Access To Base Classes [Archive] - Wizards Community

Access To Base Classes [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Flan
04-08-07, 07:42 PM Reading through the latest LGCS I'm not entirely clear on how you gain access to base classes other than the ones explicitly stated as open (i.e. PHB, marshall, healer etc.) From what I can tell in order to play a, say, Dragon Shaman, you need campaign documentation to open for you, i.e. you need to first play in a module that gives you access to it. Is that correct? If so, are there any "common" ways/modules to gain access to any other base classes that aren't region specific or are core?
Sieylianna
04-08-07, 09:24 PM Reading through the latest LGCS I'm not entirely clear on how you gain access to base classes other than the ones explicitly stated as open (i.e. PHB, marshall, healer etc.) From what I can tell in order to play a, say, Dragon Shaman, you need campaign documentation to open for you, i.e. you need to first play in a module that gives you access to it. Is that correct? If so, are there any "common" ways/modules to gain access to any other base classes that aren't region specific or are core?

AFAIK, tHe only way to get access to a non-open base class is through AR access. It doesn't make sense for a meta-org or special mission to offer it. I've played a lot of LG and never seen one offered, although some people apparently have received access to duskblade.

Ed
haferka
04-08-07, 09:54 PM ...It doesn't make sense for a meta-org or special mission to offer it. ...

That is entirely your opinion.. but.. A special mission to win the favor of a famous NPC who has class levels of a limited class.. is the perfect SM for access to that Base Class.

Meta-orgs would be an awsome way to gain access to a base class that makes sense for them.. but, that would encourage "shopping around" for class access instead of "regional flavor". So I would agree that granting instant access with a metaorg would be a bad idea... It could however have a "trainer" willing to train metaorg members who win his favor... (see above).
cetiken
04-08-07, 10:17 PM In theory the new Campaign Cards could provide a avenue to access if the circle felt like it.

Though that would somewhat limit their ability to make such classes open in the future.

Humm.... Actually with a campaign card you could assign an additional penalty to classes the circle felt were too strong. I'm thinking about the Warlock here.
GreatSiron
04-08-07, 11:56 PM In theory the new Campaign Cards could provide a avenue to access if the circle felt like it.

Though that would somewhat limit their ability to make such classes open in the future.

Humm.... Actually with a campaign card you could assign an additional penalty to classes the circle felt were too strong. I'm thinking about the Warlock here.

A campaign card wouldn't fix the warlock. It's MIC ablity is just way too powerful.
Flan
04-09-07, 02:14 AM It seems odd that so many prestiege classes are open, and so few base classes are. PrC tend to be weird, exotic and would be more appropriate to being rare and not open due to lack of trainers etc. Many of the non-open but not closed base classes are pretty mundane in comparison.
JamesMaissen
04-09-07, 09:37 AM A campaign card wouldn't fix the warlock. It's MIC ablity is just way too powerful.

It really isn't. All it does is allow the warlock to meet prereqs for whichever feats that they take. LG has skewed MIC up in power, but by atleast taking away automatic access to items it's more in line with what a feat should deliver.

Warlocks peak in power early. They are basically the equivalent of trying to do primary roles with reserve like feats. I think that the name is resonating with bad connotations more than anything else.

-James
Rerednaw
04-09-07, 10:11 AM It really isn't. All it does is allow the warlock to meet prereqs for whichever feats that they take. LG has skewed MIC up in power, but by atleast taking away automatic access to items it's more in line with what a feat should deliver.

Warlocks peak in power early. They are basically the equivalent of trying to do primary roles with reserve like feats. I think that the name is resonating with bad connotations more than anything else.

-James
Off-topic:

I wonder what the official reason was for banning the class (not that they actually need one.) All of the ones brought up on the boards have been refuted.

Wait a minute...Duskblade access?
GreatSiron
04-09-07, 05:11 PM Off-topic:

I wonder what the official reason was for banning the class (not that they actually need one.) All of the ones brought up on the boards have been refuted.

Wait a minute...Duskblade access?

Yeah, I haven't found any other arguement that came even close to holding up. I really think they just don't like it.
bitznarf
04-09-07, 05:32 PM To be honest, every reason I've heard about this from the circle leads me to think that the class should be closed for everyone, and not be available for the writers either.
GreatSiron
04-09-07, 05:39 PM To be honest, every reason I've heard about this from the circle leads me to think that the class should be closed for everyone, and not be available for the writers either.

Where did you hear any reasons from the Circle? I didn't see any on the boards, and I'd like to know why I can't play my favorite class in LG.
bitznarf
04-09-07, 05:44 PM http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=788014
GreatSiron
04-09-07, 06:14 PM Okay, so the only reason the Circle has is that the rules are weird? I admit that invocations are different from spells, and different enough from spell-like ablilities, but that's their only reason? That's stupid.
catsclaw
04-09-07, 07:05 PM Okay, so the only reason the Circle has is that the rules are weird? I admit that invocations are different from spells, and different enough from spell-like ablilities, but that's their only reason? That's stupid.The reasoning seems to be that judges are required to be conversant in the rules behind everything at their table, and warlocks are sufficiently different, rules-wise, to make that impractical.

Given how complex the rules have gotten, and all the open PrCs now, I don't think that's a compelling reason anymore. I even recommended my brother start a warlock for XE, because the invocations are fun and a lot easier to deal with than spellcasting in D&D.

Alas, for LG he decided to make a bard and then an abjurer. Sure, those are easy to optimize. Feh.
bitznarf
04-09-07, 07:34 PM The reasoning seems to be that judges are required to be conversant in the rules behind everything at their table, and warlocks are sufficiently different, rules-wise, to make that impractical.

Given how complex the rules have gotten, and all the open PrCs now, I don't think that's a compelling reason anymore. I even recommended my brother start a warlock for XE, because the invocations are fun and a lot easier to deal with than spellcasting in D&D.

Alas, for LG he decided to make a bard and then an abjurer. Sure, those are easy to optimize. Feh.
So why has shadow magic been allowed into the campaign?
Arvagor
04-09-07, 07:50 PM So why has shadow magic been allowed into the campaign?I've raised the same point... Shadow magic is, IMO, much different, and the class is even more difficult to understand than the warlock, so the arguments against warlock are bad, at best...

I'm not sure how the hexblade's "Any nongood" (LN, N, CN) is better than the warlock's "Any evil or any chaotic" (CG, CN) ...
catsclaw
04-10-07, 11:46 AM So why has shadow magic been allowed into the campaign?My point exactly.

Actually, given the number of various explanations why warlocks are closed, I'm guessing different members of the Circle have different reasons -- some don't like the flavor, some don't like the mechanical aspects, some think they're overpowered, some don't care, some like them but don't want to make waves -- so there's a rough consensus to keep them closed, but no one agrees on why.
Timlagor
04-10-07, 11:57 AM I think Shadow Magic was an experiment to see how many problems it caused.
haferka
04-10-07, 08:25 PM You can request a Special Mission for the Dragon Magic version of warlock... they get invocations.. I forget the class name.. but its essentially the same thing...
Madfox11
04-11-07, 03:38 AM It seems odd that so many prestiege classes are open, and so few base classes are. PrC tend to be weird, exotic and would be more appropriate to being rare and not open due to lack of trainers etc. Many of the non-open but not closed base classes are pretty mundane in comparison.

Of course, there a tons of more prestige classes than base classes so for a proper comparison you would need to compare percentages - and you don't count special books like the Complete Psionic, Tome of Magic, Incarnum and Book of Nine Swords. The main reason to avoid these classes is indeed the fact that they follow a complete new subset of rules that is not only difficult for the DM but also for the setting designers. Shadow magic is an experiment and one we picked because it makes so perfect sense in the setting. Considering the amount of times I had to point out to players that their interpretation/memory of certain spells was off (sometimes by a lot), the complicateness of these new rule sets is really important.

For a few base classes this holds less basis, but for these power also comes into play or they do not fit very well in the setting.

Side-note: access is REALLY not the most disruptive part of magic item creation. The fact that you can turn xp into gold, can get specific items much earlier than equal level non-crafters AND exchange them without a nett loss in gold is what make these feats so powerful. Remember, D&D is balanced with a certain ratio of gp to xp in mind, and anything that increases the gp in relation to xp disrupts the balance. Of course, one can argue whether the creation feats do so in an amount that it really is noticable, but that is a discussion for another thread ;)
JamesMaissen
04-11-07, 10:28 AM The main reason to avoid these classes is indeed the fact that they follow a complete new subset of rules that is not only difficult for the DM but also for the setting designers. Shadow magic is an experiment and one we picked because it makes so perfect sense in the setting. Considering the amount of times I had to point out to players that their interpretation/memory of certain spells was off (sometimes by a lot), the complicateness of these new rule sets is really important.

Warlocks appear in modules so judges are going to need to know how they work anyway. They are far more popular and well known than shadow magic anyway. This is especially true with Complete Mage's slew of warlock based PrCs making them a class that's not just appearing in only one publication. Imho this makes them more mainstream as a concept.

Now if concern about such new rules were to be truely valid I would think that warlocks and the like would be completely closed, much like Psionics are.

However if you draw the line at PCs vs NPCs then they are still in the game and their ruleset will simply be less well-known when they do come up. This solves nothing in protecting people from unknown rules, but rather makes them more vulnerable to it. I've seen just as many judges get wierd creatures and less known classes wrong as players missunderstanding a spell. If an item is more open then you get 7 times as many chances to recognize such an error.

-James
Timlagor
04-11-07, 11:38 AM From the perspective of complication, Shadow Magic (all ToM actually) is about as bad as it gets.

Warlocks are really pretty straightforward with all the rules in just a couple of pages (much like any PrC) with only a few invocations needing to be examined the the Judge. (as opposed to dozens of spells)
Eric Anondson
04-11-07, 01:09 PM Warlocks appear in modules so judges are going to need to know how they work anyway. They are far more popular and well known than shadow magic anyway.Just because warlocks are more popular than..., or better understood by players and judges than..., or more supported than... still doesn't change that Shadow has a long established connection to the canon of the Greyhawk setting. This long link is what it sounds like the Circle kept in mind why they considered this experiment.
Eric Anondson
04-11-07, 02:01 PM And for what it is worth, Ari Marmell, the author of the Shadow Magic section of Tome of Magic, has said there are some things about the class that he would redo. Ari followed a thread on on the shadowcaster class on ENWorld (http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=167796&page=1&pp=40). At the end of the fourth page Ari links to another thread where me makes suggestions for alterations he would make to the class were he to start over.
Madfox11
04-12-07, 04:49 AM Now if concern about such new rules were to be truely valid I would think that warlocks and the like would be completely closed, much like Psionics are.

I never said that the same argument holds true for all none standard open base classes.

Shall I requote myself: "For a few base classes this holds less basis, but for these power also comes into play or they do not fit very well in the setting."

I merely said that argument is used for MOST of the closed base classes (which are truly closed btw):
"and you don't count special books like the Complete Psionic, Tome of Magic, Incarnum and Book of Nine Swords. The main reason to avoid these classes is indeed the fact that they follow a complete new subset of rules that is not only difficult for the DM but also for the setting designers."

Or:
"Shadow magic is an experiment and one we picked because it makes so perfect sense in the setting."
Timlagor
04-13-07, 09:42 PM So.. how it the Shadow Magic experiment going?

[I'd really like to see ToB myself :)]
Eric Anondson
04-13-07, 11:10 PM [I'd really like to see ToB myself :)]:headexplo
The_Jester
04-14-07, 12:00 PM I'm not sure how the hexblade's "Any nongood" (LN, N, CN) is better than the warlock's "Any evil or any chaotic" (CG, CN) ...

Well, they're not "any evil/chaotic" just usually chaotic or evil. Like bards are typically chaotic. There's no monk/paladin alignment restriction I can see that prevents, say, a lawful good warlock.

Side-note: access is REALLY not the most disruptive part of magic item creation. The fact that you can turn xp into gold, can get specific items much earlier than equal level non-crafters AND exchange them without a nett loss in gold is what make these feats so powerful.

How exactly do they get turned into gold? I understand the 1/25th xp hit but if you sell it you're still only paying 1/2 of what you got it for (1/4 of the regular price).
It may be cheaper saving money in the long run but with the sacrifice of feats that could otherwise be used to save your butt in combat.

Personally, the feat thing is why I laugh at crafting warlocks. True they can make anything, but at the cost of a chunk of their feats (skill focus, at least one crafting skill but the examples seem to be 2-3) and half their skill points. UMD is handy but maxing it out is keeping points away from Concentrate, Spellcraft and any of the other skills a warlock might use. Crafting anything at L12 is handy but wading through the previous 11 without Precise Shot or the like hurts.
bitznarf
04-14-07, 02:53 PM When you sell it, you get 1/2 of market price, which is exactly what you paid for it.
Arvagor
04-14-07, 10:16 PM Well, they're not "any evil/chaotic" just usually chaotic or evil. Like bards are typically chaotic. There's no monk/paladin alignment restriction I can see that prevents, say, a lawful good warlock.I'm not sure what you're saying here, Jester... The warlock class has an alignment requirement, being "any evil or any chaotic" (Complete Arcane, pg.7), so a lawful good warlock cannot exist by the RAW. (Of course, there appears to be no penalty for the warlock changing his alignment down the road, so it seems to be a moot point.)
Akhamshyy
04-15-07, 01:50 AM I'm not sure what you're saying here, Jester... The warlock class has an alignment requirement, being "any evil or any chaotic" (Complete Arcane, pg.7), so a lawful good warlock cannot exist by the RAW. (Of course, there appears to be no penalty for the warlock changing his alignment down the road, so it seems to be a moot point.)

I don't see anywhere where it takes away your abilities, but you couldn't gain more levels since you no longer meet the classes requirements.
Japangirl
04-15-07, 04:04 AM I don't see anywhere where it takes away your abilities, but you couldn't gain more levels since you no longer meet the classes requirements.

Unless you took one of the PrCs that requires you to be lawful or good or both, I think they are in Complete Mage or PH2.
Hariman
04-17-07, 11:12 PM Unless you took one of the PrCs that requires you to be lawful or good or both, I think they are in Complete Mage or PH2.

Complete Mage. There's three PrCs for warlocks in it. Two are theurge style classes that combine warlock with divine or arcane. The other is the Enlightened Spirit which lets you be a undead/evil slaying bastion of good.

I'd argue in favor of the warlock, for reasons like "Not Broken" and "Easy to learn, even for newbies.", but I've already seen more than one outright "No/Never" response from Britt and the circle.

I think the Dragon Magic equivalent is the "Dragonfire Adept", and getting a special mission might be difficult. It depends on your triad.

Hariman

PS: A ranged touch sorcerer can be just as good as a warlock if built right.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Flan 04-08-07, 07:42 PM	Reading through the latest LGCS I'm not entirely clear on how you gain access to base classes other than the ones explicitly stated as open (i.e. PHB, marshall, healer etc.) From what I can tell in order to play a, say, Dragon Shaman, you need campaign documentation to open for you, i.e. you need to first play in a module that gives you access to it. Is that correct? If so, are there any "common" ways/modules to gain access to any other base classes that aren't region specific or are core?
Sieylianna 04-08-07, 09:24 PM	Reading through the latest LGCS I'm not entirely clear on how you gain access to base classes other than the ones explicitly stated as open (i.e. PHB, marshall, healer etc.) From what I can tell in order to play a, say, Dragon Shaman, you need campaign documentation to open for you, i.e. you need to first play in a module that gives you access to it. Is that correct? If so, are there any "common" ways/modules to gain access to any other base classes that aren't region specific or are core? AFAIK, tHe only way to get access to a non-open base class is through AR access. It doesn't make sense for a meta-org or special mission to offer it. I've played a lot of LG and never seen one offered, although some people apparently have received access to duskblade. Ed
haferka 04-08-07, 09:54 PM	...It doesn't make sense for a meta-org or special mission to offer it. ... That is entirely your opinion.. but.. A special mission to win the favor of a famous NPC who has class levels of a limited class.. is the perfect SM for access to that Base Class. Meta-orgs would be an awsome way to gain access to a base class that makes sense for them.. but, that would encourage "shopping around" for class access instead of "regional flavor". So I would agree that granting instant access with a metaorg would be a bad idea... It could however have a "trainer" willing to train metaorg members who win his favor... (see above).
cetiken 04-08-07, 10:17 PM	In theory the new Campaign Cards could provide a avenue to access if the circle felt like it. Though that would somewhat limit their ability to make such classes open in the future. Humm.... Actually with a campaign card you could assign an additional penalty to classes the circle felt were too strong. I'm thinking about the Warlock here.
GreatSiron 04-08-07, 11:56 PM	In theory the new Campaign Cards could provide a avenue to access if the circle felt like it. Though that would somewhat limit their ability to make such classes open in the future. Humm.... Actually with a campaign card you could assign an additional penalty to classes the circle felt were too strong. I'm thinking about the Warlock here. A campaign card wouldn't fix the warlock. It's MIC ablity is just way too powerful.
Flan 04-09-07, 02:14 AM	It seems odd that so many prestiege classes are open, and so few base classes are. PrC tend to be weird, exotic and would be more appropriate to being rare and not open due to lack of trainers etc. Many of the non-open but not closed base classes are pretty mundane in comparison.
JamesMaissen 04-09-07, 09:37 AM	A campaign card wouldn't fix the warlock. It's MIC ablity is just way too powerful. It really isn't. All it does is allow the warlock to meet prereqs for whichever feats that they take. LG has skewed MIC up in power, but by atleast taking away automatic access to items it's more in line with what a feat should deliver. Warlocks peak in power early. They are basically the equivalent of trying to do primary roles with reserve like feats. I think that the name is resonating with bad connotations more than anything else. -James
Rerednaw 04-09-07, 10:11 AM	It really isn't. All it does is allow the warlock to meet prereqs for whichever feats that they take. LG has skewed MIC up in power, but by atleast taking away automatic access to items it's more in line with what a feat should deliver. Warlocks peak in power early. They are basically the equivalent of trying to do primary roles with reserve like feats. I think that the name is resonating with bad connotations more than anything else. -James Off-topic: I wonder what the official reason was for banning the class (not that they actually need one.) All of the ones brought up on the boards have been refuted. Wait a minute...Duskblade access?
GreatSiron 04-09-07, 05:11 PM	Off-topic: I wonder what the official reason was for banning the class (not that they actually need one.) All of the ones brought up on the boards have been refuted. Wait a minute...Duskblade access? Yeah, I haven't found any other arguement that came even close to holding up. I really think they just don't like it.
bitznarf 04-09-07, 05:32 PM	To be honest, every reason I've heard about this from the circle leads me to think that the class should be closed for everyone, and not be available for the writers either.
GreatSiron 04-09-07, 05:39 PM	To be honest, every reason I've heard about this from the circle leads me to think that the class should be closed for everyone, and not be available for the writers either. Where did you hear any reasons from the Circle? I didn't see any on the boards, and I'd like to know why I can't play my favorite class in LG.
bitznarf 04-09-07, 05:44 PM	http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=788014
GreatSiron 04-09-07, 06:14 PM	Okay, so the only reason the Circle has is that the rules are weird? I admit that invocations are different from spells, and different enough from spell-like ablilities, but that's their only reason? That's stupid.
catsclaw 04-09-07, 07:05 PM	Okay, so the only reason the Circle has is that the rules are weird? I admit that invocations are different from spells, and different enough from spell-like ablilities, but that's their only reason? That's stupid.The reasoning seems to be that judges are required to be conversant in the rules behind everything at their table, and warlocks are sufficiently different, rules-wise, to make that impractical. Given how complex the rules have gotten, and all the open PrCs now, I don't think that's a compelling reason anymore. I even recommended my brother start a warlock for XE, because the invocations are fun and a lot easier to deal with than spellcasting in D&D. Alas, for LG he decided to make a bard and then an abjurer. Sure, those are easy to optimize. Feh.
bitznarf 04-09-07, 07:34 PM	The reasoning seems to be that judges are required to be conversant in the rules behind everything at their table, and warlocks are sufficiently different, rules-wise, to make that impractical. Given how complex the rules have gotten, and all the open PrCs now, I don't think that's a compelling reason anymore. I even recommended my brother start a warlock for XE, because the invocations are fun and a lot easier to deal with than spellcasting in D&D. Alas, for LG he decided to make a bard and then an abjurer. Sure, those are easy to optimize. Feh. So why has shadow magic been allowed into the campaign?
Arvagor 04-09-07, 07:50 PM	So why has shadow magic been allowed into the campaign?I've raised the same point... Shadow magic is, IMO, much different, and the class is even more difficult to understand than the warlock, so the arguments against warlock are bad, at best... I'm not sure how the hexblade's "Any nongood" (LN, N, CN) is better than the warlock's "Any evil or any chaotic" (CG, CN) ...
catsclaw 04-10-07, 11:46 AM	So why has shadow magic been allowed into the campaign?My point exactly. Actually, given the number of various explanations why warlocks are closed, I'm guessing different members of the Circle have different reasons -- some don't like the flavor, some don't like the mechanical aspects, some think they're overpowered, some don't care, some like them but don't want to make waves -- so there's a rough consensus to keep them closed, but no one agrees on why.
Timlagor 04-10-07, 11:57 AM	I think Shadow Magic was an experiment to see how many problems it caused.
haferka 04-10-07, 08:25 PM	You can request a Special Mission for the Dragon Magic version of warlock... they get invocations.. I forget the class name.. but its essentially the same thing...
Madfox11 04-11-07, 03:38 AM	It seems odd that so many prestiege classes are open, and so few base classes are. PrC tend to be weird, exotic and would be more appropriate to being rare and not open due to lack of trainers etc. Many of the non-open but not closed base classes are pretty mundane in comparison. Of course, there a tons of more prestige classes than base classes so for a proper comparison you would need to compare percentages - and you don't count special books like the Complete Psionic, Tome of Magic, Incarnum and Book of Nine Swords. The main reason to avoid these classes is indeed the fact that they follow a complete new subset of rules that is not only difficult for the DM but also for the setting designers. Shadow magic is an experiment and one we picked because it makes so perfect sense in the setting. Considering the amount of times I had to point out to players that their interpretation/memory of certain spells was off (sometimes by a lot), the complicateness of these new rule sets is really important. For a few base classes this holds less basis, but for these power also comes into play or they do not fit very well in the setting. Side-note: access is REALLY not the most disruptive part of magic item creation. The fact that you can turn xp into gold, can get specific items much earlier than equal level non-crafters AND exchange them without a nett loss in gold is what make these feats so powerful. Remember, D&D is balanced with a certain ratio of gp to xp in mind, and anything that increases the gp in relation to xp disrupts the balance. Of course, one can argue whether the creation feats do so in an amount that it really is noticable, but that is a discussion for another thread ;)
JamesMaissen 04-11-07, 10:28 AM	The main reason to avoid these classes is indeed the fact that they follow a complete new subset of rules that is not only difficult for the DM but also for the setting designers. Shadow magic is an experiment and one we picked because it makes so perfect sense in the setting. Considering the amount of times I had to point out to players that their interpretation/memory of certain spells was off (sometimes by a lot), the complicateness of these new rule sets is really important. Warlocks appear in modules so judges are going to need to know how they work anyway. They are far more popular and well known than shadow magic anyway. This is especially true with Complete Mage's slew of warlock based PrCs making them a class that's not just appearing in only one publication. Imho this makes them more mainstream as a concept. Now if concern about such new rules were to be truely valid I would think that warlocks and the like would be completely closed, much like Psionics are. However if you draw the line at PCs vs NPCs then they are still in the game and their ruleset will simply be less well-known when they do come up. This solves nothing in protecting people from unknown rules, but rather makes them more vulnerable to it. I've seen just as many judges get wierd creatures and less known classes wrong as players missunderstanding a spell. If an item is more open then you get 7 times as many chances to recognize such an error. -James
Timlagor 04-11-07, 11:38 AM	From the perspective of complication, Shadow Magic (all ToM actually) is about as bad as it gets. Warlocks are really pretty straightforward with all the rules in just a couple of pages (much like any PrC) with only a few invocations needing to be examined the the Judge. (as opposed to dozens of spells)
Eric Anondson 04-11-07, 01:09 PM	Warlocks appear in modules so judges are going to need to know how they work anyway. They are far more popular and well known than shadow magic anyway.Just because warlocks are more popular than..., or better understood by players and judges than..., or more supported than... still doesn't change that Shadow has a long established connection to the canon of the Greyhawk setting. This long link is what it sounds like the Circle kept in mind why they considered this experiment.
Eric Anondson 04-11-07, 02:01 PM	And for what it is worth, Ari Marmell, the author of the Shadow Magic section of Tome of Magic, has said there are some things about the class that he would redo. Ari followed a thread on on the shadowcaster class on ENWorld (http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=167796&page=1&pp=40). At the end of the fourth page Ari links to another thread where me makes suggestions for alterations he would make to the class were he to start over.
Madfox11 04-12-07, 04:49 AM	Now if concern about such new rules were to be truely valid I would think that warlocks and the like would be completely closed, much like Psionics are. I never said that the same argument holds true for all none standard open base classes. Shall I requote myself: "For a few base classes this holds less basis, but for these power also comes into play or they do not fit very well in the setting." I merely said that argument is used for MOST of the closed base classes (which are truly closed btw): "and you don't count special books like the Complete Psionic, Tome of Magic, Incarnum and Book of Nine Swords. The main reason to avoid these classes is indeed the fact that they follow a complete new subset of rules that is not only difficult for the DM but also for the setting designers." Or: "Shadow magic is an experiment and one we picked because it makes so perfect sense in the setting."
Timlagor 04-13-07, 09:42 PM	So.. how it the Shadow Magic experiment going? [I'd really like to see ToB myself :)]
Eric Anondson 04-13-07, 11:10 PM	[I'd really like to see ToB myself :)]:headexplo
The_Jester 04-14-07, 12:00 PM	I'm not sure how the hexblade's "Any nongood" (LN, N, CN) is better than the warlock's "Any evil or any chaotic" (CG, CN) ... Well, they're not "any evil/chaotic" just usually chaotic or evil. Like bards are typically chaotic. There's no monk/paladin alignment restriction I can see that prevents, say, a lawful good warlock. Side-note: access is REALLY not the most disruptive part of magic item creation. The fact that you can turn xp into gold, can get specific items much earlier than equal level non-crafters AND exchange them without a nett loss in gold is what make these feats so powerful. How exactly do they get turned into gold? I understand the 1/25th xp hit but if you sell it you're still only paying 1/2 of what you got it for (1/4 of the regular price). It may be cheaper saving money in the long run but with the sacrifice of feats that could otherwise be used to save your butt in combat. Personally, the feat thing is why I laugh at crafting warlocks. True they can make anything, but at the cost of a chunk of their feats (skill focus, at least one crafting skill but the examples seem to be 2-3) and half their skill points. UMD is handy but maxing it out is keeping points away from Concentrate, Spellcraft and any of the other skills a warlock might use. Crafting anything at L12 is handy but wading through the previous 11 without Precise Shot or the like hurts.
bitznarf 04-14-07, 02:53 PM	When you sell it, you get 1/2 of market price, which is exactly what you paid for it.
Arvagor 04-14-07, 10:16 PM	Well, they're not "any evil/chaotic" just usually chaotic or evil. Like bards are typically chaotic. There's no monk/paladin alignment restriction I can see that prevents, say, a lawful good warlock.I'm not sure what you're saying here, Jester... The warlock class has an alignment requirement, being "any evil or any chaotic" (Complete Arcane, pg.7), so a lawful good warlock cannot exist by the RAW. (Of course, there appears to be no penalty for the warlock changing his alignment down the road, so it seems to be a moot point.)
Akhamshyy 04-15-07, 01:50 AM	I'm not sure what you're saying here, Jester... The warlock class has an alignment requirement, being "any evil or any chaotic" (Complete Arcane, pg.7), so a lawful good warlock cannot exist by the RAW. (Of course, there appears to be no penalty for the warlock changing his alignment down the road, so it seems to be a moot point.) I don't see anywhere where it takes away your abilities, but you couldn't gain more levels since you no longer meet the classes requirements.
Japangirl 04-15-07, 04:04 AM	I don't see anywhere where it takes away your abilities, but you couldn't gain more levels since you no longer meet the classes requirements. Unless you took one of the PrCs that requires you to be lawful or good or both, I think they are in Complete Mage or PH2.
Hariman 04-17-07, 11:12 PM	Unless you took one of the PrCs that requires you to be lawful or good or both, I think they are in Complete Mage or PH2. Complete Mage. There's three PrCs for warlocks in it. Two are theurge style classes that combine warlock with divine or arcane. The other is the Enlightened Spirit which lets you be a undead/evil slaying bastion of good. I'd argue in favor of the warlock, for reasons like "Not Broken" and "Easy to learn, even for newbies.", but I've already seen more than one outright "No/Never" response from Britt and the circle. I think the Dragon Magic equivalent is the "Dragonfire Adept", and getting a special mission might be difficult. It depends on your triad. Hariman PS: A ranged touch sorcerer can be just as good as a warlock if built right.