its basically anything level 6 and down can be infa cast.
Some warlock feedback
Moderators: Active DMs, Forum Moderators, Contributors
-
- Posts: 493
- Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:02 am
Re: Some warlock feedback
The Feylock Epic Blast effect needed a nerf, but I think this was a bit much.
50% Attacker Miss Chance is basically a non-existent benefit: Blindfight removes all Attacker Miss Chance, and if you show me a nonspellcaster build that doesn't have Blindfight, then I'll show you a bad build. A bonus that's negated completely by a feat that's almost universally taken isn't really much of a bonus at all.
50% Attacker Miss Chance is basically a non-existent benefit: Blindfight removes all Attacker Miss Chance, and if you show me a nonspellcaster build that doesn't have Blindfight, then I'll show you a bad build. A bonus that's negated completely by a feat that's almost universally taken isn't really much of a bonus at all.
what would fred rogers do?
Re: Some warlock feedback
I dont know why it needed a nerf at all, beyond the fact that people who play stealth AA builds are mad that they no longer are on top of the metaFlower Power wrote: ↑Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:51 amThe Feylock Epic Blast effect needed a nerf, but I think this was a bit much.
50% Attacker Miss Chance is basically a non-existent benefit: Blindfight removes all Attacker Miss Chance, and if you show me a nonspellcaster build that doesn't have Blindfight, then I'll show you a bad build. A bonus that's negated completely by a feat that's almost universally taken isn't really much of a bonus at all.
Player of
- Neli Ore - Flew too close to the sun
- Trouble Brightwood - Missing 411'd
- Avdotia Zakharova / "Hathran" - Finished her investigations
- Ghashburz Swordeater - In search of honor
Re: Some warlock feedback
If this is the post with less sarcasm I struggle to imagine just how condescendingly sarcastic the previous edit was. Seriously though, that's not a nice or constructive way to deliver feedback, it's just snarky and mean.
-
- General Admin
- Posts: 1484
- Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 10:34 am
- Location: Concourse Capaneus
- Contact:
Re: Some warlock feedback
I've done some testing with this before actually committing to the change. I had a creature with Blind Fight attack me and gave it 100% miss chance. If Blind Fight worked as described on NWNwiki, the creature would've hit my test character all the time, but instead it missed 100% of the time.Flower Power wrote: ↑Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:51 amThe Feylock Epic Blast effect needed a nerf, but I think this was a bit much.
50% Attacker Miss Chance is basically a non-existent benefit: Blindfight removes all Attacker Miss Chance, and if you show me a nonspellcaster build that doesn't have Blindfight, then I'll show you a bad build. A bonus that's negated completely by a feat that's almost universally taken isn't really much of a bonus at all.
So miss chance isn't negated by Blind Fight, it's squared, making the epic blast effect essentially a 50% concealment boost for all of the feylock's allies when attacked by the blast target.
Re: Some warlock feedback
And against targets with blind fight that would make it 25%. In essence, its a concealment effect you can't remove compared to sources of concealment like improved invisibility and displacement?Kalopsia wrote: ↑Fri Sep 03, 2021 9:37 amI've done some testing with this before actually committing to the change. I had a creature with Blind Fight attack me and gave it 100% miss chance. If Blind Fight worked as described on NWNwiki, the creature would've hit my test character all the time, but instead it missed 100% of the time.Flower Power wrote: ↑Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:51 amThe Feylock Epic Blast effect needed a nerf, but I think this was a bit much.
50% Attacker Miss Chance is basically a non-existent benefit: Blindfight removes all Attacker Miss Chance, and if you show me a nonspellcaster build that doesn't have Blindfight, then I'll show you a bad build. A bonus that's negated completely by a feat that's almost universally taken isn't really much of a bonus at all.
So miss chance isn't negated by Blind Fight, it's squared, making the epic blast effect essentially a 50% concealment boost for all of the feylock's allies when attacked by the blast target.
To believe in an ideal is to be willing to betray it.
Re: Some warlock feedback
Now I know why my ab seemed weird today.
Seeing the update written down, now epic eldritch mastery outclasses agonizing blast quite a bit, since 6d6 is on average more than the 13-14-15 modifier granted by 24+ charisma.
Also, how do the new masteries affect Eldritch Doom? Because if Epic Mastery adds 6d4, it's still comparable to agonizing blast even for that.
Seeing the update written down, now epic eldritch mastery outclasses agonizing blast quite a bit, since 6d6 is on average more than the 13-14-15 modifier granted by 24+ charisma.
Also, how do the new masteries affect Eldritch Doom? Because if Epic Mastery adds 6d4, it's still comparable to agonizing blast even for that.
-
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2017 11:15 pm
- Location: Carcosa
Re: Some warlock feedback
I saw the changes to the Warlock Full Plate and the Eldritch Armor feats and I still don't think its worth going for if you're making a hideous blow STR lock.
You can lose 1d6 blast damage and 2 caster levels, and take hexblade levels to get cha to saves without needing to have 24+ charisma and an epic feat, and get 2 more AC than if you were wearing the warlock full plate, since the only restriction the Accursed chains have (no divine shield) is already applied to warlocks with an epic pact.
Or you could get full blast damage progression, use an epic feat on Eldritch Armor, and another on whatever else you want (not much you can qualify for as a STR lock besides hideous blows and eldritch armor), end up with bad saves (since you're not gonna have 24 charisma to take Dark Blessing) and lose 2 AC from not multiclassing into Hexblade.
We're still figuring out how to build Warlock though, so its not even like the build I'm describing is optimal. Maybe someone's figured out a way to build STR lock where taking Eldritch Armor is worth it, but I just can't see it, still.
You can lose 1d6 blast damage and 2 caster levels, and take hexblade levels to get cha to saves without needing to have 24+ charisma and an epic feat, and get 2 more AC than if you were wearing the warlock full plate, since the only restriction the Accursed chains have (no divine shield) is already applied to warlocks with an epic pact.
Or you could get full blast damage progression, use an epic feat on Eldritch Armor, and another on whatever else you want (not much you can qualify for as a STR lock besides hideous blows and eldritch armor), end up with bad saves (since you're not gonna have 24 charisma to take Dark Blessing) and lose 2 AC from not multiclassing into Hexblade.
We're still figuring out how to build Warlock though, so its not even like the build I'm describing is optimal. Maybe someone's figured out a way to build STR lock where taking Eldritch Armor is worth it, but I just can't see it, still.
Re: Some warlock feedback
Eldrich Armor is mostly doable on like, a Gold Dwarf or Orog that trades dex for STR or CON. I don't know about human cause I never play humans:)
You do have to take hexblade as 24 charisma isn't an option but the classes synergize so that's obviously the intent.
The stat spread even on those advantageous races is rough. You want 18 charisma to have all the spells. You need 24 strength. You can probably skate with 10 or 12 intelligence as expertise doesn't work with hideous blow. Here's the kicker though, you need that constitution more than any other warlock because you're blasting in melee range if you're STR based and need a big HP pool and EDR feats because you're a sitting duck.
I've been playing with it on a salvaged hexblade, now hex/warlock as well as some fresh builds and there's potential but I wish the EA strength requirement was lower as I think it's otherwise an extremely niche build. Hideous blow is also really clunky unfortunately, I can get the hang of ranged blasts but touching the hideous icon then clicking the opponent over and over and over in melee vs multiple enemies is tough with NWN's janky hitboxes. Seems really easy to waste a round accidentally attacking with your weapon when you're in close combat too. Maybe I'll get used to it but it's not as fun as I thought it would be.
Anyway, point is lowering the STR requirement of EA seems necessary to make it more playable. I suppose hideous blow is a whole different discussion, I'm kinda holding out that it will be tweaked before I play it seriously.
(While I'm discussing this- does the hexblade's curse of life stack with warlock damage resistance and does it scale with warlock synergy?)
You do have to take hexblade as 24 charisma isn't an option but the classes synergize so that's obviously the intent.
The stat spread even on those advantageous races is rough. You want 18 charisma to have all the spells. You need 24 strength. You can probably skate with 10 or 12 intelligence as expertise doesn't work with hideous blow. Here's the kicker though, you need that constitution more than any other warlock because you're blasting in melee range if you're STR based and need a big HP pool and EDR feats because you're a sitting duck.
I've been playing with it on a salvaged hexblade, now hex/warlock as well as some fresh builds and there's potential but I wish the EA strength requirement was lower as I think it's otherwise an extremely niche build. Hideous blow is also really clunky unfortunately, I can get the hang of ranged blasts but touching the hideous icon then clicking the opponent over and over and over in melee vs multiple enemies is tough with NWN's janky hitboxes. Seems really easy to waste a round accidentally attacking with your weapon when you're in close combat too. Maybe I'll get used to it but it's not as fun as I thought it would be.
Anyway, point is lowering the STR requirement of EA seems necessary to make it more playable. I suppose hideous blow is a whole different discussion, I'm kinda holding out that it will be tweaked before I play it seriously.
(While I'm discussing this- does the hexblade's curse of life stack with warlock damage resistance and does it scale with warlock synergy?)
Re: Some warlock feedback
I feel like if the blast shapes were made contrips that require the feats to use, and could only be quickened, alot of the weirdness of how quicken is applied, and also how hideous blow is said to wack out, would go away.
Also Eldritch armor feat should probably be 20-22 str to allow a bit more wiggle room with int/cha/con.
Would also make it more of a choice between hb curse of life (3% di) + cha to saves + 14 ac armor vs 5% di + stat wiggle room + damage + 2 less AC
Also Eldritch armor feat should probably be 20-22 str to allow a bit more wiggle room with int/cha/con.
Would also make it more of a choice between hb curse of life (3% di) + cha to saves + 14 ac armor vs 5% di + stat wiggle room + damage + 2 less AC
Re: Some warlock feedback
One more thing.. Between the weak blast and lack of summons I think warlocks may be a little too squishy at level 3. They pick up a lot of power quickly so I'm not saying they're inherently weak but considering they may be trying not to show they're warlocks It might be nice to give them something like a customized very low level outsider summon spell, like a weak imp or mephit or something they could use to get through levels 3 and 4 if they're laying low.
Even possibly the persistent blade as a level 1 spell, which would also allow them to try and pass as true flames for a little while.
Even possibly the persistent blade as a level 1 spell, which would also allow them to try and pass as true flames for a little while.
Re: Some warlock feedback
This can be fixed by moving blast progress from 2,4,6,8...28,30 to 1,3,5,7...27,29.Eyeliner wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 12:38 amOne more thing.. Between the weak blast and lack of summons I think warlocks may be a little too squishy at level 3. They pick up a lot of power quickly so I'm not saying they're inherently weak but considering they may be trying not to show they're warlocks It might be nice to give them something like a customized very low level outsider summon spell, like a weak imp or mephit or something they could use to get through levels 3 and 4 if they're laying low.
Even possibly the persistent blade as a level 1 spell, which would also allow them to try and pass as true flames for a little while.
Same 15d6 for a 30 dedication, gives them a 2d6 blast at 3 which will help alot.
The main complaint I've been hearing is just how slow the first 3-6 levels are killing level appropriate mobs.
Re: Some warlock feedback
Giving them their first spell at level 1 would also help, in that they could then have GSF: conjuration at level 3, and cast a usable summon from Summon I scrolls.
Ivar Ferdamann - Mercenary turned Marshall
Re: Some warlock feedback
My only suggestion is to move the first pact to level 2 as I think otherwise alot of existing builds will be broken on migration. It will also save having to code migration to automatically select the most appropriate pact (which I think will likely cause lots of rebuild requests if people dont like the pact that gets auto selected for them).
Also with the first pact currently at level 1 if you make a new character that has gifts and your pre-gift stats dont qualify you for the pact then you cant take the pact at level 1 on creation even though you should be able to (i.e 14 charisma pre-gifts wont let you take unseelie pact even though after gifts you will have 16 charisma).
Also with the first pact currently at level 1 if you make a new character that has gifts and your pre-gift stats dont qualify you for the pact then you cant take the pact at level 1 on creation even though you should be able to (i.e 14 charisma pre-gifts wont let you take unseelie pact even though after gifts you will have 16 charisma).
Re: Some warlock feedback
I do belive it might be intentional that you have to pick your pact at the start, Without any gifts!
Re: Some warlock feedback
All warlocks can cast haste now. I don’t understand why. They get access to UMD for wands, or can use potions.
Can someone tell me the reasoning behind this?
Can someone tell me the reasoning behind this?
Re: Some warlock feedback
So... night hag pact warlocks can effectively reset the rest for their friends allowing daily abilities (and vancian spellcasting) to be used as often as one wants?
-
- Posts: 297
- Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 5:18 pm
Re: Some warlock feedback
Interested in a reason, too.
Giving feylock's top cookie to every warlock pact is a bit meh, really.
At least -relevel is still a thing for those that didn't take their pact at level 1, I guess.
Bearing in mind that lots of subraces get different stats from their base race (and also have to be selected before pacts), I'm not so sure. For undying pact, by that reasoning, troglodyte warlocks have a minimum 18 CON (16 for pact, +2 from subrace applied after), while most other races only need 16.
This is of particular concern for feylocks, who quite often would like to start with 15 CHA, as 15 + gift + levels gives the 24 CHA breakpoint for epic stuff. Realistically feylocks fish for 1s primarily, so 17 starting CHA is of dubious value, given how much they need other stats, too.
Re: Some warlock feedback
How much damage do the new masteries add to Eldritch Doom?
2d3 (2d4 for Greater Doom), or the same amount of dice they add to the normal blast, but lowered to d3 and d4 respectively?
Also, on the level 1 pre-requisites. Due to how gifts work, I think it would be nicer to lower them slightly, even just to 15, nothing crazy. It really messes up plans, in my experiments. Moreover, also having level 1 spells at level 1 would allow humans to spend their extra feat a bit more freely. Right now the best options a human warlock has at level 1 are toughness or luck of heroes, with stuff like expertise and crafting feats as possible options that are really hard to marry permanently.
As last addendum, I am not really sure how the Water stream is supposed to work on Fathomless, since in my tests all their summons called outsiders. So, how is a Fathomless warlock supposed to employ the stream it gets?
2d3 (2d4 for Greater Doom), or the same amount of dice they add to the normal blast, but lowered to d3 and d4 respectively?
Frankly speaking, Feylock seemed overtuned, among other things because of this, that put him a cut above the other warlock and awarded it de facto an extra feat, as he could do without Quicken Spell. Feylock still can cast Haste on himself with no cooldown, and can keep it up on TWO minions with Extend Spell. Feylock still has a better Haste than all other Pacts, it's just that the gap is smaller now. This is merely my observation of course, I would be curious to hear the developers' reasoning behind this as well, but personally I like the change.
Also, on the level 1 pre-requisites. Due to how gifts work, I think it would be nicer to lower them slightly, even just to 15, nothing crazy. It really messes up plans, in my experiments. Moreover, also having level 1 spells at level 1 would allow humans to spend their extra feat a bit more freely. Right now the best options a human warlock has at level 1 are toughness or luck of heroes, with stuff like expertise and crafting feats as possible options that are really hard to marry permanently.
As last addendum, I am not really sure how the Water stream is supposed to work on Fathomless, since in my tests all their summons called outsiders. So, how is a Fathomless warlock supposed to employ the stream it gets?
-
- Posts: 2753
- Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2019 2:54 pm
Re: Some warlock feedback
Several people are asking what is the reason warlocks get Haste in their spellbook, and to them I ask - why not? Is there any arcane spellbook in this game without Haste? Even some divine casters have it. It's one of the most basic and good buffs in this game. It's also a big QoL boon to people with limited time to play who sometimes need to cover distances to get to their RP or whatever. I'm not going to be extreme and say every class in the game should have a spellbook with Haste obviously, but warlocks - arcane lvl 8th caster - can have it, and be balanced around the fact they have it, so I really dont see a problem there, only upsides.
Re: Some warlock feedback
They already got haste in their spellbook. This has been given as a pact spell with a greater pact, ie it doesn't consume a spell slot when used (3 min cd).AstralUniverse wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 5:12 pmSeveral people are asking what is the reason warlocks get Haste in their spellbook, and to them I ask - why not?
Haste limitations are important for holding back inficasting evokers, like abyssal/infernal locks and true flames. The reason I asked "why?" is because they could already extended self haste about 10 times per day as well as haste 10 times per day. But that mattered a lot because those were important slots not to run out of.
Re: Some warlock feedback
1) Power does not exist in a bubble. Giving Warlocks something that typically is exclusive to wizards/clerics lessens wizards and clerics.
2) Action economy in PvP. A two minute casting is better than a one minute wand or potion.
I also don't think people being able to run faster should be part of the conversation. If our characters move to slowly to facilitate RP then up everyone's movement speed.
edit* and what was said above
2) Action economy in PvP. A two minute casting is better than a one minute wand or potion.
I also don't think people being able to run faster should be part of the conversation. If our characters move to slowly to facilitate RP then up everyone's movement speed.
edit* and what was said above
Re: Some warlock feedback
Cleric used to get Haste only through Domains, it's hardly an exclusive of the class, as bards already had it by default in vanilla, unlike cleric. While extended Mass Haste remains an exclusive of wizards for the most part. Clerics should be already happy to have Haste by default in their spellbook, while wizards already have their edge for party setups.
I don't find your argument particularly convincing at all. I am not bothered by this point either way, but I see no reason why it should not be part of the conversation if to somebody this aspect is important. It has reason to be there like any other argument, from my point of view. And I doubt these people will change idea because you simply think otherwise.I also don't think people being able to run faster should be part of the conversation. If our characters move to slowly to facilitate RP then up everyone's movement speed.
-
- Posts: 72
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2021 4:13 pm
Re: Some warlock feedback
Moving and rping is literally harder on anyone's brain. The idea is to get to the goal point and start rping with the comfort of being able to focus on typing and not moving.
Unwanted, too slow
Sent to the world below
Sent to the world below