Warlock Character Build, Advice Sought

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

After a long dry spell of not gaming I've decided to scare up a game
to join. To get back into the mood I've created a 1st level Warlock.
I've never designed a Warlock before. I'm wondering how this looks and
can anyone offer any advice? TIA.

Pavel the Enervated (AKA Coenric Winterhaven)

Human Male, Warlock, 1st Level, Chaotic Neutral

Str: 10 (2 points) +0
Dex: 14 (6 points) +2
Con: 10 (2 points) +0
Int: 14 (6 points) +2
Wis: 10 (2 points) +0
Cha: 16 (10 points) +3
28 Point Buy

Base Speed 30
Languages: Common, Draconic, and Abyssal.

HP: 6
Initiative: +6 (+2 DX, +4 Improved Initiative)
BAB: +0
BAB Melee: +0
BAB Missile: +2
Eldritch Blast: 1d6, 60’ range +2 BAB (Ranged Touch Attack)
Saves: Fort +0, Ref +2 (+2 DX), Will +2
Armour Class: 15 (+3 Studded Leather, +2 DX)

Skills: 1st level points: 20 (2 + 2 (+2 IN)) x 4 + 4 (Human Bonus) = 20
5 each following level (2 + 2 (+2 IN)) +1 (Human Bonus) = 5

Class Skills:
Bluff (CH) +5 (2 ranks + CH Bonus)
Concentration (CN) +2 (2 ranks)
Disguise (CH) +2 (CH Bonus)
Intimidate (CH) +7 (4 ranks + CH Bonus)
Knowledge (Arcana) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
Knowledge (The Planes) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
Knowledge (Religion) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
Spellcraft (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
Use Magic Device (CH) +7 (4 ranks + CH Bonus)

Feats: 2 total at 1st level
Improved Initiative: +4 to Init.
Precise Shot: No BAB penalty for shooting into melee.

Invocations:
Eldritch Spear (Least, 1st level): Eldritch Blast range increased to 250’.

Equipment:
Studded Leather Armour (+3 AC, -1 Armour Penalty) Black color
Backpack
Bed Roll
Mess Kit
Waterskin
Two changes of clothes
1 Dagger (1d4 19-20/x2, 10 ft. RI. 1 lb. Piercing or slashing)
Spear (1d8/x3, 20 ft. RI, 6 lb. Piercing)
Flint & Steel
Rations (week)
Grooming Kit
Belt Pouch (7 gp)

Description:

Pavel is of slightly above average height (5’ 10”) and of slim build. He
has thick, light brown hair (slightly darker than blond) which he wears
long and often in a single braid. He also sports a neatly trimmed beard
and moustache, which is kept short. His one most noticeable facial
feature is his slightly off-centered nose (leans to the left). This
gives him a bit of a rakish air.

Personal History:

Pavel the Enervated was born Coenric Winterhaven to Lord Cedric
Winterhaven and Lady Gillian Winterhaven. His parents were both Wizards
in good standing of the Northwall Mage’s Guild. His parents were very
much stay at home, bookish Wizards. Not prone to leaving the city of
Northwall let alone go adventuring. The most exciting bit of family
“gossip” was that his Mother’s maternal Grandfather had been a Tiefling.
The elder Winterhavens very much wanted their only child to grow up and
become a Guild Mage as they had.

Coenric had a much different future planned…

He had learned at an early age that his parent’s Guild connections would
gain him access to the Guild Library’s Restricted Stacks. Not only was
this a good place to get away from people but it gave his parents the
impression that he was studious. Mostly Coenric used his time to read
old memoirs of past Guild spellcasters. He also took advantage of the
quiet area to “entertain” female adepts and Guild apprentices. It was in
these stacks that he first stumbled on information about Warlocks.

Warlocks appealed to Coenric’s rather volatile nature and interest in
the raw magical power of the multiverse. He read every book he could
find on the topic. He taught himself Draconic and Abyssal to gain the
knowledge contained in the truly esoteric volumes on Invocations.

Coenric decided to try and become a Warlock in secret. After months of
study, meditation and physical toil he found The Key. His power awakened
and he let loose with his first Eldritch Blast. This was an eye opening
experience for Coenric. Not least of which because he damaged a number
of valuable books in the stacks. He couldn’t hide his research from his
parents any longer. The Head Librarian informed his parents of what he
had done and how he had done it. The ensuing row shook the walls of the
Guild Tower.

Coenric took his belongings, a bit of gold he had and left the Tower and
his parents behind.

As soon as he had left the city limits he changed his name and struck
out into the world to make a name for himself as a Warlock.

Goals:

Pavel wants to become a great Warlock. He takes great pleasure in using
his Eldritch Blast as often as he can. He sees himself as some sort of
arcane living weapon, a mythic archer who never needs an external item
to take down his targets. He also wants to show his parents that a
Warlock can be just as important as a Guild Wizard can. He also secretly
wants to earn a Lordship in his own right, rather than inherent such a
title from his parents.

Personality:

Pavel is the quintessential 80’s era punk. Rebelling against his
parent’s conservatism. He has a very selfish worldview. He is also
rather short sighted. The larger, world picture is beyond him. He knows
that there are starving people in the world. But that happens “over
there”. If he were to encounter such a person face to face he would
react on a personal level. He is fiercely loyal to those that except him
for whom he is, Pavel the Enervated, Warlock at large. He enjoys being
the charming rogue. He also enjoys the success with the ladies that his
charm gains him.

The world is Pavel’s oyster… and he’s hungry. Now if he just had some money…

Alignment View:

Pavel will not knowingly harm an innocent. He will not attack an unarmed
person unless in self-defense. If he perceives an armed person as a
threat he is not above a “preemptive strike”. He bases his views on how
people act, rather than what they preach. He is a bit of a cad when it
comes to women. He sees them as conquests rather than equals. This view
could change but he would need to see a strong female in action first.
He sees much of the world as resources for his own, personal use.

Build Plan: Feat, Invocation Choices and Ability Boosts

1st Level: Feats (Improved Initiative, Precise Shot), Invocation
(Eldritch Spear)

2nd Level: Invocation (See the Unseen)

3rd Level: Feat (Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast)

4th Level: Invocation (Beguiling Influence), +1 CH

5th Level: N/A

6th Level: Feat (Empower Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast), Invocation
(Fell Flight)

7th Level: N/A

8th Level: Invocation (Walk Unseen), +1 CH

9th Level: Feat (Maximize Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast)

10th Level: Invocation (Brimstone Blast)

11th Level: Invocation (Vitriolic Blast)

12th Level: Feat (Improved Critical: Eldritch Blast), +1 CH

13th Level: Invocation (Eldritch Cone)

14th Level: N/A

15th Level: Feat (Quicken Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast),
Invocation (Chilling Tentacles)

16th Level: Invocation (Retributive Invisibility, swap out Walk Unseen
for Eldritch Chain), +1 CH

17th Level: N/A

18th Level: Feat (Inured to Energy: Fire ER +10), Invocation (Eldritch Doom)

19th Level: N/A

20th Level: Invocation (Dark Discorporation), +1 CH

--
Tetsubo
My page: http://home.comcast.net/~tetsubo/
--------------------------------------
If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
-- Anatole France
39 answers Last reply
More about warlock character build advice sought
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Tetsubo" <tetsubo@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:zvSdnRfX4b6F8HHfRVn-jg@comcast.com...
    > After a long dry spell of not gaming I've decided to scare up a game to
    > join. To get back into the mood I've created a 1st level Warlock. I've
    > never designed a Warlock before. I'm wondering how this looks and can
    > anyone offer any advice? TIA.

    Personally, I would not bother with Improved Initiative. I would also take
    advantage of the Extra Invocation feat at pretty much every opportunity.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tetsubo wrote:
    > After a long dry spell of not gaming I've decided to scare up a game to
    > join. To get back into the mood I've created a 1st level Warlock. I've
    > never designed a Warlock before. I'm wondering how this looks and can
    > anyone offer any advice? TIA.
    >
    > Pavel the Enervated (AKA Coenric Winterhaven)
    >
    > Human Male, Warlock, 1st Level, Chaotic Neutral
    >
    [cut]
    > Goals:
    >
    > Pavel wants to become a great Warlock. He takes great pleasure in using
    > his Eldritch Blast as often as he can. He sees himself as some sort of
    > arcane living weapon, a mythic archer who never needs an external item
    > to take down his targets. He also wants to show his parents that a
    > Warlock can be just as important as a Guild Wizard can. He also secretly
    > wants to earn a Lordship in his own right, rather than inherent such a
    > title from his parents.
    >
    > Personality:
    >
    > Pavel is the quintessential 80’s era punk. Rebelling against his
    > parent’s conservatism. He has a very selfish worldview. He is also
    > rather short sighted. The larger, world picture is beyond him. He knows
    > that there are starving people in the world. But that happens “over
    > there”. If he were to encounter such a person face to face he would
    > react on a personal level. He is fiercely loyal to those that except him
    > for whom he is, Pavel the Enervated, Warlock at large. He enjoys being
    > the charming rogue. He also enjoys the success with the ladies that his
    > charm gains him.
    >
    > The world is Pavel’s oyster… and he’s hungry. Now if he just had some
    > money…
    >
    > Alignment View:
    >
    > Pavel will not knowingly harm an innocent. He will not attack an unarmed
    > person unless in self-defense. If he perceives an armed person as a
    > threat he is not above a “preemptive strike”. He bases his views on how
    > people act, rather than what they preach. He is a bit of a cad when it
    > comes to women. He sees them as conquests rather than equals. This view
    > could change but he would need to see a strong female in action first.
    > He sees much of the world as resources for his own, personal use.
    >

    This alignment view is more /neutral/ than chaotic neutral. Chaotic
    neutral would see people as getting what they deserve, they most
    certainly would knowingly harm an innocent if they had any notion to do
    so, and loyalty is to themselves over anyone else. A neutral person
    would also knowingly harm an innocent, they just are unlikely to ever
    benefit from it. Only the good avoid knowingly harming innocents.


    > Build Plan: Feat, Invocation Choices and Ability Boosts
    >
    > 1st Level: Feats (Improved Initiative, Precise Shot), Invocation
    > (Eldritch Spear)
    >

    Consider the feat , education, or other feats that better represent your
    character's artistocratic upbringing. Perhaps instead of precise shot,
    since improved initiative is quite useful if your thinking of keeping
    him a shootfirstquestionlater kind-of-guy.
  3. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tetsubo wrote:
    > After a long dry spell of not gaming I've decided to scare up a game
    > to join. To get back into the mood I've created a 1st level Warlock.
    > I've never designed a Warlock before. I'm wondering how this looks and
    > can anyone offer any advice? TIA.
    >
    > Pavel the Enervated (AKA Coenric Winterhaven)
    >
    > Human Male, Warlock, 1st Level, Chaotic Neutral
    >
    > Str: 10 (2 points) +0
    > Dex: 14 (6 points) +2
    > Con: 10 (2 points) +0
    > Int: 14 (6 points) +2
    > Wis: 10 (2 points) +0
    > Cha: 16 (10 points) +3
    > 28 Point Buy

    If you're concentrating upon Eldritch Blast use rather than a lot of
    invocations with saving throws, it may be worth putting the 16 into DEX
    rather than CHA, to keep your attack bonus up. And no CON bonus can hurt
    with a d6 hit die - maybe steal points from INT or WIS for it.

    > Skills: 1st level points: 20 (2 + 2 (+2 IN)) x 4 + 4 (Human Bonus) =
    > 20 5 each following level (2 + 2 (+2 IN)) +1 (Human Bonus) = 5
    >
    > Class Skills:
    > Bluff (CH) +5 (2 ranks + CH Bonus)
    > Concentration (CN) +2 (2 ranks)
    > Disguise (CH) +2 (CH Bonus)
    > Intimidate (CH) +7 (4 ranks + CH Bonus)
    > Knowledge (Arcana) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    > Knowledge (The Planes) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    > Knowledge (Religion) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    > Spellcraft (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    > Use Magic Device (CH) +7 (4 ranks + CH Bonus)

    Concentration can be an important skill for a Warlock, as all his
    invocations provoke AoOs if not cast defensively. You may want to max it out
    at low levels. Steal a rank each from Planes and Religion, perhaps.

    > Feats: 2 total at 1st level
    > Improved Initiative: +4 to Init.
    > Precise Shot: No BAB penalty for shooting into melee.

    Precise Shot has Point Blank Shot as a prerequisite.

    > 6th Level: Feat (Empower Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast),
    > Invocation (Fell Flight)
    >
    > 7th Level: N/A
    >
    > 8th Level: Invocation (Walk Unseen), +1 CH
    >
    > 9th Level: Feat (Maximize Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast)

    Maximise gets you a better power boost than Empower, and both are available
    at the same level. That being the case, get Maximise first, then Empower.

    --
    Mark.
  4. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:

    >"Tetsubo" <tetsubo@comcast.net> wrote in message
    >news:zvSdnRfX4b6F8HHfRVn-jg@comcast.com...
    >
    >
    >> After a long dry spell of not gaming I've decided to scare up a game to
    >>join. To get back into the mood I've created a 1st level Warlock. I've
    >>never designed a Warlock before. I'm wondering how this looks and can
    >>anyone offer any advice? TIA.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Personally, I would not bother with Improved Initiative. I would also take
    >advantage of the Extra Invocation feat at pretty much every opportunity.
    >
    >
    >
    After having it pointed out that Precise Shot needs Point Blank Shot
    as a prerequisite I dropped Improved Initiative. Though I really like
    that Feat. Being the first one to get off an Eldritch Blast is important
    to a low HP character.

    I thought about Extra Invocation... I just couldn't justify it.

    --
    Tetsubo
    My page: http://home.comcast.net/~tetsubo/
    --------------------------------------
    If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
    -- Anatole France
  5. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Tetsubo" <tetsubo@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:NI2dnabDHZRW1HDfRVn-vA@comcast.com...
    > Malachias Invictus wrote:
    >>"Tetsubo" <tetsubo@comcast.net> wrote in message
    >>news:zvSdnRfX4b6F8HHfRVn-jg@comcast.com...

    >>> After a long dry spell of not gaming I've decided to scare up a game to
    >>> join. To get back into the mood I've created a 1st level Warlock. I've
    >>> never designed a Warlock before. I'm wondering how this looks and can
    >>> anyone offer any advice? TIA.

    >>Personally, I would not bother with Improved Initiative. I would also
    >>take advantage of the Extra Invocation feat at pretty much every
    >>opportunity.

    > After having it pointed out that Precise Shot needs Point Blank Shot as
    > a prerequisite I dropped Improved Initiative. Though I really like that
    > Feat. Being the first one to get off an Eldritch Blast is important to a
    > low HP character.

    I prefer to use Walk Unseen to get the drop on my enemies; it is generally
    more reliable than a die roll, and useful in many other ways as well.
    Voracious Dispelling is simply *disgusting* at lower levels as well.

    > I thought about Extra Invocation... I just couldn't justify it.

    Hmm. With both my Warlock characters, I took that feat at every
    opportunity. Invocations are simply too juicy to pass up.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  6. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Shawn Roske wrote:

    > Tetsubo wrote:
    >
    >> After a long dry spell of not gaming I've decided to scare up a game
    >> to join. To get back into the mood I've created a 1st level Warlock.
    >> I've never designed a Warlock before. I'm wondering how this looks
    >> and can anyone offer any advice? TIA.
    >>
    >> Pavel the Enervated (AKA Coenric Winterhaven)
    >>
    >> Human Male, Warlock, 1st Level, Chaotic Neutral
    >>
    > [cut]
    >
    >> Goals:
    >>
    >> Pavel wants to become a great Warlock. He takes great pleasure in
    >> using his Eldritch Blast as often as he can. He sees himself as some
    >> sort of arcane living weapon, a mythic archer who never needs an
    >> external item to take down his targets. He also wants to show his
    >> parents that a Warlock can be just as important as a Guild Wizard
    >> can. He also secretly wants to earn a Lordship in his own right,
    >> rather than inherent such a title from his parents.
    >>
    >> Personality:
    >>
    >> Pavel is the quintessential 80’s era punk. Rebelling against his
    >> parent’s conservatism. He has a very selfish worldview. He is also
    >> rather short sighted. The larger, world picture is beyond him. He
    >> knows that there are starving people in the world. But that happens
    >> “over there”. If he were to encounter such a person face to face he
    >> would react on a personal level. He is fiercely loyal to those that
    >> except him for whom he is, Pavel the Enervated, Warlock at large. He
    >> enjoys being the charming rogue. He also enjoys the success with the
    >> ladies that his charm gains him.
    >>
    >> The world is Pavel’s oyster… and he’s hungry. Now if he just had some
    >> money…
    >>
    >> Alignment View:
    >>
    >> Pavel will not knowingly harm an innocent. He will not attack an
    >> unarmed person unless in self-defense. If he perceives an armed
    >> person as a threat he is not above a “preemptive strike”. He bases
    >> his views on how people act, rather than what they preach. He is a
    >> bit of a cad when it comes to women. He sees them as conquests rather
    >> than equals. This view could change but he would need to see a strong
    >> female in action first. He sees much of the world as resources for
    >> his own, personal use.
    >>
    >
    > This alignment view is more /neutral/ than chaotic neutral. Chaotic
    > neutral would see people as getting what they deserve, they most
    > certainly would knowingly harm an innocent if they had any notion to
    > do so, and loyalty is to themselves over anyone else. A neutral
    > person would also knowingly harm an innocent, they just are unlikely
    > to ever benefit from it. Only the good avoid knowingly harming
    > innocents.

    I might argue that point... but he needs to be Chaotic for the class
    and I didn't want to go CG. I'm looking at a rather selfish point of
    view for Pavel. He just isn't Evil.

    >
    >
    >> Build Plan: Feat, Invocation Choices and Ability Boosts
    >>
    >> 1st Level: Feats (Improved Initiative, Precise Shot), Invocation
    >> (Eldritch Spear)
    >>
    >
    > Consider the feat , education, or other feats that better represent
    > your character's artistocratic upbringing. Perhaps instead of precise
    > shot, since improved initiative is quite useful if your thinking of
    > keeping him a shootfirstquestionlater kind-of-guy.

    I dropped Improved Initiative because Precise Shot needs Point Blank
    Shot as a prereq, an oversight on my part. Feats are so dear for a
    Warlock that I can't really justify the Educated Feat.

    --
    Tetsubo
    My page: http://home.comcast.net/~tetsubo/
    --------------------------------------
    If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
    -- Anatole France
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Shawn Roske wrote:

    > This alignment view is more /neutral/ than chaotic neutral. Chaotic
    > neutral would see people as getting what they deserve, they most
    > certainly would knowingly harm an innocent if they had any notion to do
    > so, and loyalty is to themselves over anyone else. A neutral person
    > would also knowingly harm an innocent, they just are unlikely to ever
    > benefit from it. Only the good avoid knowingly harming innocents.

    RTFM.

    -Will
  8. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Will Green wrote:
    > Shawn Roske wrote:
    >
    >> This alignment view is more /neutral/ than chaotic neutral. Chaotic
    >> neutral would see people as getting what they deserve, they most
    >> certainly would knowingly harm an innocent if they had any notion to
    >> do so, and loyalty is to themselves over anyone else. A neutral
    >> person would also knowingly harm an innocent, they just are unlikely
    >> to ever benefit from it. Only the good avoid knowingly harming
    >> innocents.
    >
    >
    > RTFM.
    >
    > -Will

    I stand by my interpretation.
  9. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 11:14:08 -0400, Shawn Roske
    <shawn_roske@sympatico.ca> wrote:


    >> Pavel will not knowingly harm an innocent. He will not attack an unarmed
    >> person unless in self-defense. If he perceives an armed person as a
    >> threat he is not above a “preemptive strike”. He bases his views on how
    >> people act, rather than what they preach. He is a bit of a cad when it
    >> comes to women. He sees them as conquests rather than equals. This view
    >> could change but he would need to see a strong female in action first.
    >> He sees much of the world as resources for his own, personal use.
    >>
    >
    >This alignment view is more /neutral/ than chaotic neutral. Chaotic
    >neutral would see people as getting what they deserve, they most
    >certainly would knowingly harm an innocent if they had any notion to do
    >so, and loyalty is to themselves over anyone else. A neutral person
    >would also knowingly harm an innocent, they just are unlikely to ever
    >benefit from it. Only the good avoid knowingly harming innocents.

    That's a bit rigid, not to mention wrong. People who avoid harming,
    but won't help either unless there is something in it for them fit
    very comfortably into the neutral range between Good and Evil.
    Besides, he isn't all that careful about determining the innocence of
    potential threats when there's any tension in the situation.
  10. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    David Johnston wrote:
    > On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 11:14:08 -0400, Shawn Roske
    > <shawn_roske@sympatico.ca> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >>>Pavel will not knowingly harm an innocent. He will not attack an unarmed
    >>>person unless in self-defense. If he perceives an armed person as a
    >>>threat he is not above a �reemptive strike・ He bases his views on how
    >>>people act, rather than what they preach. He is a bit of a cad when it
    >>>comes to women. He sees them as conquests rather than equals. This view
    >>>could change but he would need to see a strong female in action first.
    >>>He sees much of the world as resources for his own, personal use.
    >>>
    >>
    >>This alignment view is more /neutral/ than chaotic neutral. Chaotic
    >>neutral would see people as getting what they deserve, they most
    >>certainly would knowingly harm an innocent if they had any notion to do
    >>so, and loyalty is to themselves over anyone else. A neutral person
    >>would also knowingly harm an innocent, they just are unlikely to ever
    >>benefit from it. Only the good avoid knowingly harming innocents.
    >
    >
    > That's a bit rigid, not to mention wrong. People who avoid harming,
    > but won't help either unless there is something in it for them fit
    > very comfortably into the neutral range between Good and Evil.

    Yes. I just don't read the character as being all that chaotic.


    > Besides, he isn't all that careful about determining the innocence of
    > potential threats when there's any tension in the situation.


    Exactly.
  11. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Shawn Roske wrote:
    > Will Green wrote:
    >
    >> Shawn Roske wrote:
    >>
    >>> This alignment view is more /neutral/ than chaotic neutral. Chaotic
    >>> neutral would see people as getting what they deserve, they most
    >>> certainly would knowingly harm an innocent if they had any notion to
    >>> do so, and loyalty is to themselves over anyone else. A neutral
    >>> person would also knowingly harm an innocent, they just are unlikely
    >>> to ever benefit from it. Only the good avoid knowingly harming
    >>> innocents.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> RTFM.
    >>
    >> -Will
    >
    >
    > I stand by my interpretation.

    Even though it's very, very wrong? Can you cite anything from the SRD
    or PHB to support your "interpretation?"
  12. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Will Green wrote:
    > Shawn Roske wrote:
    >> Will Green wrote:
    >>> Shawn Roske wrote:
    >>>> This alignment view is more /neutral/ than chaotic neutral. Chaotic
    >>>> neutral would see people as getting what they deserve, they most
    >>>> certainly would knowingly harm an innocent if they had any notion to
    >>>> do so, and loyalty is to themselves over anyone else. A neutral
    >>>> person would also knowingly harm an innocent, they just are unlikely
    >>>> to ever benefit from it. Only the good avoid knowingly harming
    >>>> innocents.
    >>> RTFM.
    >> I stand by my interpretation.
    > Even though it's very, very wrong? Can you cite anything from the SRD
    > or PHB to support your "interpretation?"

    The bit about not harming an innocent seems more towards good than
    neutral, so I suggested dropping the chaotic element. Since he needs
    the chaos for the class, perhaps drop the consideration of innocence
    altogether.

    The paragraph, beginning "People who are neutral..." bottom of 104p. PH
    depicts a person or group of people who would knowlingly send innocents
    to die if they were not in the in-group. For example, fairy tales often
    tell of situations where a village casts out the innocent person to the
    evil in the land because that person is "different" or a stranger. The
    villagers are not evil, not good, they simply make no effort to protect
    what they see as outside themselves.

    Add chaos to neutral with the coresponding rebellion from authority and
    the emphasis on individualism, this places relations to others on a
    sharper grade of me-verses-everyone-else. Harming the innocent does not
    always occur through malice, and most often occurs through not giving a
    damn.

    My statements concerning CN is in line with 105p. see the sentences
    containing the phrases, "individualist", "values own liberty", "doesn't
    strive to protect others' freedom", and the rest of the paragraph.
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Shawn Roske wrote:

    > The paragraph, beginning "People who are neutral..." bottom of 104p. PH
    > depicts a person or group of people who would knowlingly send innocents
    > to die if they were not in the in-group.

    No, it doesn't. Read it again. It suggests reasons why a neutral
    person might sacrifice himself to protect others; it's got nothing to do
    with innocents, and it certainly has nothing to do with knowingly
    harming innocents!

    The fact is that a neutral person might knowingly harm an innocent
    person, but he wouldn't be at all happy about it, and he'd have to have
    a very compelling reason to do so. They have COMPUNCTIONS against
    harming innocents.

    <snip>

    > Add chaos to neutral with the coresponding rebellion from authority and
    > the emphasis on individualism, this places relations to others on a
    > sharper grade of me-verses-everyone-else.

    No -- it more likely gives you a personality like "Do what you want,
    just don't keep me down."

    > Harming the innocent does not
    > always occur through malice, and most often occurs through not giving a
    > damn.

    Which is enough, really. Such people "simply have no compassion for
    others."

    > My statements concerning CN is in line with 105p. see the sentences
    > containing the phrases, "individualist", "values own liberty", "doesn't
    > strive to protect others' freedom", and the rest of the paragraph.

    Except for the bit you made up about hurting innocent people.
  14. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Will Green wrote:
    > Shawn Roske wrote:
    >
    >> The paragraph, beginning "People who are neutral..." bottom of 104p.
    >> PH depicts a person or group of people who would knowlingly send
    >> innocents to die if they were not in the in-group.
    >
    >
    > No, it doesn't. Read it again. It suggests reasons why a neutral
    > person might sacrifice himself to protect others;

    It also suggests reasons why a neutral person would not lift a finger to
    help a stranger.

    > it's got nothing to do
    > with innocents, and it certainly has nothing to do with knowingly
    > harming innocents!
    >

    The question is doing harm to someone, an innocent, a child. We are
    arguing about how to interpret the neutral and chaotic neutral
    alignments in relation to harming innocents. Are you talking about
    something else?


    > The fact is that a neutral person might knowingly harm an innocent
    > person, but he wouldn't be at all happy about it, and he'd have to have
    > a very compelling reason to do so. They have COMPUNCTIONS against
    > harming innocents.

    Yes. This does not counter my statements. You are supporting my
    position. So what if they feel "a slight regret", they'll still toss
    the virgins into the volcano. The reason does not have to be that
    compelling to overcome a scrupple.


    >
    > <snip>
    >
    >> Add chaos to neutral with the coresponding rebellion from authority
    >> and the emphasis on individualism, this places relations to others on
    >> a sharper grade of me-verses-everyone-else.
    >
    >
    > No -- it more likely gives you a personality like "Do what you want,
    > just don't keep me down."
    >

    You are supporting my position. You could just have easily put a "yes"
    in front of your sentence.

    >> Harming the innocent does not always occur through malice, and most
    >> often occurs through not giving a damn.
    >
    >
    > Which is enough, really. Such people "simply have no compassion for
    > others."
    >

    Precisely my point about neutrality. A neutral person would harm an
    innocent this way. They are simply unlikely to be the one pulling the
    trigger without, "feeling compunctions about it".

    A chaotic neutral person would feel even less "picking of conscience"
    than a neutral person.
  15. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Shawn Roske" <shawn_roske@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    news:xynHe.876$pH4.181358@news20.bellglobal.com...
    > Will Green wrote:

    >> The fact is that a neutral person might knowingly harm an innocent
    >> person, but he wouldn't be at all happy about it, and he'd have to have a
    >> very compelling reason to do so. They have COMPUNCTIONS against harming
    >> innocents.
    >
    > Yes. This does not counter my statements. You are supporting my
    > position. So what if they feel "a slight regret", they'll still toss the
    > virgins into the volcano. The reason does not have to be that compelling
    > to overcome a scrupple.

    ?!?

    First of all, what is a "scrupple"?

    Secondly, where do you get the idea that sacrificing innocents would cause
    no more than a "slight regret" in a Neutral?

    >> Which is enough, really. Such people "simply have no compassion for
    >> others."

    > Precisely my point about neutrality. A neutral person would harm an
    > innocent this way. They are simply unlikely to be the one pulling the
    > trigger without, "feeling compunctions about it".
    >
    > A chaotic neutral person would feel even less "picking of conscience" than
    > a neutral person.

    Evidence?

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  16. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    I had a big long post which seems to have gotten lost, I'll try to
    recreate it.

    Since I'm actually playing a warlock...

    Tetsubo wrote:
    > Str: 10 (2 points) +0

    Str is pretty useless to a pure warlock. I'd drop this one to 8.

    > Dex: 14 (6 points) +2
    > Con: 10 (2 points) +0
    > Int: 14 (6 points) +2
    > Wis: 10 (2 points) +0

    Wisdom is not necessary to a warlock, and they have a good will save
    anyway, again I'd drop this. Put the points anywhere else and you'll
    be better off.

    > Cha: 16 (10 points) +3

    > Initiative: +6 (+2 DX, +4 Improved Initiative)

    Well you already changed this so skipping.

    > Class Skills:
    > Bluff (CH) +5 (2 ranks + CH Bonus)
    > Concentration (CN) +2 (2 ranks)

    You probably want to max this out, as mentioned elsewhere. You might
    be able to get away without it.

    > Disguise (CH) +2 (CH Bonus)
    > Intimidate (CH) +7 (4 ranks + CH Bonus)
    > Knowledge (Arcana) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    > Knowledge (The Planes) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    > Knowledge (Religion) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    > Spellcraft (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)

    You want at least 5 ranks here ASAP for the synergy bonus to UMD.

    > Use Magic Device (CH) +7 (4 ranks + CH Bonus)
    >
    > Invocations:
    > Eldritch Spear (Least, 1st level): Eldritch Blast range increased to 250'.
    >

    There are better things than this at 1st lv. Spider Climb or Baleful
    Utterance. But you can't go wrong with it either.

    > Pavel is of slightly above average height (5' 10")

    I thought that was average?

    > 2nd Level: Invocation (See the Unseen)
    >

    There's a better version later - Devil Sight, and it's not really
    needed this early, either of the other ones mentioned above would be
    better.

    > 3rd Level: Feat (Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast)
    >

    Not sure what this does.

    > 4th Level: Invocation (Beguiling Influence), +1 CH
    >

    Not sure about this one.


    > 6th Level: Feat (Empower Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast), Invocation
    > (Fell Flight)
    >

    Metamagic doesn't work really well with eldritch blast, since you have
    to do lower damage to use it, It might barely be worth it - and there's
    some argument if you can even use it with the blast. I'd check with
    your DM first. Extra Invocation is probably a better way to go. But
    if you want to focus on the blast, one metamagic is probably o.k.

    One thing to consider is the feat to increase level against SR. Most
    of that is taken care of by Vitriolic Blast, but there's still those
    pesky Acid Immune creatures.

    > 9th Level: Feat (Maximize Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast)

    I'd only get either Maximize or Empower, not both, they don't stack
    well for the Blast.

    > 12th Level: Feat (Improved Critical: Eldritch Blast), +1 CH
    >

    Interesting choise, but I'd really go with Craft Wonderous Item here,
    unless your DM is going to let you buy a Chasubel of Fell Power, the
    greater one adds +2d6 to your Eldrich Blast. If you weren't so focused
    on the Eldrich Blast I'd suggest Scribe Scroll (hey all spells in the
    book in scroll form!) or Craft Staff. Another option to consider is
    Craft Rod for the Warlock Rod, which increases your Blast damage for
    charges, and is a +2 Mace.

    > 16th Level: Invocation (Retributive Invisibility, swap out Walk Unseen
    > for Eldritch Chain), +1 CH
    >

    You really only need one blast shape, but chain can be useful too,
    there's just so many other good invocations.

    > 18th Level: Feat (Inured to Energy: Fire ER +10), Invocation (Eldritch Doom)

    Again with the one blast shape.

    > 20th Level: Invocation (Dark Discorporation), +1 CH

    A flavorful choice. I'm not sure so wise. You don't need the flight
    capability since you already have Fell Flight. You can't use your
    blast in this shape, and you are putting so much into it, that this
    seems counter to your focus. It can be useful, you can distract
    casters, if you are lucky, but you put yourself at a great risk taking
    +50% damage from are effects. It's alright aginst purely weapon based
    challenges since they can't harm you at all, but you're probably better
    off for your companions to just get rid of the threat quicker with your
    blasts. That leaves escaping grapples, and it's really good for that,
    but that's all it's really good for.

    - Justisaur
  17. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:

    > "Shawn Roske" <shawn_roske@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    > news:xynHe.876$pH4.181358@news20.bellglobal.com...
    >
    >>Will Green wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>The fact is that a neutral person might knowingly harm an innocent
    >>>person, but he wouldn't be at all happy about it, and he'd have to have a
    >>>very compelling reason to do so. They have COMPUNCTIONS against harming
    >>>innocents.
    >>
    >>Yes. This does not counter my statements. You are supporting my
    >>position. So what if they feel "a slight regret", they'll still toss the
    >>virgins into the volcano. The reason does not have to be that compelling
    >>to overcome a scrupple.
    >
    >
    > ?!?
    >
    > First of all, what is a "scrupple"?
    >
    > Secondly, where do you get the idea that sacrificing innocents would cause
    > no more than a "slight regret" in a Neutral?
    >
    >
    >>>Which is enough, really. Such people "simply have no compassion for
    >>>others."
    >
    >
    >>Precisely my point about neutrality. A neutral person would harm an
    >>innocent this way. They are simply unlikely to be the one pulling the
    >>trigger without, "feeling compunctions about it".
    >>
    >>A chaotic neutral person would feel even less "picking of conscience" than
    >>a neutral person.
    >
    >
    > Evidence?
    >

    IMHO, alignment is simply too imprecise to reach these conclusions.
    Flexability in interpretation is a key part of the alignment system. It
    can be either or both ways, because there's just no right answer here.

    CH
  18. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Clawhound" <none@nowhere.com> wrote in message
    news:pTuHe.237$n5.359@mencken.net.nih.gov...
    > Malachias Invictus wrote:
    >
    >> "Shawn Roske" <shawn_roske@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    >> news:xynHe.876$pH4.181358@news20.bellglobal.com...
    >>
    >>>Will Green wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>>The fact is that a neutral person might knowingly harm an innocent
    >>>>person, but he wouldn't be at all happy about it, and he'd have to have
    >>>>a very compelling reason to do so. They have COMPUNCTIONS against
    >>>>harming innocents.
    >>>
    >>>Yes. This does not counter my statements. You are supporting my
    >>>position. So what if they feel "a slight regret", they'll still toss the
    >>>virgins into the volcano. The reason does not have to be that compelling
    >>>to overcome a scrupple.
    >>
    >>
    >> ?!?
    >>
    >> First of all, what is a "scrupple"?
    >>
    >> Secondly, where do you get the idea that sacrificing innocents would
    >> cause no more than a "slight regret" in a Neutral?
    >>
    >>
    >>>>Which is enough, really. Such people "simply have no compassion for
    >>>>others."
    >>
    >>
    >>>Precisely my point about neutrality. A neutral person would harm an
    >>>innocent this way. They are simply unlikely to be the one pulling the
    >>>trigger without, "feeling compunctions about it".
    >>>
    >>>A chaotic neutral person would feel even less "picking of conscience"
    >>>than a neutral person.

    >> Evidence?

    > IMHO, alignment is simply too imprecise to reach these conclusions.

    Well, that is certainly true with some of the conclusions Shawn reached.

    > Flexability in interpretation is a key part of the alignment system. It
    > can be either or both ways, because there's just no right answer here.

    Perhaps, but there are *wrong* answers. "A neutral person would harm an
    innocent this way" is clearly wrong. If you change "would" to "might," then
    you are on better ground.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  19. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:aNCdnRna36ET1HPfRVn-1g@comcast.com...
    > "Shawn Roske" <shawn_roske@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    > > Precisely my point about neutrality. A neutral person would harm an
    > > innocent this way. They are simply unlikely to be the one pulling the
    > > trigger without, "feeling compunctions about it".
    > >
    > > A chaotic neutral person would feel even less "picking of conscience"
    than
    > > a neutral person.
    >
    > Evidence?

    This should be amusing. Dear Shawn: you are being a moron in public. Can
    you stop yourself from spouting nonsense before the inevitable consequences
    of this activity catch up to you?

    -Michael
  20. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 22:47:59 -0400, Shawn Roske
    <shawn_roske@sympatico.ca> dared speak in front of ME:

    >Will Green wrote:
    >> Shawn Roske wrote:
    >>> Will Green wrote:
    >>>> Shawn Roske wrote:
    >>>>> This alignment view is more /neutral/ than chaotic neutral. Chaotic
    >>>>> neutral would see people as getting what they deserve, they most
    >>>>> certainly would knowingly harm an innocent if they had any notion to
    >>>>> do so, and loyalty is to themselves over anyone else. A neutral
    >>>>> person would also knowingly harm an innocent, they just are unlikely
    >>>>> to ever benefit from it. Only the good avoid knowingly harming
    >>>>> innocents.
    >>>> RTFM.
    >>> I stand by my interpretation.
    >> Even though it's very, very wrong? Can you cite anything from the SRD
    >> or PHB to support your "interpretation?"
    >
    >The bit about not harming an innocent seems more towards good than
    >neutral, so I suggested dropping the chaotic element. Since he needs
    >the chaos for the class, perhaps drop the consideration of innocence
    >altogether.
    >
    >The paragraph, beginning "People who are neutral..." bottom of 104p. PH
    >depicts a person or group of people who would knowlingly send innocents
    >to die if they were not in the in-group.

    No it doesn't. It depicts a person or group thereof who won't stop
    someone else from doing as you describe.

    >Add chaos to neutral with the coresponding rebellion from authority and
    >the emphasis on individualism,

    And you get someone who's... not going to get involved without a
    personal interest either way. (And if his interest leads towards
    doing harm to said 'innocent,' then it becomes questionable whether
    said person is truly innocent.)

    >Harming the innocent does not
    >always occur through malice, and most often occurs through not giving a
    >damn.

    You are confusing "allows harm to come to innocents" with "knowingly
    causes harm to innocents."

    --
    Address no longer works.
    try removing all numbers from
    gafgirl1@2allstream3.net

    --
    Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
    ------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
    Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
  21. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Mark Blunden wrote:
    > Justisaur wrote:
    >
    > > Tetsubo wrote:
    >
    > >> 2nd Level: Invocation (See the Unseen)

    > >> 6th Level: Feat (Empower Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast),
    > >> Invocation (Fell Flight)
    > >>
    > >
    > > Metamagic doesn't work really well with eldritch blast, since you have
    > > to do lower damage to use it, It might barely be worth it - and
    > > there's some argument if you can even use it with the blast. I'd
    > > check with your DM first. Extra Invocation is probably a better way
    > > to go. But if you want to focus on the blast, one metamagic is
    > > probably o.k.
    >
    > The Complete Arcane errata clears up whether it's usable - Eldritch Blast is
    > corrected from spell level of half caster level to 1st level, allowing any
    > metamagic spell-like ability feat to be taken with it. The only downside is
    > that you can't stack it with level-increasing blast shapes or eldritch
    > essences until you're higher level, but by the time he's intending to take
    > Brimstone Blast he'll be high enough level to add it and still use Empower
    > or Maximise, so there's no downside up to that point.
    >

    I haven't read the eratta yet, but that's certainly much better. As you
    say later on, it actually makes having both Maximize & Empower quite
    useful.

    > >> 9th Level: Feat (Maximize Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast)
    > >
    > > I'd only get either Maximize or Empower, not both, they don't stack
    > > well for the Blast.
    >
    > 3X damage three times per day is better than 2X, as is three each of 2X and
    > 1.5X. However, Empower definitely gets you less bang for your buck, so it
    > may be worth swapping for something else.
    >

    > >> 20th Level: Invocation (Dark Discorporation), +1 CH
    > >
    > > A flavorful choice. I'm not sure so wise. You don't need the flight
    > > capability since you already have Fell Flight. You can't use your
    > > blast in this shape, and you are putting so much into it, that this
    > > seems counter to your focus. It can be useful, you can distract
    > > casters, if you are lucky, but you put yourself at a great risk taking
    > > +50% damage from are effects. It's alright aginst purely weapon based
    > > challenges since they can't harm you at all, but you're probably
    > > better off for your companions to just get rid of the threat quicker
    > > with your blasts. That leaves escaping grapples, and it's really
    > > good for that, but that's all it's really good for.
    >
    > I'd certainly agree with that - it's definitely not one of the more optimal
    > invocations. I know the OP is going for offensive capability, but I'd really
    > suggest looking at Path of Shadow here - Shadow Walk is a seriously
    > excellent travel-utility spell that can help out the whole party, and the
    > improved healing is just a bonus.

    Yes that's the one that looks most appealing to me as well.

    - Justisaur
  22. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tetsubo wrote:
    > Justisaur wrote:
    >
    > I am highly hesitant to have a stat penalty. It might just be my
    > style of gaming.
    >

    It's not going to cripple you either way, so don't worry about it.


    > >>3rd Level: Feat (Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast)
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >
    > >Not sure what this does.
    > >
    > Adds a +2 to any saved based features of the focused ability.

    Not sure that actually does anything since Eldrich Blast doesn't have a
    save...

    >
    > >
    > >>4th Level: Invocation (Beguiling Influence), +1 CH
    > >>
    > >Not sure about this one.
    > >
    > Adds a +6 bonus to Bluff, Diplomacy and Intimidate for 24 hours.
    >

    Just not sure about it. Depends on how your DM runs all these, and how
    much you will be making use of them.

    > >
    > >>12th Level: Feat (Improved Critical: Eldritch Blast), +1 CH
    > >
    > >Interesting choise, but I'd really go with Craft Wonderous Item here,
    > >unless your DM is going to let you buy a Chasubel of Fell Power, the
    > >greater one adds +2d6 to your Eldrich Blast. If you weren't so focused
    > >on the Eldrich Blast I'd suggest Scribe Scroll (hey all spells in the
    > >book in scroll form!) or Craft Staff. Another option to consider is
    > >Craft Rod for the Warlock Rod, which increases your Blast damage for
    > >charges, and is a +2 Mace.
    > >
    > >
    > Pavel isn't a creator. He is a Destroyer. He likes to blow stuff up.
    >

    Sometimes you have to create to destroy... +2d6 to your blast is
    nothing to sneeze at, it's a hell of a lot better than Improved
    Critical, and you can always take one or the other later, I wasn't
    specifically saying don't take Improved critical, just that an item
    creation feat can really help your blast. Of course if your DM is
    letting you buy them you can safely skip it.

    > >
    > >>18th Level: Feat (Inured to Energy: Fire ER +10), Invocation (Eldritch Doom)
    > >>

    Ah, forgot to mention this, It seems a pretty weak feat to me as well,
    what was your reasoning here?


    > So, which Dark Invocation would you recommend as a replacement?
    > Utterdark Blast and Word of Changing both have something to be said for
    > them... Utterdark Blast has the character concept advantage of modifying
    > the Eldritch Blast, which fits Pavel well.
    >

    Utterdark Blast appears to be pretty useful. The Shadow Walk one is my
    favorite though.
  23. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:
    > "Shawn Roske" <shawn_roske@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    > news:xynHe.876$pH4.181358@news20.bellglobal.com...
    >
    >>Will Green wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>The fact is that a neutral person might knowingly harm an innocent
    >>>person, but he wouldn't be at all happy about it, and he'd have to have a
    >>>very compelling reason to do so. They have COMPUNCTIONS against harming
    >>>innocents.
    >>
    >>Yes. This does not counter my statements. You are supporting my
    >>position. So what if they feel "a slight regret", they'll still toss the
    >>virgins into the volcano. The reason does not have to be that compelling
    >>to overcome a scrupple.
    >
    >
    > ?!?
    >
    > First of all, what is a "scrupple"?

    They eat that in Canada a lot. Haven't you heard of "scrupple/egg
    sandwiches?" ;-)
  24. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Justisaur wrote:

    >I had a big long post which seems to have gotten lost, I'll try to
    >recreate it.
    >
    >Since I'm actually playing a warlock...
    >
    >Tetsubo wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Str: 10 (2 points) +0
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Str is pretty useless to a pure warlock. I'd drop this one to 8.
    >
    >
    I am highly hesitant to have a stat penalty. It might just be my
    style of gaming.

    >
    >
    >>Dex: 14 (6 points) +2
    >>Con: 10 (2 points) +0
    >>Int: 14 (6 points) +2
    >>Wis: 10 (2 points) +0
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Wisdom is not necessary to a warlock, and they have a good will save
    >anyway, again I'd drop this. Put the points anywhere else and you'll
    >be better off.
    >
    >
    See above.

    >
    >
    >>Cha: 16 (10 points) +3
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    >
    >>Initiative: +6 (+2 DX, +4 Improved Initiative)
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Well you already changed this so skipping.
    >
    >
    >
    >>Class Skills:
    >>Bluff (CH) +5 (2 ranks + CH Bonus)
    >>Concentration (CN) +2 (2 ranks)
    >>
    >>
    >
    >You probably want to max this out, as mentioned elsewhere. You might
    >be able to get away without it.
    >
    >
    >
    >>Disguise (CH) +2 (CH Bonus)
    >>Intimidate (CH) +7 (4 ranks + CH Bonus)
    >>Knowledge (Arcana) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    >>Knowledge (The Planes) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    >>Knowledge (Religion) (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    >>Spellcraft (IN) +4 (2 ranks + IN Bonus)
    >>
    >>
    >
    >You want at least 5 ranks here ASAP for the synergy bonus to UMD.
    >
    >
    Eventually I would have 5 ranks of both Spellcraft and Bluff for the
    synergy bonus. I'm trying to create a well rounded skill list though.
    One that reflects the characters past. Pavel is also a pushing SOB, thus
    the high Intimidate...

    >
    >
    >>Use Magic Device (CH) +7 (4 ranks + CH Bonus)
    >>
    >>Invocations:
    >>Eldritch Spear (Least, 1st level): Eldritch Blast range increased to 250'.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >There are better things than this at 1st lv. Spider Climb or Baleful
    >Utterance. But you can't go wrong with it either.
    >
    >
    My character concept is much like an arcane archer. Kill them when
    they are "over there".

    >
    >
    >>Pavel is of slightly above average height (5' 10")
    >>
    >>
    >
    >I thought that was average?
    >
    >
    Modern American males are around 5' 8" - 5' 9" on average.

    >
    >
    >>2nd Level: Invocation (See the Unseen)
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >There's a better version later - Devil Sight, and it's not really
    >needed this early, either of the other ones mentioned above would be
    >better.
    >
    >
    I like the abilities of Darkvision and See Invisible too much.

    >
    >
    >>3rd Level: Feat (Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast)
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Not sure what this does.
    >
    Adds a +2 to any saved based features of the focused ability.

    >
    >
    >>4th Level: Invocation (Beguiling Influence), +1 CH
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Not sure about this one.
    >
    >
    Adds a +6 bonus to Bluff, Diplomacy and Intimidate for 24 hours.

    >
    >
    >
    >>6th Level: Feat (Empower Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast), Invocation
    >>(Fell Flight)
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Metamagic doesn't work really well with eldritch blast, since you have
    >to do lower damage to use it, It might barely be worth it - and there's
    >some argument if you can even use it with the blast. I'd check with
    >your DM first. Extra Invocation is probably a better way to go. But
    >if you want to focus on the blast, one metamagic is probably o.k.
    >
    >One thing to consider is the feat to increase level against SR. Most
    >of that is taken care of by Vitriolic Blast, but there's still those
    >pesky Acid Immune creatures.
    >
    >
    >
    >>9th Level: Feat (Maximize Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast)
    >>
    >>
    >
    >I'd only get either Maximize or Empower, not both, they don't stack
    >well for the Blast.
    >
    >
    I think I might agree with dropping Empower and just taking
    Maximize. I will keep Quicken however. The ability to get off TWO
    Eldritch Blasts in one round three times a day is just too tempting. In
    place of the Empower I think I will take Extra Invocation and choose
    Flee The Scene.

    >
    >
    >>12th Level: Feat (Improved Critical: Eldritch Blast), +1 CH
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Interesting choise, but I'd really go with Craft Wonderous Item here,
    >unless your DM is going to let you buy a Chasubel of Fell Power, the
    >greater one adds +2d6 to your Eldrich Blast. If you weren't so focused
    >on the Eldrich Blast I'd suggest Scribe Scroll (hey all spells in the
    >book in scroll form!) or Craft Staff. Another option to consider is
    >Craft Rod for the Warlock Rod, which increases your Blast damage for
    >charges, and is a +2 Mace.
    >
    >
    Pavel isn't a creator. He is a Destroyer. He likes to blow stuff up.

    >
    >
    >>16th Level: Invocation (Retributive Invisibility, swap out Walk Unseen
    >>for Eldritch Chain), +1 CH
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >You really only need one blast shape, but chain can be useful too,
    >there's just so many other good invocations.
    >
    >
    I'm maximizing my Eldritch Blast for utility. Thus the multiple
    blast shape Invocations. Pavel will have a shape for all occasions...

    >
    >
    >>18th Level: Feat (Inured to Energy: Fire ER +10), Invocation (Eldritch Doom)
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Again with the one blast shape.
    >
    >
    >
    >>20th Level: Invocation (Dark Discorporation), +1 CH
    >>
    >>
    >
    >A flavorful choice. I'm not sure so wise. You don't need the flight
    >capability since you already have Fell Flight. You can't use your
    >blast in this shape, and you are putting so much into it, that this
    >seems counter to your focus. It can be useful, you can distract
    >casters, if you are lucky, but you put yourself at a great risk taking
    >+50% damage from are effects. It's alright aginst purely weapon based
    >challenges since they can't harm you at all, but you're probably better
    >off for your companions to just get rid of the threat quicker with your
    >blasts. That leaves escaping grapples, and it's really good for that,
    >but that's all it's really good for.
    >
    >
    So, which Dark Invocation would you recommend as a replacement?
    Utterdark Blast and Word of Changing both have something to be said for
    them... Utterdark Blast has the character concept advantage of modifying
    the Eldritch Blast, which fits Pavel well.

    >- Justisaur
    >
    >
    >
    Thank you for your thoughts.

    --
    Tetsubo
    My page: http://home.comcast.net/~tetsubo/
    --------------------------------------
    If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
    -- Anatole France
  25. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Tetsubo" <tetsubo@comcast.net> wrote in message
    news:eqKdnRFvG8FKAnPfRVn-rA@comcast.com...
    > Justisaur wrote:

    >>>Pavel is of slightly above average height (5' 10")

    >>I thought that was average?

    > Modern American males are around 5' 8" - 5' 9" on average.

    No, it is 177 cm., which is just shy of 5' 10".

    >>>2nd Level: Invocation (See the Unseen)

    >>There's a better version later - Devil Sight, and it's not really
    >>needed this early, either of the other ones mentioned above would be
    >>better.

    > I like the abilities of Darkvision and See Invisible too much.

    See the Unseen is vastly superior to Devil Sight. Keep it.

    >>>4th Level: Invocation (Beguiling Influence), +1 CH

    >>Not sure about this one.

    > Adds a +6 bonus to Bluff, Diplomacy and Intimidate for 24 hours.

    That is great for a socially-oriented character. Think about what you could
    do with Skill Focus, that Invocation, and a high Charisma. Nasty.

    >>I'd only get either Maximize or Empower, not both, they don't stack
    >>well for the Blast.

    > I think I might agree with dropping Empower and just taking Maximize. I
    > will keep Quicken however. The ability to get off TWO Eldritch Blasts in
    > one round three times a day is just too tempting. In place of the Empower
    > I think I will take Extra Invocation and choose Flee The Scene.

    Flee the Scene *rocks*. I like to couple it with Walk Unseen.

    > So, which Dark Invocation would you recommend as a replacement?
    > Utterdark Blast and Word of Changing both have something to be said for
    > them... Utterdark Blast has the character concept advantage of modifying
    > the Eldritch Blast, which fits Pavel well.

    Word of Changing is very powerful. Dark Foresight is not bad, and is
    especially good for a team player.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  26. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Michael Scott Brown wrote:
    > "Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:aNCdnRna36ET1HPfRVn-1g@comcast.com...
    >
    >>"Shawn Roske" <shawn_roske@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
    >>
    >>>Precisely my point about neutrality. A neutral person would harm an
    >>>innocent this way. They are simply unlikely to be the one pulling the
    >>>trigger without, "feeling compunctions about it".
    >>>
    >>>A chaotic neutral person would feel even less "picking of conscience"
    >
    > than
    >
    >>>a neutral person.
    >>
    >>Evidence?
    >
    >
    > This should be amusing. Dear Shawn: you are being a moron in public. Can
    > you stop yourself from spouting nonsense before the inevitable consequences
    > of this activity catch up to you?
    >

    Yes. I can stop.

    I also admit that "scruple" is spelled with only one "p".
  27. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Justisaur wrote:

    > Tetsubo wrote:

    >> 2nd Level: Invocation (See the Unseen)
    >>
    >
    > There's a better version later - Devil Sight, and it's not really
    > needed this early, either of the other ones mentioned above would be
    > better.

    Devil's Sight isn't really better - it has the advantage of letting you see
    in magical darkness, but the range is only 30' rather than See the Unseen's
    60' darkvision, and it lacks the See Invisibility aspect.

    >> 6th Level: Feat (Empower Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast),
    >> Invocation (Fell Flight)
    >>
    >
    > Metamagic doesn't work really well with eldritch blast, since you have
    > to do lower damage to use it, It might barely be worth it - and
    > there's some argument if you can even use it with the blast. I'd
    > check with your DM first. Extra Invocation is probably a better way
    > to go. But if you want to focus on the blast, one metamagic is
    > probably o.k.

    The Complete Arcane errata clears up whether it's usable - Eldritch Blast is
    corrected from spell level of half caster level to 1st level, allowing any
    metamagic spell-like ability feat to be taken with it. The only downside is
    that you can't stack it with level-increasing blast shapes or eldritch
    essences until you're higher level, but by the time he's intending to take
    Brimstone Blast he'll be high enough level to add it and still use Empower
    or Maximise, so there's no downside up to that point.

    The only problematic ones are Eldritch Cone, which he can't Empower or
    Maximise until 14th level, Vitriolic Blast, which has to wait for 16th, and
    Eldritch Doom, which would have to wait until 20th. Quicken has stronger
    constraints, of course, but then even a regular Eldritch Blast as a free
    action is pretty useful.

    >> 9th Level: Feat (Maximize Spell-like Ability: Eldritch Blast)
    >
    > I'd only get either Maximize or Empower, not both, they don't stack
    > well for the Blast.

    3X damage three times per day is better than 2X, as is three each of 2X and
    1.5X. However, Empower definitely gets you less bang for your buck, so it
    may be worth swapping for something else.

    >> 20th Level: Invocation (Dark Discorporation), +1 CH
    >
    > A flavorful choice. I'm not sure so wise. You don't need the flight
    > capability since you already have Fell Flight. You can't use your
    > blast in this shape, and you are putting so much into it, that this
    > seems counter to your focus. It can be useful, you can distract
    > casters, if you are lucky, but you put yourself at a great risk taking
    > +50% damage from are effects. It's alright aginst purely weapon based
    > challenges since they can't harm you at all, but you're probably
    > better off for your companions to just get rid of the threat quicker
    > with your blasts. That leaves escaping grapples, and it's really
    > good for that, but that's all it's really good for.

    I'd certainly agree with that - it's definitely not one of the more optimal
    invocations. I know the OP is going for offensive capability, but I'd really
    suggest looking at Path of Shadow here - Shadow Walk is a seriously
    excellent travel-utility spell that can help out the whole party, and the
    improved healing is just a bonus.

    --
    Mark.
  28. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
    >> >>3rd Level: Feat (Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast)
    >> >
    >> >Not sure what this does.
    >> >
    >> Adds a +2 to any saved based features of the focused ability.
    >
    >Not sure that actually does anything since Eldrich Blast doesn't have a
    >save...

    Not the base "Xd6 damage" part, but several of the side effects allow saves.

    DOnald
  29. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Donald Tsang" <tsang@soda.csua.berkeley.edu> wrote in message
    news:dcmh1m$179k$1@agate.berkeley.edu...
    > Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
    >>> >>3rd Level: Feat (Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast)
    >>> >
    >>> >Not sure what this does.
    >>> >
    >>> Adds a +2 to any saved based features of the focused ability.
    >>
    >>Not sure that actually does anything since Eldrich Blast doesn't have a
    >>save...
    >
    > Not the base "Xd6 damage" part, but several of the side effects allow
    > saves.

    ....including reflex saves for half on the area effect stuff.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  30. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Justisaur wrote:

    >Tetsubo wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Justisaur wrote:
    >>
    >> I am highly hesitant to have a stat penalty. It might just be my
    >>style of gaming.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >It's not going to cripple you either way, so don't worry about it.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>>>3rd Level: Feat (Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast)
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>Not sure what this does.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >> Adds a +2 to any saved based features of the focused ability.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Not sure that actually does anything since Eldrich Blast doesn't have a
    >save...
    >
    >
    >
    >>>>4th Level: Invocation (Beguiling Influence), +1 CH
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>Not sure about this one.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >> Adds a +6 bonus to Bluff, Diplomacy and Intimidate for 24 hours.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Just not sure about it. Depends on how your DM runs all these, and how
    >much you will be making use of them.
    >
    >
    I plan on Pavel doing a lot of Imtimidating... not to mention
    getting dates...

    >
    >
    >>>>12th Level: Feat (Improved Critical: Eldritch Blast), +1 CH
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>Interesting choise, but I'd really go with Craft Wonderous Item here,
    >>>unless your DM is going to let you buy a Chasubel of Fell Power, the
    >>>greater one adds +2d6 to your Eldrich Blast. If you weren't so focused
    >>>on the Eldrich Blast I'd suggest Scribe Scroll (hey all spells in the
    >>>book in scroll form!) or Craft Staff. Another option to consider is
    >>>Craft Rod for the Warlock Rod, which increases your Blast damage for
    >>>charges, and is a +2 Mace.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >> Pavel isn't a creator. He is a Destroyer. He likes to blow stuff up.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Sometimes you have to create to destroy... +2d6 to your blast is
    >nothing to sneeze at, it's a hell of a lot better than Improved
    >Critical, and you can always take one or the other later, I wasn't
    >specifically saying don't take Improved critical, just that an item
    >creation feat can really help your blast. Of course if your DM is
    >letting you buy them you can safely skip it.
    >
    >
    >
    >>>>18th Level: Feat (Inured to Energy: Fire ER +10), Invocation (Eldritch Doom)
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >
    >Ah, forgot to mention this, It seems a pretty weak feat to me as well,
    >what was your reasoning here?
    >
    >
    It will give him a ER of 15 or 20 (depending on level) to Fire. I
    like that idea... The Feat adds a +10 to an existing energy resistance.

    >
    >
    >
    >> So, which Dark Invocation would you recommend as a replacement?
    >>Utterdark Blast and Word of Changing both have something to be said for
    >>them... Utterdark Blast has the character concept advantage of modifying
    >>the Eldritch Blast, which fits Pavel well.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Utterdark Blast appears to be pretty useful. The Shadow Walk one is my
    >favorite though.
    >
    >
    >
    That's what I chose, Utterdark Blast.

    --
    Tetsubo
    My page: http://home.comcast.net/~tetsubo/
    --------------------------------------
    If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
    -- Anatole France
  31. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    In news:zvSdnRfX4b6F8HHfRVn-jg@comcast.com,
    Tetsubo <tetsubo@comcast.net> typed:
    > After a long dry spell of not gaming I've decided to scare up a game
    > to join. To get back into the mood I've created a 1st level Warlock.
    > I've never designed a Warlock before. I'm wondering how this looks and
    > can anyone offer any advice? TIA.

    With the amount of magick items available at higher levels (assuming
    standard world), is fire res. really worth a feat? Or See the Unseen worth
    keeping past midlevels?

    --
    T. Koivula
  32. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    T. Koivula wrote:

    >In news:zvSdnRfX4b6F8HHfRVn-jg@comcast.com,
    >Tetsubo <tetsubo@comcast.net> typed:
    >
    >
    >> After a long dry spell of not gaming I've decided to scare up a game
    >>to join. To get back into the mood I've created a 1st level Warlock.
    >>I've never designed a Warlock before. I'm wondering how this looks and
    >>can anyone offer any advice? TIA.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >With the amount of magick items available at higher levels (assuming
    >standard world), is fire res. really worth a feat? Or See the Unseen worth
    >keeping past midlevels?
    >
    >--
    >T. Koivula
    >
    >
    >
    I've never liked being dependent on magic items for my characters
    survival. That's one of the attractions of the Warlock, innate power.
    Magic items are great, I will have a high UMD skill. But I would rather
    not be completely dependent on them...

    --
    Tetsubo
    My page: http://home.comcast.net/~tetsubo/
    --------------------------------------
    If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
    -- Anatole France
  33. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 17:37:25 -0400, Tetsubo <tetsubo@comcast.net>
    dared speak in front of ME:

    >T. Koivula wrote:
    >
    >>In news:zvSdnRfX4b6F8HHfRVn-jg@comcast.com,
    >>Tetsubo <tetsubo@comcast.net> typed:
    >>
    >>
    >>> After a long dry spell of not gaming I've decided to scare up a game
    >>>to join. To get back into the mood I've created a 1st level Warlock.
    >>>I've never designed a Warlock before. I'm wondering how this looks and
    >>>can anyone offer any advice? TIA.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>With the amount of magick items available at higher levels (assuming
    >>standard world), is fire res. really worth a feat? Or See the Unseen worth
    >>keeping past midlevels?
    >>
    >>--
    >>T. Koivula
    >>
    > I've never liked being dependent on magic items for my characters
    >survival.

    Iron Heroes. Couple of threads further down ;)

    --
    Address no longer works.
    try removing all numbers from
    gafgirl1@2allstream3.net

    --
    Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
    ------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
    Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
  34. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    In news:QLednYkgqK42enLfRVn-hQ@comcast.com,
    Tetsubo <tetsubo@comcast.net> typed:
    > I've never liked being dependent on magic items for my characters
    > survival. That's one of the attractions of the Warlock, innate power.
    > Magic items are great, I will have a high UMD skill. But I would
    > rather not be completely dependent on them...

    Naturally, just wondering if fe. fire res. is costeffective to take as a
    feat instead of magic item...

    --
    T. Koivula
  35. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Donald Tsang wrote:
    > Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >>>>>3rd Level: Feat (Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast)
    >>>>
    >>>>Not sure what this does.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Adds a +2 to any saved based features of the focused ability.
    >>
    >>Not sure that actually does anything since Eldrich Blast doesn't have a
    >>save...
    >
    > Not the base "Xd6 damage" part, but several of the side effects allow saves.

    If you're using different invocations then it's not an Eldritch
    Blast any more is it? I'd think you'd need ability focus for the ability
    you're acctually using, Vitriolic Doom is a different power to a
    Sickening Spear.

    --
    tussock

    Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
  36. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    tussock wrote:

    > Donald Tsang wrote:
    >
    >> Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>>>>> 3rd Level: Feat (Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast)
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Not sure what this does.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Adds a +2 to any saved based features of the focused ability.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Not sure that actually does anything since Eldrich Blast doesn't have a
    >>> save...
    >>
    >>
    >> Not the base "Xd6 damage" part, but several of the side effects allow
    >> saves.
    >
    >
    > If you're using different invocations then it's not an Eldritch
    > Blast any more is it? I'd think you'd need ability focus for the
    > ability you're acctually using, Vitriolic Doom is a different power to
    > a Sickening Spear.
    >
    A modification to an Eldritch Blast, is still an Eldritch Blast. So
    the Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast Feat would positively effect a cone
    shaped Eldritch Blast. Or one that was partially fire. etc. Making the
    save +2 higher never hurts...

    --
    Tetsubo
    My page: http://home.comcast.net/~tetsubo/
    --------------------------------------
    If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
    -- Anatole France
  37. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "tussock" <scrub@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
    news:42f05cd8@clear.net.nz...
    > Donald Tsang wrote:
    >> Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>>>>>3rd Level: Feat (Ability Focus: Eldritch Blast)
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Not sure what this does.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Adds a +2 to any saved based features of the focused ability.
    >>>
    >>>Not sure that actually does anything since Eldrich Blast doesn't have a
    >>>save...
    >>
    >> Not the base "Xd6 damage" part, but several of the side effects allow
    >> saves.
    >
    > If you're using different invocations then it's not an Eldritch Blast
    > any more is it?

    Yes, it is. It is clear in the book that Ability Focus affects Eldritch
    Blasts of any type. There is even a discussion (in the errata, I believe)
    about how Blast Invocations effect your ability to use feats like Quicken
    Spell-Like Ability on your Eldritch Blast.

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
  38. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Malachias Invictus wrote:
    > "tussock" <scrub@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
    > news:42f05cd8@clear.net.nz...
    >
    >> If you're using different invocations then it's not an Eldritch Blast
    >>any more is it?
    >
    > Yes, it is. It is clear in the book that Ability Focus affects Eldritch
    > Blasts of any type. There is even a discussion (in the errata, I believe)
    > about how Blast Invocations effect your ability to use feats like Quicken
    > Spell-Like Ability on your Eldritch Blast.

    Cool, thanks. I can see why one gets short on feats for these guys.

    --
    tussock

    Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
  39. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "tussock" <scrub@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
    news:42f35e55@clear.net.nz...
    > Malachias Invictus wrote:
    >> "tussock" <scrub@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
    >> news:42f05cd8@clear.net.nz...
    >>
    >>> If you're using different invocations then it's not an Eldritch Blast
    >>> any more is it?
    >>
    >> Yes, it is. It is clear in the book that Ability Focus affects Eldritch
    >> Blasts of any type. There is even a discussion (in the errata, I
    >> believe) about how Blast Invocations effect your ability to use feats
    >> like Quicken Spell-Like Ability on your Eldritch Blast.
    >
    > Cool, thanks. I can see why one gets short on feats for these guys.

    Indeed. Too much good stuff. You *really* want Quicken, Empower, and
    Maximize, but raising the save is good, and getting more Invocations...

    --
    ^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishment the scroll,
    I am the Master of my fate:
    I am the Captain of my soul.

    from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Ask a new question

Read More

Video Games