binder dip for me, Lords of Madness for Aberration feats, Shorten Grip (Dragon Magazine Compendium) to hit adjacent squares, and Magic Item Compendium (Bracers of Opportunity).

Obviously core included, and for you Tome of Battle (I have it so don't worry about me, but don't they have that information online?) Complete Warrior, whatever else you find should be fine.

28PB seems fine, as for level probably just roll 1d6+8 in your post.

Draz74
2007-10-03, 03:33 PM
Warblade and the maneuvers have been released publicly. No need to debate without actually reading based on just not owning the book.

Warblade (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060802a&page=2)
Maneuvers (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20061225a)


You'll notice I did, in fact, agree to the duel. Because I know about these resources. I sure wouldn't have agreed to a Warblade building challenge without them!

It's Feats and PrCs from ToB that have me more worried about my lack of optimization skills.

EDIT: Errrm. That's a LOT of sources you're asking for. I wanted to keep things relatively simple (and I don't have easy access to a crucial fraction of them). I have some specific comments about which of them I'd like to veto, but I don't have time to type it all right now.

Kaelik
2007-10-03, 04:36 PM
EDIT: Errrm. That's a LOT of sources you're asking for. I wanted to keep things relatively simple (and I don't have easy access to a crucial fraction of them). I have some specific comments about which of them I'd like to veto, but I don't have time to type it all right now.

Feel free to let me know what you want to veto, but if I'm going through all the trouble to build a Warlock who stands around visible waiting for you to hit him I should get something.

Several sources you'll note I'm only using a single item/feat/thing from. For example, you probably want to ban my one level Binder dip, even though you might not know what it's for. I'll tell you, it's for Binding Nebarius and healing one point of Con damage a round, I could drop that no problem, and you'd probably regret it since my (probably easily accomplished, assuming everything else) goal is to kill you in one round. I can take 1 point of Con damage, I can even take 2.

Other things you probably don't like, Hellfire Warlock, guess what? That's a stable, saying no to that is like saying no to Stances. Pretty critical to the class.

Complete Mage probably doesn't add much but I want my choices for invocations since most of the good Complete Arcane ones involve invisibility and flying, since I'm not going to Eldritch Disciple cheese (it's actually less cheesy then Clericzilla, but you know, that's not saying much) I don't need any of the PrCs or feats.

Removing Dragon Magic is the same as removing maneuvers. Eldritch Glaive is the only decent melee shape around. Without that I'd pretty much have to resort to flight to even pretend to be playing a Warlock.

Between Lords of Madness Aberration Feats and Shorten Grip, You could want to ban either or both, but it's somewhat silly to do so if you ask me, since at that point I won't have anything to do with my feats, and I should be able to take feats that work towards my goal of skill in combat, just like you should.

The Magic Item Compendium is just there to give me the same thing I could get with UMD usage, but I'm trying to limit that.

And if you want to ban Complete Arcane, well then I call ToB of limits. :smallwink:

As for ToB, you should definitely find a way to look at those feats and PrCs (Feats more important.) Maybe if you asked somewhere (here, Char Op, wherever) about what feats from ToB would be useful for a Warblade trying to do X (where X is whatever you want him to be able to do well) you'd get some good info.

Oh and if you don't mind Hmm, I failed at dice rolling, guess I'll use Invisible Castle: Okay, apparently level 13 is what we should go for. (http://invisiblecastle.com/find.py?id=1297923)

And another thing, Flaws from the SRD?

EDIT: And how do we want to do HP? I prefer systems of 3/4s or something similar, rolling just seems to random for any real competition (which is why we have point buy) and I think 3/4s gives real benefit to the high HD, which generally need it (though not as much in the Warblades case, seeing as he is awesome.)

Draz74
2007-10-03, 05:55 PM
I'm back ...


Feel free to let me know what you want to veto, but if I'm going through all the trouble to build a Warlock who stands around visible waiting for you to hit him I should get something.

Yeah, fair enough; it would indeed be a silly contest to say "we're dueling, but you're not allowed to put anything that's actually good on the Warlock." But at the same time, like you said, if you build a "Warlock" who's actually an Eldritch Theurge ClericZilla, that defeats the purpose just as badly.

... but it's not my fault that the Warblade needs to "fish" in less splatbooks to be effective than the Warlock does. :smalltongue:


Several sources you'll note I'm only using a single item/feat/thing from. For example, you probably want to ban my one level Binder dip, even though you might not know what it's for. I'll tell you, it's for Binding Nebarius and healing one point of Con damage a round, I could drop that no problem, and you'd probably regret it since my (probably easily accomplished, assuming everything else) goal is to kill you in one round. I can take 1 point of Con damage, I can even take 2.

Oh, I knew exactly what you had planned on from Tome of Magic. I practically started typing "Fiendish Codex and Tome of Magic" on the list of allowed sources, but then I decided to wait and see if you were planning to use the Hellfire/Naberius trick based on whether you requested these sources.

I still think multiclassing in a duel like this is lame, since we're supposed to be testing two classes against each other. I say it's up to the DM. A possible compromise would be to modify the Bind Vestige feat so that you can choose which power you gain from binding a vestige. (Or does the Bind Vestige feat give you the ability damage healing anyway? I'm away from book.) You did complain about having worthwhile feats to pick from, didn't you?

If you're allowed Tome of Magic and multiclassing, though, then I'm allowed XPH and multiclassing. (Not sure whether I'd end up using it anyway, but I might.)


Other things you probably don't like, Hellfire Warlock, guess what? That's a stable, saying no to that is like saying no to Stances. Pretty critical to the class.

Not really. It's more like saying "no" to Frenzied Berserker if I were making a Barbarian. Stances are actually written into the class, and in the same book as the Warblade. :smallamused: Still, I guess PrCs that don't require multiclassing are a pretty reasonable thing to allow ... and again, saying "you're not allowed to use anything that's actually good" would be pretty dumb.


Complete Mage probably doesn't add much but I want my choices for invocations since most of the good Complete Arcane ones involve invisibility and flying, since I'm not going to Eldritch Disciple cheese (it's actually less cheesy then Clericzilla, but you know, that's not saying much) I don't need any of the PrCs or feats.

See, this one puzzled me because the only Complete Mage stuff I've really heard much about (for Warlocks or anyone else) is PrC's. Which I guess means that it won't hurt too much to allow Complete Mage ... except that I have no clue whatsoever about what Invocations are in it, and I like to know the possibilities of what I might get hit with. And I don't know if I have any way to preview Complete Mage at all, I don't think any of my friends have it.


Removing Dragon Magic is the same as removing maneuvers. Eldritch Glaive is the only decent melee shape around. Without that I'd pretty much have to resort to flight to even pretend to be playing a Warlock.

Again, saying Eldritch Glaive is the same as maneuvers is an exaggeration. More like "Eldritch Blast in general" is the same as maneuvers. Still, yeah, I agree this is a pretty fundamental part of a Warlock, and I feel dumb for forgetting to list Dragon Magic in my original list of proposed allowed sources.


Between Lords of Madness Aberration Feats and Shorten Grip, You could want to ban either or both, but it's somewhat silly to do so if you ask me, since at that point I won't have anything to do with my feats, and I should be able to take feats that work towards my goal of skill in combat, just like you should.

Lords of Madness was the other request that confused me. I don't know much at all about Aberrant feats. (*Quickly reads through some of them*) Ah. You're probably mostly after Inhuman Reach? Well, I'd say that it's a somewhat overpowered feat and not really meaningfully connected to the Warlock at all. So I'd still vote to exclude Lords of Madness.

As for Shorten Grip, I'd rather veto that too; I don't trust Dragon feats to be balanced quality, and if you want a similar ability you can just grab Short Haft from the PHB II. (It's got more prereqs and requires you to use up swift actions, but you'll avoid the -2 penalty, so it will even help you in a way.)


The Magic Item Compendium is just there to give me the same thing I could get with UMD usage, but I'm trying to limit that.

I'd imagine the MIC is at least as helpful to melee types as it is to a Warlock. So if I had access to it, there's a good chance I could be talked into allowing it. But I've never so much as seen the book, so if I can't use it, you can't either. UMD away. :smalltongue:


And if you want to ban Complete Arcane, well then I call ToB of limits. :smallwink:

Awww man! That was my real strategy!


As for ToB, you should definitely find a way to look at those feats and PrCs (Feats more important.) Maybe if you asked somewhere (here, Char Op, wherever) about what feats from ToB would be useful for a Warblade trying to do X (where X is whatever you want him to be able to do well) you'd get some good info.

I'll see my friend who has a large book collection tonight and bug him about what I can borrow from him in the near future. He's said he's OK with loaning me stuff but so far hasn't followed up on that offer. He might have even gotten the MIC recently.


Okay, apparently level 13 is what we should go for.[/URL]
And another thing, Flaws from the SRD?

I've always figured that allowing UA at all was pretty crazy, because then you're allowing (in theory) Gestalt. Wheeee! I'll be a Warblade//Feat Rogue. But Flaws, specifically ... hmmm, I've always thought they were silly munchkin stuff. I'd rather (again) keep things as simple as possible. But I suppose if you convince our hypothetical DM to allow Flaws, I would probably find a use for one myself.

Abstruse
2007-10-03, 06:07 PM
There should probably be a spell that creats a 5 inch thick Wall of Force around your square only, rendering you immune to melee/touch attacks or grapples for the duration...
There is. It's called Otiluke's Resilient Sphere. Just cast it on yourself. Of course, now you'll need to use indirect spells like conjuration for the next seven or eight minutes, but hey! You're immune to melee attacks and grapples! :smallwink:

Kaelik
2007-10-03, 07:27 PM
Oh, I knew exactly what you had planned on from Tome of Magic. I practically started typing "Fiendish Codex and Tome of Magic" on the list of allowed sources, but then I decided to wait and see if you were planning to use the Hellfire/Naberius trick based on whether you requested these sources.

I still think multiclassing in a duel like this is lame, since we're supposed to be testing two classes against each other. I say it's up to the DM. A possible compromise would be to modify the Bind Vestige feat so that you can choose which power you gain from binding a vestige. (Or does the Bind Vestige feat give you the ability damage healing anyway? I'm away from book.) You did complain about having worthwhile feats to pick from, didn't you?

Bind Vestige gives some skills (that go away if I take Con damage, how funny, and Improved Bind gives the ability to take ten on something.) But like I said, It shouldn't really matter, since if you stopped trying to nerf me so much I'd kill you before you ever hit (Not that I might not anyway.:smalltongue: )


See, this one puzzled me because the only Complete Mage stuff I've really heard much about (for Warlocks or anyone else) is PrC's. Which I guess means that it won't hurt too much to allow Complete Mage ... except that I have no clue whatsoever about what Invocations are in it, and I like to know the possibilities of what I might get hit with. And I don't know if I have any way to preview Complete Mage at all, I don't think any of my friends have it.

To be honest, I'm not really sure what's in there either, but I know it has Invocations, and I know I rarely choose them because Invis and Flying are better.


Lords of Madness was the other request that confused me. I don't know much at all about Aberrant feats. (*Quickly reads through some of them*) Ah. You're probably mostly after Inhuman Reach? Well, I'd say that it's a somewhat overpowered feat and not really meaningfully connected to the Warlock at all. So I'd still vote to exclude Lords of Madness.

It's not overpowered at all, It even requires blowing a feat beforehand, and it is meaningfully connected to a GlaiveLock since it is meaningfully connected to every reach weapon wielder.


As for Shorten Grip, I'd rather veto that too; I don't trust Dragon feats to be balanced quality, and if you want a similar ability you can just grab Short Haft from the PHB II. (It's got more prereqs and requires you to use up swift actions, but you'll avoid the -2 penalty, so it will even help you in a way.)

It won't help in anyway. Burning those actions isn't a problem, the problem is that it isn't an immediate action instead. It's not a similar ability at all.


I'd imagine the MIC is at least as helpful to melee types as it is to a Warlock. So if I had access to it, there's a good chance I could be talked into allowing it. But I've never so much as seen the book, so if I can't use it, you can't either. UMD away. :smalltongue:

Just remember that you asked for it. (No I'm not going to UMD Divine Power, even though every good Glaive Lock Should.)

I've always figured that allowing UA at all was pretty crazy, because then you're allowing (in theory) Gestalt. Wheeee! I'll be a Warblade//Feat Rogue. But Flaws, specifically ... hmmm, I've always thought they were silly munchkin stuff. I'd rather (again) keep things as simple as possible. But I suppose if you convince our hypothetical DM to allow Flaws, I would probably find a use for one myself.[/QUOTE]

Flaws aren't silly munchkin stuff in my mind, they are a compensation for the realization by the designers that they created way too many feats, so that every class (even a Fighter 10/Psychic Warrior 2/Monk 2/Feat Rouge 2/Whatever X) would always have more good options then Feats. And that's why I pretty much just tell my characters that they all get a level one feat anyway, and then I look a their characters and give them another one that I think they should have. I don't even give them flaws. In my mind all Characters need more Feats.

Chronos
2007-10-04, 12:15 AM
Of course, now you'll need to use indirect spells like conjuration for the next seven or eight minutes, but hey! You're immune to melee attacks and grapples!Don't you still need line of effect to the point where a summon appears? Resilient sphere would block line of effect. Though I suppose you're still perfectly free to summon things inside the globe with you...