New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 72
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    May 2014

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruftzwerg View Post
    Enlightened Fist is still a choice for clawlocks, don't get me wrong. It just shouldn't be the reason to sole get that ability ;)

    Using the combo (either Enlightened Fist or Hideous Blow) can be a nice prebuff method but that's all. After the combat starts you don't wanna waste any possible extra attacks anymore.
    Oh, absolutely, I was merely considering it a fun extra - and being able to deliver an actual eldritch blast alongside the eldritch claws would be amusing, plus it's something I know works with eldritch essences. Alternatively, I have a few Chameleon levels in that build, so I could also just use it for actual ray spells. Either way, however, it would just be something I do as prep, or if I somehow end up with a turn in which can't get adjacent to any enemies or otherwise can't attack, but I also don't feel like actually using the ray as a ray.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darg View Post
    I don't see why "You can deliver your eldritch blast as a melee attack" would mean you aren't delivering your eldritch blast with the melee attacks you can make. Prior to the unarmed strike damage being mentioned, it tells you that you make claw attacks. It does not say that you make an unarmed attack or strike.
    Hideous blow contains the language one would use if one actually was delivering a blast with a melee attack of any sort (at least if the designers were being sensible). By contrast, eldritch claws merely give you claws, whose damage contains both unarmed strike and eldritch blast damage. Why would it be one of those and not the other?

    You aren't really wasting anything. If anything it's actually really beneficial. It saves an invocation choice, explicitly let's you use an unarmed strike in place of the touch attack as part of casting, and let's you combine it with the arcane fist ability. Or, you could combine it with hideous blow. Hold the charge and use the standard action with hideous blow and deliver your blast twice in a single standard (hideous blow is not cast so it doesn't provoke nor cause the loss of the charge). Add in Snap Kick and you could make it 3 blasts and 2 unarmed strikes. The only thing you lose out on is really just arcane rejuvenation.
    That character will be using eldritch claws+beast strike, not hideous blow, which seems inferior to both those feats either alone or together. In general, it'd be more advantageous to use the claws over Enlightened Fist's hold ray ability, unless I have enough prep time to channel an eldritch blast and hold the charge before activating the claws on the next turn. Or, if it turns out I can't use essences with the claws, and thus I'm only getting use of essences (and Hellfire Warlock's extra hellfire damage) from casting the normal eldritch blast"

    You don't have permission to perform more than 2 attacks. You can tell me all you want that it is simply a reminder, but that is not what it says. The explicit wording is in the feat's description, "You can deliver your eldritch blast as a melee attack." The PHB even tells you that this part of the feat is a "Description of what the feat does or represents in plain language."
    ...I had to look at the feat again to figure out why you kept saying that, and turns out it says it between the feat name and the prerequisites, the section I never look at for actual rules because it's almost always just fluff and never actually has anything of mechanical value. I've never encountered a case where the summary actually expanded one's understanding of the rules, but I guess there's a first time for everything, even in 3.5. However, that still leaves a couple of unanswered questions - does it use different damage types or is it all the same slashing and piercing used by normal claws? Since it's not a touch attack, I'm inclined to believe it's entirely physical, like normal claws - and also because it'd be really nice if you could effectively double your unarmed strike damage with the Beast Strike feat (though DMs might understandably want to disallow that!), and that's obviously a no-go if your claws technically deal bludgeoning plus force damage.
    Last edited by Dusk Raven; 2021-05-19 at 12:39 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Potato_Priest View Post
    Honestly, most players would get super excited about Zenob the god of crabs because it's eccentric. I know I would.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    But a friendly reminder that, by RAW, this game is unplayable

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusk Raven View Post
    Hideous blow contains the language one would use if one actually was delivering a blast with a melee attack of any sort (at least if the designers were being sensible). By contrast, eldritch claws merely give you claws, whose damage contains both unarmed strike and eldritch blast damage. Why would it be one of those and not the other?
    While I can't get inside the mind of the creator of the feat I can tell you that it is most likely the difference in structure. A feat description is formatted completely differently than an invocation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusk Raven View Post
    That character will be using eldritch claws+beast strike, not hideous blow, which seems inferior to both those feats either alone or together. In general, it'd be more advantageous to use the claws over Enlightened Fist's hold ray ability, unless I have enough prep time to channel an eldritch blast and hold the charge before activating the claws on the next turn. Or, if it turns out I can't use essences with the claws, and thus I'm only getting use of essences (and Hellfire Warlock's extra hellfire damage) from casting the normal eldritch blast"
    I don't have much experience with eldritch claws+beast strike because we tend to stay away from dragon material. You'd get your full attack with unarmed strikes + 2 claw attacks of eldritch blast damage. If your DM rules that eldritch claws is not eldritch blast, you could hold off on using the feat until after you make your first blast attack to add essences to it. Blinding/shaken/nauseated are really good to put on your target. That said, I don't think eldritch claws even qualifies for beast strike; which requires an actual claw attack. Eldritch claws refers to itself as the weapon "eldritch claws" instead of saying you are proficient with your claws.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusk Raven View Post
    ...I had to look at the feat again to figure out why you kept saying that, and turns out it says it between the feat name and the prerequisites, the section I never look at for actual rules because it's almost always just fluff and never actually has anything of mechanical value. I've never encountered a case where the summary actually expanded one's understanding of the rules, but I guess there's a first time for everything, even in 3.5. However, that still leaves a couple of unanswered questions - does it use different damage types or is it all the same slashing and piercing used by normal claws? Since it's not a touch attack, I'm inclined to believe it's entirely physical, like normal claws - and also because it'd be really nice if you could effectively double your unarmed strike damage with the Beast Strike feat (though DMs might understandably want to disallow that!), and that's obviously a no-go if your claws technically deal bludgeoning plus force damage.
    An example of the feat not making any sense at all without the plain text at the beginning of the feat description is the Double Wand Wielder feat from CArc.

    General
    You can activate two wands at the same time.

    Prerequisite
    Craft Wand (PH) , Two-Weapon Fighting (PH)

    Benefit
    As a full-round action, you can wield a wand in each hand (if you have both hands free), with one wand designated as your primary wand and the other your secondary wand. Each use of the secondary wand expends 2 charges from it instead of 1.
    Without the plain text it's easy to see how someone could look at it and say that it doesn't actually do anything. Other examples include the proficiency feats and weapon selection feats in the PHB. One egregious example is the shield proficiency feat. If you don't pay attention to the plain text, the benefit would apply to tower shields as well.

    Edritch blast damage is magical without a descriptor. So at the bare minimum in how it is ruled, it will bypass x/magic damage reduction. It is never force damage unless one uses a homebrew invocation to change the damage type. If you want to damage incorporeal creatures without the 50% miss chance, a one level dip into enlighted spirit will get you spirit blast. A one level dip can be valuable anyways thanks to aura of menace, just passing by some one gives them a really nice penalties and it works automatically.
    Last edited by Darg; 2021-05-19 at 09:44 AM.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    May 2014

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Darg View Post
    I don't have much experience with eldritch claws+beast strike because we tend to stay away from dragon material. You'd get your full attack with unarmed strikes + 2 claw attacks of eldritch blast damage. If your DM rules that eldritch claws is not eldritch blast, you could hold off on using the feat until after you make your first blast attack to add essences to it. Blinding/shaken/nauseated are really good to put on your target. That said, I don't think eldritch claws even qualifies for beast strike; which requires an actual claw attack. Eldritch claws refers to itself as the weapon "eldritch claws" instead of saying you are proficient with your claws.
    Why only two? Also, it says you get claw attacks, they're natural weapons. That's all Beast Strike needs. And I don't recall a case of a creature not being proficient with natural weapons, or of those terms even being used in the same sentence at any point in the rules. It's just assumed that you're proficient.

    This is reaching levels of quibbling over language that I would completely ignore as a DM, and I would implore any other DM to just use some common sense. D&D 3.5, after all, is where I learned to hate the words, "rules as written."

    Edritch blast damage is magical without a descriptor. So at the bare minimum in how it is ruled, it will bypass x/magic damage reduction. It is never force damage unless one uses a homebrew invocation to change the damage type. If you want to damage incorporeal creatures without the 50% miss chance, a one level dip into enlighted spirit will get you spirit blast. A one level dip can be valuable anyways thanks to aura of menace, just passing by some one gives them a really nice penalties and it works automatically.
    ...Never mind on the force damage thing, I honestly thought that was its normal damage type, and not untyped damage. Guess I'm too used to 5e now.
    Quote Originally Posted by Potato_Priest View Post
    Honestly, most players would get super excited about Zenob the god of crabs because it's eccentric. I know I would.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    But a friendly reminder that, by RAW, this game is unplayable

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    schreier's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    I thought it would be interesting to get responses in survey format since the responses are so widespread, so here is the link:
    https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/6P8LN68

    I'll post the responses we get this weekend I guess although anyone should be able to see them I beleive

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Troll in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Darg View Post
    You don't have permission to perform more than 2 attacks. You can tell me all you want that it is simply a reminder, but that is not what it says. The explicit wording is in the feat's description, "You can deliver your eldritch blast as a melee attack." The PHB even tells you that this part of the feat is a "Description of what the feat does or represents in plain language."




    I guess you missed the rule on page 40 under "Extraordinary or Supernatural Abilities": "Unless the description of the specific maneuver or stance says otherwise, treat it as an extraordinary ability."
    First, it seems I missed the rule on P40 as you said, thx for pointing me to it =)

    But.. I still don't see how your statement about Eldritch Claws is justified: Link to Eldritch Claws feat JPG
    Nowhere does it state that you "deliver your eldritch blast". It only tells you that you grow Claws from your eldritch blast ability and tells you how the damage of em is calculated, not more not less.

    And repeating general rules as reminder is a common thing. E.g. most touch spells still repeat that they work on a successful touch attack in their text even if the "target: creature touched"-line already puts them under the general rules for touch attacks. Ray spells are another example where the obvious "Effect: Ray" is explained as friendly reminder in their rule text. Eldritch Claws does the same thing by repeating the general rules for "Claws". Just repeating general rules just repeat em. It doesn't create a 2nd copy of it that pretends to be more specific, but calls out the same result as the general rule. That would make no sense since it would be just repeating the general rules. As such, you have to threat such rule text as friendly reminder.

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    France

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruftzwerg View Post
    Nowhere does it state that you "deliver your eldritch blast". It only tells you that you grow Claws from your eldritch blast ability and tells you how the damage of em is calculated, not more not less.
    It does. Before anything else, just below the title.

    On a related matter, if a glaivelock uses his iteration attacks then, as a free action, grows his claws, can he make the claw attacks as a secondary natural one ? It sounds pretty nice

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    May 2014

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    It does. Before anything else, just below the title.

    On a related matter, if a glaivelock uses his iteration attacks then, as a free action, grows his claws, can he make the claw attacks as a secondary natural one ? It sounds pretty nice
    By the time you grow the claws, the full attack action would already be over, I think, and thus you'd be left with claws but no action to use them - although you could at least make attacks of opportunity with them. Also, you'd have to have one or more foes within reach weapon range, and one or more within 5 feet, since the two have different ranges.
    Last edited by Dusk Raven; 2021-05-19 at 01:31 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Potato_Priest View Post
    Honestly, most players would get super excited about Zenob the god of crabs because it's eccentric. I know I would.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    But a friendly reminder that, by RAW, this game is unplayable

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Zarvistic's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2017

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusk Raven View Post
    By the time you grow the claws, the full attack action would already be over, I think, and thus you'd be left with claws but no action to use them - although you could at least make attacks of opportunity with them. Also, you'd have to have one or more foes within reach weapon range, and one or more within 5 feet, since the two have different ranges.
    Not sure if the idea is possible or not, but I don't think these two things are an issue, cause you can both 5ft step as well as take free actions between attacks of a full-attack, so you could create the claws between glaive attacks and 5ft step later to use them.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    May 2014

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarvistic View Post
    Not sure if the idea is possible or not, but I don't think these two things are an issue, cause you can both 5ft step as well as take free actions between attacks of a full-attack, so you could create the claws between glaive attacks and 5ft step later to use them.
    I wasn't sure if you could take free actions within a full attack or not. The problem, however, is that you can't use your normal eldritch blast with your claws out. So, the question is, is your full attack over once all your iterative glaive attacks are used? Actually, I'm not even sure you could do that, because using eldritch glaive isn't a full attack, it's a special full-round action. At least, if I'm reading the invocation text correctly.
    Last edited by Dusk Raven; 2021-05-19 at 04:32 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Potato_Priest View Post
    Honestly, most players would get super excited about Zenob the god of crabs because it's eccentric. I know I would.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    But a friendly reminder that, by RAW, this game is unplayable

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusk Raven View Post
    I wasn't sure if you could take free actions within a full attack or not. The problem, however, is that you can't use your normal eldritch blast with your claws out. So, the question is, is your full attack over once all your iterative glaive attacks are used? Actually, I'm not even sure you could do that, because using eldritch glaive isn't a full attack, it's a special full-round action. At least, if I'm reading the invocation text correctly.
    The PHB says, "You can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally." This is on page 139. Basically they can be performed at any time during your turn.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusk Raven View Post
    By the time you grow the claws, the full attack action would already be over, I think, and thus you'd be left with claws but no action to use them - although you could at least make attacks of opportunity with them. Also, you'd have to have one or more foes within reach weapon range, and one or more within 5 feet, since the two have different ranges.
    Just pick up the Short Haft feat. As a swift action you can give up your reach quality. But the 5 ft. step is probably a lot more functional and doesn't cost a feat.
    Last edited by Darg; 2021-05-19 at 06:59 PM.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Troll in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    It does. Before anything else, just below the title.

    On a related matter, if a glaivelock uses his iteration attacks then, as a free action, grows his claws, can he make the claw attacks as a secondary natural one ? It sounds pretty nice
    1: That sentence is fluff text and not part of the "rules" presented in the "benefit" section. A common format in 3.5. Only the "benefit" section has the right to create rules for the feat. Anything else is not part of the rules of the feat and just mere fluff text.

    2: Depends on the limbs used.. (official answer)
    At first glance you can freely combine your regular full-attack (including iterative) and use your Eldritch Claws as secondary attacks. The sole thing that restricts this is that IIRC 3.5 has some kind of "1 limb per action/per round" rule (don't ask where this does come from. I can just recall several discussions regarding it over the years..).
    E.g.: If you use a 2h weapon, both arms are already used for attacking (and couldn't use Claws). A monk on the other hand could attack with his other limbs and still use both arms for the claw attacks.

    Rules of the Game for reference: All about Unarmed Strikes part 2
    Quote Originally Posted by Rules of the game archive
    A creature can choose to treat its unarmed attacks as its primary attacks and its natural weapons as secondary attacks. (This method is normally used to add weapon attacks to a natural attack routine.) The creature must make all unarmed attacks with its primary limb, which prevents that hand from being used for a natural attack such as a claw or slam.
    Sadly they don't tell us where this rule comes from.. ^^
    Maybe someone can back this up with actual rule text?

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    France

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruftzwerg View Post
    1: That sentence is fluff text and not part of the "rules" presented in the "benefit" section. A common format in 3.5. Only the "benefit" section has the right to create rules for the feat. Anything else is not part of the rules of the feat and just mere fluff text.
    Fair enough but the RAI is as clear as can be. Going against it upholding the sacred RAW is just fanatism

    2: Depends on the limbs used.. (official answer)
    At first glance you can freely combine your regular full-attack (including iterative) and use your Eldritch Claws as secondary attacks. The sole thing that restricts this is that IIRC 3.5 has some kind of "1 limb per action/per round" rule (don't ask where this does come from. I can just recall several discussions regarding it over the years..).
    E.g.: If you use a 2h weapon, both arms are already used for attacking (and couldn't use Claws). A monk on the other hand could attack with his other limbs and still use both arms for the claw attacks.

    Rules of the Game for reference: All about Unarmed Strikes part 2
    Sadly they don't tell us where this rule comes from.. ^^
    Maybe someone can back this up with actual rule text?
    I remember reading something like this in the archives as well but never found the actual rule for it.
    Is there anyway to make a Talashatora Warlock ? ^^ I didn't find an easy one

    The best way imho would be playing a Diopsid Warlock
    Last edited by Paragon; 2021-05-20 at 04:25 AM.

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Zarvistic's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2017

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Could take monastic training bound to cerebruhmancer and use that to advance a bunch of stuff maybe.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Troll in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    Fair enough but the RAI is as clear as can be. Going against it upholding the sacred RAW is just fanatism



    I remember reading something like this in the archives as well but never found the actual rule for it.
    Is there anyway to make a Talashatora Warlock ? ^^ I didn't find an easy one

    The best way imho would be playing a Diopsid Warlock
    I can see a point for RAI, but since the benefit section ain't ambiguous imho, it wouldn't fly at my table.

    And regarding Talashatora: Dunno if the is any PRC that progresses psionic and arcane caster lvl at the same time. Alternatively just UMD a Monk's Belt. UMD Roll -20 (penalty from UMD) +5 (Monk's Belt) = effective Monk lvl for activating the belt

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruftzwerg View Post
    1: That sentence is fluff text and not part of the "rules" presented in the "benefit" section. A common format in 3.5. Only the "benefit" section has the right to create rules for the feat. Anything else is not part of the rules of the feat and just mere fluff text.
    "Fluff" is not how the PHB describes it. Yes, there is rules text within the plain text. I even provided examples where feats even require the plain text to even function: proficiency feats and weapon selections such as improved critical or weapon focus.

    Where is the basis that "fluff" text even exists other than personal disagreement with the text itself?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruftzwerg View Post
    Sadly they don't tell us where this rule comes from.. ^^
    Maybe someone can back this up with actual rule text?
    There is no rules text for this. The only rule available is that you only use a limb for a single type of attack. Use gauntlets for an armed unarmed strike? You can't use those hands. That said, claws can also be on the feet so where a creature has its natural weapons is important too. Unarmed strikes as the description of the weapon says in the PHB can be made with ANY part of the body so even if arms and legs can't be used a head butt is still quite possible unless you bite which uses the "head limb." That said, a booty bump or belly bump isn't going to do any damage by themselves so unarmed strikes are pretty limited by the number of extremities.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    France

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruftzwerg View Post
    Alternatively just UMD a Monk's Belt. UMD Roll -20 (penalty from UMD) +5 (Monk's Belt) = effective Monk lvl for activating the belt
    But maybe I don't get what UMD allows you to do but whether you're a level-0 monk (with UMD) or not a monk (without it) it doesn't change much right ?

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    schreier's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    But maybe I don't get what UMD allows you to do but whether you're a level-0 monk (with UMD) or not a monk (without it) it doesn't change much right ?
    Not sure it works, but it could be trying to qualify as a monk for purposes of the damage? A level 15 warlock UMD on the monks belt might be able to do level 20 unarmed damage with that approach (if the DM allows)

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    schreier's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Responses to the survey so far (5 responses):

    What type of ability does the Eldritch Claws feat count as?
    Supernatural 3
    Extraordinary 2

    I went Supernatural there, even though the RAW part of me thinks Extraordinary because it feels Supernatural. If shadow blink is extraordinary though, this feels like it could be/should be too though, so I am honestly torn. I'll call it 2.5 to 2.5, so a virtual tie because I can't decide.


    Does Eldritch Claws work with Beast Strike?
    Yes 4
    No 1

    Does Eldritch Claws allow you to use Blast Essences on it?
    No 5

    The only unanimous answer


    Interesting responses so far ... glad to see 1. I am not crazy for having questions, and 2. I am relatively close to the majority opinion.

    I didn't ask about the interaction of the necklace of natural weapons because it feels open to abuse (if claws/unarmed attacks stack 3 times or not) -- I think the easiest answer is no because the "claw" damage is the base damage, not the "enhanced" damage (which is kind of like claw damage + other damage/effects).

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by schreier View Post
    Responses to the survey so far (5 responses):

    What type of ability does the Eldritch Claws feat count as?
    Supernatural 3
    Extraordinary 2

    I went Supernatural there, even though the RAW part of me thinks Extraordinary because it feels Supernatural. If shadow blink is extraordinary though, this feels like it could be/should be too though, so I am honestly torn. I'll call it 2.5 to 2.5, so a virtual tie because I can't decide.


    Does Eldritch Claws work with Beast Strike?
    Yes 4
    No 1

    Does Eldritch Claws allow you to use Blast Essences on it?
    No 5

    The only unanimous answer


    Interesting responses so far ... glad to see 1. I am not crazy for having questions, and 2. I am relatively close to the majority opinion.

    I didn't ask about the interaction of the necklace of natural weapons because it feels open to abuse (if claws/unarmed attacks stack 3 times or not) -- I think the easiest answer is no because the "claw" damage is the base damage, not the "enhanced" damage (which is kind of like claw damage + other damage/effects).
    Opinions don't really mean much. On this board there is a higher concentration of optimizers that expect every frontline fighter to take a 1 level pounce barbarian dip to keep up than people playing 3e actually do. They are also of the opinion that losing caster levels in trade for non-casting opportunities is an exceptionally poor choice due to the multitude of options spellcasters receive over the decade of content releases. Always with the disclaimer of balancing to the table like the disclaimer actually helps anyone. Just take it with a grain of salt.

    Your first question has its own flaws. 2 of us believe that it delivers your eldritch blast instead of being your eldritch blast. As a feat it is unaffected by AMF. But the damage is the eldritch blast. As an SLA, the eldritch blast portion would be affected by AMF and spell resistance. Meaning you would still have claws, just not blast damage. Personally I think the feat as a whole for flavor be supernatural so that you can't form the claws in an AMF, but the blast damage is still an SLA and thus subject to spell resistance.

    The last 2 questions are fine.

    Quote Originally Posted by schreier View Post
    Not sure it works, but it could be trying to qualify as a monk for purposes of the damage? A level 15 warlock UMD on the monks belt might be able to do level 20 unarmed damage with that approach (if the DM allows)
    To emulate a class feature at a specific level, the skill requires activating the item. A passive effect isn't activated and therefore you can't fake being a level 20 monk.
    Last edited by Darg; 2021-05-20 at 01:54 PM.

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Troll in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Darg View Post
    "Fluff" is not how the PHB describes it. Yes, there is rules text within the plain text. I even provided examples where feats even require the plain text to even function: proficiency feats and weapon selections such as improved critical or weapon focus.

    Where is the basis that "fluff" text even exists other than personal disagreement with the text itself?



    There is no rules text for this. The only rule available is that you only use a limb for a single type of attack. Use gauntlets for an armed unarmed strike? You can't use those hands. That said, claws can also be on the feet so where a creature has its natural weapons is important too. Unarmed strikes as the description of the weapon says in the PHB can be made with ANY part of the body so even if arms and legs can't be used a head butt is still quite possible unless you bite which uses the "head limb." That said, a booty bump or belly bump isn't going to do any damage by themselves so unarmed strikes are pretty limited by the number of extremities.
    We have an official format for Feat Descriotions which sole gives the "Benefit:" line the permission to give you rules for the ability. Anything else has not been given permission to do so.
    And if you have a look at the PHB version on page 89, it has also the following line in between the title and prerequisite:

    Description of what the feat does or represents in plain language.
    This defines the part that your interpretation relies on as "plain language", which is *fluff* and not rule text how the ability works. That is defined in the "Benefits" section as said.

    Regarding Eldritch Claws on you feet: The ability is specific that your grow claws from your hands and thus disallows the regular option to have claws on your feet therefore. Sadly this doesn't work. This is why I mentioned monk, since only their unarmed strike ability has the special exception to not have any "offhand part of their body". They can choose anything as their "Primary Limb" to get their iterative attacks (something non monks don't have the permission to do..).

    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    But maybe I don't get what UMD allows you to do but whether you're a level-0 monk (with UMD) or not a monk (without it) it doesn't change much right ?
    You can use UMD to emulate a class feature. You pretend to have X lvls in a class with a -20 on your roll. The Monk's Belt then gives you higher values in return. For more details, see my response to Darg below.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darg View Post

    Your first question has its own flaws. 2 of us believe that it delivers your eldritch blast instead of being your eldritch blast. As a feat it is unaffected by AMF. But the damage is the eldritch blast. As an SLA, the eldritch blast portion would be affected by AMF and spell resistance. Meaning you would still have claws, just not blast damage. Personally I think the feat as a whole for flavor be supernatural so that you can't form the claws in an AMF, but the blast damage is still an SLA and thus subject to spell resistance.

    The last 2 questions are fine.



    To emulate a class feature at a specific level, the skill requires activating the item. A passive effect isn't activated and therefore you can't fake being a level 20 monk.
    Since Eldritch Claws aren't a maneuver, they don't have the clause to default to EX when their type ain't mentioned in their rule text. Imho we should be agreeing that the act of forming the Eldritch Claws definitively involves magic and thus therefore should be categorized as SU (which means that you can't use em in a AMF).

    Regards "Activating Magic Items":
    Quote Originally Posted by Using Items
    Using Items

    To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly. In most cases, using an item requires a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity. By contrast, spell completion items are treated like spells in combat and do provoke attacks of opportunity.

    Activating a magic item is a standard action unless the item description indicates otherwise. However, the casting time of a spell is the time required to activate the same power in an item, regardless of the type of magic item, unless the item description specifically states otherwise.

    The four ways to activate magic items are described below.

    ...
    All magic items need to be activated. Even passive working magic items have activation methods. It may be as simple as donning em. Therefore you may UMD a Monk's Belt.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    France

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruftzwerg View Post
    This defines the part that your interpretation relies on as "plain language", which is *fluff* and not rule text how the ability works. That is defined in the "Benefits" section as said.
    Fair enough. But a friendly reminder that, by RAW, this game is unplayable


    Since Eldritch Claws aren't a maneuver, they don't have the clause to default to EX when their type ain't mentioned in their rule text. Imho we should be agreeing that the act of forming the Eldritch Claws definitively involves magic and thus therefore should be categorized as SU (which means that you can't use em in a AMF).
    I think the Ex by default when a maneuver isn't the argument here. What is interesting is that an exception to "magic = Spell/SLA/Su" exists and since you only need an exception to invalidate a rule then you can't dismiss it and say "itis magical and not an SLA nor a spell so it is Su".

    You can use UMD to emulate a class feature. You pretend to have X lvls in a class with a -20 on your roll. The Monk's Belt then gives you higher values in return. For more details, see my response to Darg below.

    Regards "Activating Magic Items":
    All magic items need to be activated. Even passive working magic items have activation methods. It may be as simple as donning em. Therefore you may UMD a Monk's Belt.
    Thanks, that seems to float except the entry says
    Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item. In this case, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20
    So i'm guessing since you don't need to use the class feature to activate it since you can don it as a non-monk, you can't UMD it ?

    What's even worse in this case
    If the class whose feature you are emulating has an alignment requirement
    .
    Monk having to be lawful is another DC check of 30 or having to be a lawful warlock which is weird (if not illegal)
    Last edited by Paragon; 2021-05-21 at 04:31 AM.

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruftzwerg View Post
    We have an official format for Feat Descriotions which sole gives the "Benefit:" line the permission to give you rules for the ability. Anything else has not been given permission to do so.
    And if you have a look at the PHB version on page 89, it has also the following line in between the title and prerequisite:



    This defines the part that your interpretation relies on as "plain language", which is *fluff* and not rule text how the ability works. That is defined in the "Benefits" section as said.
    Good job ignoring the feats I gave as examples where the plain text has important rules for the function of the feat. As your quote mentions, it tells you what the feat does which is not simply fluff the way you like it.

    Quote Originally Posted by PHB, pg 100
    SHIELD PROFICIENCY [GENERAL]
    You are proficient with bucklers, small shields, and large shields.

    Benefit: You can use a shield and take only the standard penalties (see Table 7–6: Armor and Shields, page 123).

    Normal: When you are using a shield with which you are not proficient, you take the shield’s armor check penalty on attack rolls and on all skill checks that involve moving, including Ride checks.

    Special: Barbarians, bards, clerics, druids, fighters, paladins, and rangers automatically have Shield Proficiency as a bonus feat. They need not select it.
    Vs

    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    Shield Proficiency [General]
    Benefit
    You can use a shield and take only the standard penalties.

    Normal
    When you are using a shield with which you are not proficient, you take the shield’s armor check penalty on attack rolls and on all skill checks that involve moving, including Ride checks.

    Special
    Barbarians, bards, clerics, druids, fighters, paladins, and rangers automatically have Shield Proficiency as a bonus feat. They need not select it.
    The SRD version of shield proficiency allows the use of tower shields without penalty. Other examples of feats that require the plain text to function or know what to apply the benefits to:

    Quote Originally Posted by PHB
    EXOTIC WEAPON PROFICIENCY [GENERAL]
    Choose a type of exotic weapon, such as dire flail or shuriken (see Table 7–5: Weapons, page 116, for a list of exotic weapons). You understand how to use that type of exotic weapon in combat.

    Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1 (plus Str 13 for bastard sword or dwarven waraxe).

    Benefit: You make attack rolls with the weapon normally.

    Normal: A character who uses a weapon with which he or she is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls.

    Special: You can gain Exotic Weapon Proficiency multiple times. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of exotic weapon. Proficiency with the bastard sword or the dwarven waraxe has an additional prerequisite of Str 13.
    A fighter may select Exotic Weapon Proficiency as one of his
    fighter bonus feats (see page 38)
    ARMOR PROFICIENCY (LIGHT) [GENERAL]
    You are proficient with light armor (see Table 7–6: Armor and Shields, page 123).

    Benefit: When you wear a type of armor with which you are proficient, the armor check penalty for that armor applies only to Balance, Climb, Escape Artist, Hide, Jump, Move Silently, Pick Pocket, and Tumble checks.

    Normal: A character who is wearing armor with which she is not proficient applies its armor check penalty to attack rolls and to all skill checks that involve moving, including Ride.

    Special: All characters except wizards, sorcerers, and monks automatically have Armor Proficiency (light) as a bonus feat. They need not select it.
    WEAPON FOCUS [GENERAL]
    Choose one type of weapon, such as greataxe. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for purposes of this feat. You are especially good at using this weapon. (If you have chosen ray, you are especially good with rays, such as the one produced by the ray of frost spell.)

    Prerequisites: Proficiency with selected weapon, base attack bonus +1.

    Benefit: You gain a +1 bonus on all attack rolls you make using the selected weapon.

    Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of weapon. A fighter may select Weapon Focus as one of his fighter bonus feats (see page 38). He must have Weapon Focus with a weapon to gain the Weapon Specialization feat for that weapon.
    The benefit line of exotic weapon proficiency doesn't tell you how the feat works. It only tells you the benefit. You NEED the plain text to give rules in order to know to select an exotic weapon and that the feat applies to that weapon. Armor proficiency works the same way. You need the plain text to know that it applies to light armor. Finally we get to weapon focus. A ray is not a weapon and therefore would normally not be an option for this feat. Luckily, the plain text is rules text so it allows us to select ray as a weapon for the feat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruftzwerg View Post
    Regarding Eldritch Claws on you feet: The ability is specific that your grow claws from your hands and thus disallows the regular option to have claws on your feet therefore. Sadly this doesn't work. This is why I mentioned monk, since only their unarmed strike ability has the special exception to not have any "offhand part of their body". They can choose anything as their "Primary Limb" to get their iterative attacks (something non monks don't have the permission to do..).
    I was referring to claws in general, not specifically Eldritch claws which as you said take up your hands. A lion has claws on all 4 legs and if it pounces and misses the neck with its bite but the back legs are on the creature, it will use the back claws to rip at the creature's hind quarter. Anatomically speaking, they have 4 sets of claws, but only use two sets at a time which mimic the lion creature entry. For a dragon disciple it doesn't specify where you grow the claws or whether you only grow 2 sets vs a dragon's 4 sets.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gruftzwerg View Post
    Regards "Activating Magic Items":
    All magic items need to be activated. Even passive working magic items have activation methods. It may be as simple as donning em. Therefore you may UMD a Monk's Belt.
    UMD lets you emulate having class features, not having levels in a class. The belt has a requirement of monk levels and therefore you cannot use UMD to fake being a monk.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    What's even worse in this case .
    Monk having to be lawful is another DC check of 30 or having to be a lawful warlock which is weird (if not illegal)
    Nothing technically requires it. But if we say a player selects the class at every level up like with the neverwinter nights games, then the alignment requirement would apply to selecting the class at every level.
    Last edited by Darg; 2021-05-21 at 09:18 AM.

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    France

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Darg View Post
    UMD lets you emulate having class features, not having levels in a class.
    It sure is worded like it does
    your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20
    And to boot,
    If the class whose feature you are emulating has an alignment requirement, you must meet it, either honestly or by emulating an appropriate alignment with a separate Use Magic Device check
    meaning you have to be lawful if you emulate any monk class feature (such as unarmed damage) of UMD being lawful.

    As for being able to activate the belt, the previous argument was pretty clear quoting that "donning" it is when you make the check

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    It sure is worded like it does

    And to boot, meaning you have to be lawful if you emulate any monk class feature (such as unarmed damage) of UMD being lawful.

    As for being able to activate the belt, the previous argument was pretty clear quoting that "donning" it is when you make the check
    The skill doesn't let you emulate a class, just a feature of the class. Take casting a scroll. Use magic device lets you emulate the spellcasting ability of a class allowed to use the scroll at the appropriate level required to cast from the scroll.

    The quote you presented even tells you that you are emulating a class feature. It just has an additional check to emulate the alignment of the class whose class feature is being emulated. You are not emulating a class at any point.
    Last edited by Darg; 2021-05-21 at 05:53 PM.

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    France

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Darg View Post
    The skill doesn't let you emulate a class, just a feature of the class. Take casting a scroll. Use magic device lets you emulate the spellcasting ability of a class allowed to use the scroll at the appropriate level required to cast from the scroll.

    The quote you presented even tells you that you are emulating a class feature. It just has an additional check to emulate the alignment of the class whose class feature is being emulated. You are not emulating a class at any point.
    Don't get me wrong I understand what it's supposed to do, i'm just liking this debate. But my quote specifically says "emulated class" and not class feature. Hence, the quote.
    And even in you exemple there is a required level to be attained by the check, why can't it be the same with you trying to reach a required level of monk for unarmed damages opposed to spellcasting ability ?

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    But my quote specifically says "emulated class" and not class feature. Hence, the quote.
    When things are taken out of context meaning can be lost. Which is what is happening here. The full quote:

    Sometimes you need to use a class feature to activate a magic item. In this case, your effective level in the emulated class equals your Use Magic Device check result minus 20.
    You aren't emulating the class as a whole, but merely a part. That part returns valid when you say you are emulating a class because you CAN emulate something in part. I can emulate a clown by wearing big shoes. It doesn't mean I'm emulating being a clown.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    And even in you exemple there is a required level to be attained by the check, why can't it be the same with you trying to reach a required level of monk for unarmed damages opposed to spellcasting ability ?
    Monk's belt doesn't require a specific amount of monk unarmed damage to function.

    The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher. If donned by a character with the Stunning Fist feat, the belt lets her make one additional stunning attack per day. If the character is not a monk, she gains the AC and unarmed damage of a 5th-level monk. This AC bonus functions just like the monk’s AC bonus.
    In all cases, the bolded statement is satisfied. A spellcraft check uses the minimum level required to successfully use an item. As the belt functions at monk level 0, the spellcraft check DC is 20 (20+0). As the character doesn't need to have levels in monk to use the belt, a spellcraft check is never actually used. In comparison, using a fireball staff requires a DC 25 check. There is no rule allowing you to upscale the caster level to increase the caster level of the spell. A spellcraft check is only ever a "can use an item" or "can't use an item."

    The PHB uses this example:

    For example, Lidda finds a magic chalice that turns regular water into holy water when a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead. She attempts to activate the item by emulating the cleric’s undead turning ability. Her effective cleric level is her check result minus 20. Since a cleric can turn undead at 1st level, she needs a Use Magic Device check result of 21 or higher to succeed.
    Last edited by Darg; 2021-05-21 at 07:58 PM.

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    France

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Darg View Post
    When things are taken out of context meaning can be lost. Which is what is happening here.
    While you are correct and I omitted part of the sentence, it still mentions class level and not class feature level in the part I've quotted.



    1) You aren't emulating the class as a whole, but merely a part. That part returns valid when you say you are emulating a class because you CAN emulate something in part.

    2) Monk's belt doesn't require a specific amount of monk unarmed damage to function.

    3) The PHB uses this example:
    For example, Lidda finds a magic chalice that turns regular water into holy water when a cleric or an experienced paladin channels positive energy into it as if turning undead. She attempts to activate the item by emulating the cleric’s undead turning ability. Her effective cleric level is her check result minus 20. Since a cleric can turn undead at 1st level, she needs a Use Magic Device check result of 21 or higher to succeed.
    1) Yes
    2) True, I remember making this argument and being convinced by the fact that every magic item need to be activated (cf post #50) and since you activate it by donning it you can UMD and I guess what i'm missing is the rule saying that since you can have one benefit of a magic item, you can't UMD to have more ?
    3) Best exemple possible. I'll rephrase it like this :
    For example, Lidda finds a monk's belt that treats the wearer's AC and unarmed damage as a monk of five levels higher when a monk dons it on. She attempts to activate the item by emulating the monk's AC bonus and Unarmed strike abilities. Her effective monk level is her check result minus 20. Since a monk has his AC bonus and Unarmed Strikes at 1st level, she needs a Use Magic Device check result of 21 or higher to succeed.

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Troll in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Darg View Post
    Good job ignoring the feats I gave as examples where the plain text has important rules for the function of the feat. As your quote mentions, it tells you what the feat does which is not simply fluff the way you like it.



    Vs



    The SRD version of shield proficiency allows the use of tower shields without penalty. Other examples of feats that require the plain text to function or know what to apply the benefits to:







    The benefit line of exotic weapon proficiency doesn't tell you how the feat works. It only tells you the benefit. You NEED the plain text to give rules in order to know to select an exotic weapon and that the feat applies to that weapon. Armor proficiency works the same way. You need the plain text to know that it applies to light armor. Finally we get to weapon focus. A ray is not a weapon and therefore would normally not be an option for this feat. Luckily, the plain text is rules text so it allows us to select ray as a weapon for the feat.
    I can explain all the feats without error and don't need to rely on the *fluff*-text for this.

    First, the "general" rules for non-/proficiency are in the weapon & armor sections. No need to repeat em here again.

    Each feat can easily be explained with sole the rule relevant parts: Prerequisites; Benefit; Normal & Special
    Fluff-text can sometimes be helpful, but also can be misleading. As such, arguments shouldn't be relying on them.

    The rules for Tower Shields are more specific than the proficiency rules. Since the feat also does rely on those rules, it gets trumped the same way due to the more specific Tower Shield rules. Even if you would consider the fluff text of Shield Proficiency as rules, it wouldn't change the outcome.

    Exotic Weapon Proficiency:
    The "Benefit/Normal" sections explain what you get and the "Special" section explains how the feat works in general (can be picked multiple times; each time select a new type of exotic weapon). No need to rely on the fluff text. (sure, it is helpful here for a quick overview, but not required as I have shown).

    Proficiency Armor (Light):
    The fluff text repeats the name of the feat = 0 new information provided.
    Everything of importance is handled in the rules section of the feat (or in the general rules for armor/weapon proficiency).

    Weapon Focus:
    Same chase as with Exotic Weapon Proficiency. The special line contains the information you are looking for in the fluff text. Still no need for the fluff text. The rules have everything covered up.


    UMD lets you emulate having class features, not having levels in a class. The belt has a requirement of monk levels and therefore you cannot use UMD to fake being a monk.
    The "general" benefit of the item is to increase a monk's US damage & AC by virtual lvls. The non-monk rule is a specific exception the item provides.
    When donning the item, it generally asks first for monk US & AC lvls. If you can't provide those, it jumps to the specific exception part and provides you with 5 virtual monk lvls for those abilities.
    And this is where UMD comes in handy. When the item asks for a class ability (the moment you equip the belt), UMD can fake to have class lvls in that class. Depending on your UMD roll (optimization) this can be pretty high.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGirl

    Join Date
    May 2014

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    I personally wouldn't let the Monk's Belt UMD work if I were DM, in the way that's being discussed. Sure, you can emulate being a monk, but it advances an unarmed strike progression that you don't actually have, and no amount of UMD will give you that.

    ...I also forgot to take a look at the questionnaire.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    Fair enough. But a friendly reminder that, by RAW, this game is unplayable
    ...I think I'm going to add this to my signature.

    Monk having to be lawful is another DC check of 30 or having to be a lawful warlock which is weird (if not illegal)
    You can be a Lawful Evil Warlock. Warlocks have to be "any evil or any chaotic." That being said, it never actually specifies any consequences for ceasing to be evil or chaotic, and the Enlightened Spirit PrC is "any good" so make of that what you will.
    Last edited by Dusk Raven; 2021-05-23 at 12:30 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Potato_Priest View Post
    Honestly, most players would get super excited about Zenob the god of crabs because it's eccentric. I know I would.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paragon View Post
    But a friendly reminder that, by RAW, this game is unplayable

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Troll in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Default Re: Clawlock v Iron Golem

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusk Raven View Post
    Sure, you can emulate being a monk, but it advances an unarmed strike progression that you don't actually have, and no amount of UMD will give you that.
    Actually the belt doesn't advance the abilities, it just gives you the values on the stats as if you where a monk with 5 additional lvls.
    Quote Originally Posted by Monk's Belt
    The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher.
    And the buff is targeting regular stats that everybody has: unarmed damage & AC
    It changes those stats to the value a monk with 5 additional lvls would have.

    This is further confirmed by:
    Quote Originally Posted by Monk's Belt
    This AC bonus functions just like the monk’s AC bonus.
    This sentence confirms that you don't get the ability. You get an effect that functions like the ability.



    While I can see that some tables might houserule this option away as for being to strong (or to cheap), I would suggest those tables to also ban Tashalatora for the same reasons.
    Other than that, if you are fine with the power lvl, it is a very strong optimization option to take by RAW.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •