Why Warlocks are Weak

[K]

The FAQ does not "adjudicate how the rules work."

The FAQ is Skip William's personal opinion that got printed because no one competent wanted the job. He'd remove entire sections when someone on the boards would call him on his BS about how wrong and/or unworkable his houserules were. Sometimes he'd just be actually wrong and it'd be obvious that he hadn't read the rules before writing up his opinion. As far as anyone could tell, he just wanted to get paid for the easy word count and he was trying to carve a niche for himself at WotC because no one wanted to let him design anything ever again.

Seriously. I'd take a ruling from a third party publisher over the FAQ because at least I know that more than one person looked it over. I mean, the reason people play RAW is because you know that several people looked over the rules and on their face those rules looked good.

My real question is: why the fvck does anyone care what Skip Williams says over your own opinion? It's only "official" because WotC did a poll and asked people if they'd be more likely to buy things if they had "official" printed on them, and after that started putting "official" on everything they printed.

This isn't tournament-play CCGs. You really can houserule your own game.

[Koumei]

Pages 184-186 shows us the Saint template, so really you can bring these things online as early as CR 3. Yeah, Saint Camel just rocked up all immune to you.

Your move, Mister Bond.

[Sashi]

The crappitude of the FAQ responses is a different conversation from the purpose of a FAQ for a game. The FAQ is supposed to be impartial adjudication on how the rules actually work. The fact that the D&D FAQ is usually ass-pulls and attempts to paper over how the actual rules work and pretend there aren't any proplems is irrelevant to the purpose of an RPG FAQ in general.

[Princess]

why the fvck does anyone care what Skip Williams says over your own opinion? It's only "official" because WotC did a poll and asked people if they'd be more likely to buy things if they had "official" printed on them

FAQ is free, WotC get no money for it.

I care about "whoever skip williams" opinion because if everyone stop forum discussions will look like this:
A: Take Weapon Focus feat on your Eldritch Blast, it rocks!
B: WHAT? I'd better take Law Devotion!
A: Law Devotion sucks, Weapon Focus is way better.
B: U MORON HAVE U READ THEM? Weapon Focus is +1 and Law Devotion is +5!
A: WotC are morons. We houseruled WF so it allow one autohit and 3 attack rerolls per day, and LD in our houserules do not work for chaotic characters and give just +2 flat bonus.
C: Hey guys, I recommend you using Acolyte of the Skin PrC, it makes your Blast two times more powerful due it's Blasphemous Blast feature at 7th level!
A&B: U MORON THERE IS NO BLASPEMOUS BLAST IN AoS PrC!11

Koumei, careful reading of page 29 will reveal that minimum CR for Saint is 8. 6 for base HD and +2 for saint template.
And yes, if your DM is abusing this +2 LA template with three energy immunities, Wis to AC and +8 total stat boost (not mentioning protective aura with globe)... Well it means either he is dick and you should find another DM, or you are dick who uses exploits too often and he is trying to get rid of you.

[Kaelik]

Kaelik I think we all are still waiting for CR 6 BoED angel name and page. Would you kindly?

No, only you are waiting on it, because you want to avoid the issue of how the FAQ doesn't have the authority to make new rules, because you are so thoroughly wrong, and so want to distract on a side tangent about how worthwhile it is to take the feat, instead of the legality, even though I already said I don't give two shits about the usefulness or balance.

But don't worry, I'm about to say something which will allow you to whine on about chain blast some fucking more instead of admitting that you are completely wrong and it's perfectly legal to take the feat, regardless of whether it is that good an idea.

I actually wasn't talking about the Saint Template, which also grants Globe of invulnerability just like the Angel subtype, I was referring to the Movanic Deva. Which I, without access to my books, remembered as being in BoED, and being CR 6.

It is in fact in Fiend Folio, and 6 HD, not CR. So the point that anyone capable of casting Lesser Planar Binding who has faced you before should be bringing it to every fight still stands, but now you can whine about Chain Blast, and how it's not CR 6 so no one should ever face it until level 11.

[K]

why the fvck does anyone care what Skip Williams says over your own opinion? It's only "official" because WotC did a poll and asked people if they'd be more likely to buy things if they had "official" printed on them

FAQ is free, WotC get no money for it.

So? They put "official" on EVERYTHING, even BS free web content where they break their own rules.... and not in a "we interpreted it differently" way, but in a "we don't understand or don't like what the rules say" way.

And Skip was getting paid to write those answers, regardless of quality.

Following the FAQ makes for a less playable game. I'd advise you to sack up and houserule your own game instead of letting one developer with a track record of failure do it for you.

[Princess]

Kaelik, stop being stupid. If your godly npc autosucceed all checks to persuade anyone they caught in planar binding why don't they summon an army of some sort?.. Anyway by your statements your warlock sucks until level 12 because he cannot polymorph or summon some cheezy low HD mob, and allowing supernatural transformation won't help you in any way.

Following the FAQ makes for a less playable game. I'd advise you to sack up and houserule your own game instead of letting one developer with a track record of failure do it for you.

I use house rules very extensively, and I personally don't mind warlocks taking SNT. But I told above, that official rules have their use - they are "default" and generally known by all.

[Kaelik]

I care about "whoever skip williams" opinion because if everyone stop forum discussions will look like this:

So to be clear, your claim is that if people follow the actual rules in the actual books, they will not follow the actual rules in the actual books.

But if they houserule their game, and demand that everyone else on the internet abide by their houserules, like you have been doing in this thread, they will then not houserule their game and then demand everyone on the internet play with their houserules.

????????????

I mean damn, I've never seen anything so tautologically wrong before in my life, you must have tried really fucking hard to make sure that your statement made no fucking sense at all.

[Kaelik]

Kaelik, stop being stupid. If your godly npc autosucceed all checks to persuade anyone they caught in planar binding why don't they summon an army of some sort?.. Anyway by your statements your warlock sucks until level 12 because he cannot polymorph or summon some cheezy low HD mob, and allowing supernatural transformation won't help you in any way.

1) WTF: No, I said that if every BBEG can Planar Bind something that completely negates your character, your character sucks. There is no statement about what else might or might not suck, because the Warlock sucks even if invocations ignore spell resistance and globe of invulnerability without any feat or invocation cost, because it's a shitty class.

2) Look, if you don't know the rules to Planar Binding, then just leave the conversation, I'm not talking about Mobs or encounters or globes with you again until you can correctly tell me why every single level 9 Wizard in the game can be certain of Planar Binding a Movanic Deva for their fight with a Warlock. Get back to me when you know the actual rules.

But I told above, that official rules have their use - they are "default" and generally known by all.

Right, which is why you jumping in and demanding that everyone else on this internet forum should abide by Skip Williams's houserules is strange and dumb, and we are calling you on it. We should instead use the actual rules as a default, the ones in the book.

[Princess]

Kaelik, trying to persuade me that you know what authors intended better than they are is quite useless. Prak_Anima gave links above. So generally speaking they told you "by the word innate we meant derived from racial HD". If you don't like it — do not try persuade all of the internets that your reading is better than that of gamedevs who wrote SS.

Also my personal house rules allow warlock to take SNT if he is so willing to forego metasla feats.

if you don't know the rules to Planar Binding, then just leave the conversation

I know rules. It seems that it is you the one who forget that it is 5th level spell (which means caster have to be level 9 (low cha wizard with troubles of persuading summoned deva) or 10 (sorcerer with no other 5th level spells unless we go for some cheezy runestaffs), so the party will be at level 7-8) and summoned monster is allowed to be dick if he don't like the command.

[Kaelik]

Kaelik, trying to persuade me that you know what authors intended better than they are is quite useless. Prak_Anima gave links above. So generally speaking they told you "by the word innate we meant derived from racial HD". If you don't like it — do not try persuade all of the internets that your reading is better than that of gamedevs who wrote SS.

Once again. I am not trying to persuade you that I know anyone's intent. I am stating quite clearly, knowing that is too vast and complex for your tiny brain to handle, that the actual rules that anyone can read are X, and that if someone intended it to mean Y, they should have written Y, or errataed X to Y, but they didn't. So the actual rules are X, and it doesn't matter if they intended Y, because I am not playing "read the designers mind, and do what they intended to be done" I am playing D&D, which has actual codified rules.

I know rules. It seems that it is you the one who forget that it is 5th level spell (which means caster have to be level 9 (low cha wizard with troubles of persuading summoned deva) or 10 (sorcerer with no other 5th level spells unless we go for some cheezy runestaffs), so the party will be at level 7-8) and summoned monster is allowed to be dick if he don't like the command.

Since I specifically just stated "Any level 9 Wizard" it would appear I do know what level spell Lesser Planar Binding is, though of course, I do know a way to get it as a level 4 spell, but meh.

Note that the BBEG being level 9 doesn't mean the party has to be level 7-8, they could be as low as level 5 and still be expected to face the BBEG. But I agree the party will usually be level 7-9.

But this "be a dick if he don't like the command" I'm going to attribute to your limited proficiency with english, because it does not say that anywhere, you are probably confusing "Note that a clever recipient can subvert some instructions." Which is easily prevented by giving clear instructions.

As for the fact that it's not a summoned creature, I'll just give that mistake to you as a freebie.

Do you know why every level 9 Wizard can be expected to be able to succeed at Planar Binding yet?

[Princess]

Kaelik, you had some hard times in reading, but up above were designers notes. And stop telling us "they do not made an errata", they also don't errated Astral shepherd or Pun-Pun, but I doubt that even you suppose it is perfectly ok to use them.

I do know a way to get it as a level 4 spell, but meh.

Like steal it from list where it's 4th level spell?

Which is easily prevented by giving clear instructions.

Give it a try.

[K]

Following the FAQ makes for a less playable game. I'd advise you to sack up and houserule your own game instead of letting one developer with a track record of failure do it for you.

I use house rules very extensively, and I personally don't mind warlocks taking SNT. But I told above, that official rules have their use - they are "default" and generally known by all.

Seriously? I think you'll find that most people don't know what's in the FAQ and they don't care to find out considering how bad it is.

I mean, the FAQ has almost as bad of a reputation as Custserv. After far as I can tell, they are both just used in internet arguments and never actually make it into anyone's game.

The "default rules" are in the books and those have weight in people's games. The FAQ and Custserv are for internet wankery exclusively.

[Username17]

I would also like to point out that the FAQ rant about how Warlocks can't use Supernatural Transformation for no reason is actually an even more obscure FAQ rant than the one about how long it takes dwarven beards to regrow after burn injuries.

If your particular MC has never turned to the FAQ for dwarf facial-hair-related matters, the chances are extremely good that he won't turn to the FAQ to find a pointlessly obscure and logically inconsistent way to put the boot in on your sub-mediocre Warlock build.

-Username17

[Aharon]

@Frank
I am amused by your continued use of Drači Doupě Plus terminology

[Datawolf]

Is it just me or does almost every thread degenerate into an asinine flame war these days?

[Roy]

Is it just me or does almost every thread degenerate into an asinine flame war these days?

Something about house burning, wife raping, and car stealing comes to mind.

[Kaelik]

Kaelik, you had some hard times in reading, but up above were designers notes. And stop telling us "they do not made an errata", they also don't errated Astral shepherd or Pun-Pun, but I doubt that even you suppose it is perfectly ok to use them.

Is it perfectly legal to use them, absolutely. That doesn't mean I oppose houserules for them, But I also don't oppose houserules for the Warlock, now the houserule needs to be "Don't use this shitty class" but that's an aside.

Like steal it from list where it's 4th level spell?

That, or take a level in that one class about being a nice summoner of evil things.

Which is easily prevented by giving clear instructions.

Give it a try.

Follow me for nine days staying within 20ft of me and taking no other actions.

Done.

[Prak]

The FAQ is not allowed to make up new rules. Why is that so hard to understand?

It's you the one with troubles. Prak_Anima gave link above about designers RAI. And it matches faq.

except there's also this part, which you seem to have ignored, Princess:

That said, we're not 100% sure that the feat would necessarily be broken for the warlock. The warlock is a pretty feat-thirsty class, so there is a real cost in picking this up to make your eldritch blast SR-proof, when you've got an eldritch essence available that can do the same thing. But just to be on the cautious side, we're saying no. Rule Zero us on this one if you like.

In other words the statement was "In our interpretation, they don't qualify, but it wouldn't be imbalanced, so make your own interpretation."

Kaelik I think we all are still waiting for CR 6 BoED angel name and page. Would you kindly?

No, just you, because no one else cares. I looked just so you'd shut up on this passive aggressive line of bull, and you're right, there isn't one. Now stop being a prick about it.

Koumei, careful reading of page 29 will reveal that minimum CR for Saint is 8. 6 for base HD and +2 for saint template.
And yes, if your DM is abusing this +2 LA template with three energy immunities, Wis to AC and +8 total stat boost (not mentioning protective aura with globe)... Well it means either he is dick and you should find another DM, or you are dick who uses exploits too often and he is trying to get rid of you.

Wrong. Saint Template is just +2 CR, and can be added to any good aligned dual-natured creature (body and soul, so no outsiders, no elementals). You don't need to take the class to get the template, just as you don't need to take Dragon Disciple to be half-dragon. Hell, you could have a redeemed kobold saint at level 2...

If you don't like it — do not try persuade all of the internets that your reading is better than that of gamedevs who wrote SS.

Except that it is. Their interpretation of Innate is, one, different from the interpretation of the word applied to any other thing, two, makes a possible bandage for a bad class not stick, and three, makes no damned sense from a flavour standpoint.

On Frank's DD+ Terminology use... I think it's awesome, MC, in english, means Master of Ceremonies, which is still better than Dungeon Master. I didn't even realize it was DD+ terminology.

[Parthenon]

I would also like to point out that the FAQ rant about how Warlocks can't use Supernatural Transformation for no reason is actually an even more obscure FAQ rant than the one about how long it takes dwarven beards to regrow after burn injuries.

If your particular MC has never turned to the FAQ for dwarf facial-hair-related matters, the chances are extremely good that he won't turn to the FAQ to find a pointlessly obscure and logically inconsistent way to put the boot in on your sub-mediocre Warlock build.

-Username17

Some people have left their mark in D&D by writing sections, some by writing up huge tomes of alternative rules, some by criticising the stupidity of designers.

To my eternal shame my mark has been one of my players asking the question about dwarf beards because of one of my games as Mister Cavern.

[Sashi]

In other words the statement was "In our interpretation, they don't qualify, but it wouldn't be imbalanced, so make your own interpretation."

Technically it was "In our interpretation it does apply and is in no way broken or overpowered, but because we are totally inconsistent wimps we are going to say it doesn't, just in case, and then waffle on the matter."

[Koumei]

Everyone uses the DD+ terms these days!

Is it just me or does almost every thread degenerate into an asinine flame war these days?

Your mum degenerates into an asinine flame war these days.

Wait, that made no sense.

[Sashi]

I honestly prefer "Mister Cavern" to any other term. It basically goes:

StoryTeller
Judge
Referee
Dungeon Master
Game Master
Gyoji (never used because of language problems, but I like the implications)
Mister Cavern

[Datawolf]

Everyone uses the DD+ terms these days!

Is it just me or does almost every thread degenerate into an asinine flame war these days?

Your mum degenerates into an asinine flame war these days.

Wait, that made no sense.

"Yo Momma" jokes don't really need to. In fact, the less sense they make, the funnier they are. You can also use "So do your pants" as a response as well.

Something that I've always found bizarre about the warlock is that I can never seem to figure out exactly why it was included in the game. It doesn't seem to fill any particular role that isn't filled better than someone else. There isn't really anything that it can do particularly well that no one else can do as well. I dunno, I suppose I dislike extraneous material in my games, which is one of the reasons why I thoroughly revile K-Dawg.

[Princess]

Follow me for nine days staying within 20ft of me and taking no other actions.

No low-level buffs, lol. Combat readiness, mage armour, shield (in case of abjurant), fly, etc are gone unless you burn slots for heighten. Only 1-2 levels of spells. I'd say in this way warlock perfectly played as a debuffer or controller role forcing opponent to get rid of most of his spells.

except there's also this part, which you seem to have ignored, Princess:

I ignore this sentence because it basically means "general answer is no, but if you really-really want to, then it's ok". If I really-really want it I do not need their faqs.

Wrong. Saint Template is just +2 CR, and can be added to any good aligned dual-natured creature

Read the damn page 29, plz. It is clearly told there that level 6 is minimum requirement.