As it stands now, a warlock PC will be compelled to make sure that he is surrounded by enemies when he uses this power and that none of his allies are within the close burst, otherwise, his allies will roundly and repeatedly curse him when he immobilizes both friend and foe with this power.
If that is the intent of this power, that a warlock ought not have any close allies, so be it.......and any future warlock characters of mine will act accordingly towards allies.
But I think there's a wording issue with Fate of the Void:
"When an enemy under your Warlock’s Curse is reduced to 0 hit points or fewer, you gain a +1 bonus to any single d20 roll you make before the end of your next turn (attack roll, saving throw, skill check, or ability check). If you don’t use this bonus by the end of your turn, it is lost."
Pretty sure that should be "by the end of your next turn" since that's the duration specified in the prior sentence.
I wish Prime Shot, Curse dmg and other Star Pact powers had been changed, but these updates at least move the warlock in the right direction.
-VIC
1. Release draft for playtest. (A few months ago)
2. Release final rules in a Dragon article. (Today)
3. Fold the rules update into PDF rule update documents. (August)
4. Incorporate the rules updates into digital tools. (September)
Epic. Fail.
Playtest is great, do that. Do MORE of that. But then just release everything all at once. There's no reason 2-4 can't be on 1 day. Let's be professional here.
Glad to hear that WoTC listened to the Community again, and finally gave Starlock the requested treatement ! Also quite happy to hear Bruce Cordell's future article will give the the CON-based Starlock some love ! Nice CON love. Also, subtle clarification changes. Really like the blue color to highlight the changes. Keep it up ! One minor thing though, the Warlock Update brought up some inconsistencies with Hellish Rebuke.
Before Hellish Rebuke used to read as:
Hit: 1d6 + Constitution modifier fire damage. If you take damage before the end of your next turn, the target takes an extra 1d6 + Constitution modifier fire damage.
Now Hellish Rebuke read as:
Hit: 1d6 + Constitution modifier fire damage. The first time you take damage before the end of your next turn, the target takes 1d6 + Constitution modifier fire damage.
Compared to Dire Radiance updated simultaneously:
Hit: 1d6 + Charisma or Constitution modifier radiant damage. The first time the target move closer to you on its next turn, it takes an extra 1d6 + Charisma or Constitution modifier damage.
Knowing how extra damage are in addition to other damage and unaffected by damage bonuses (being already factored in the initial Power's damage roll) I suggest bringing back Hellish Rebuke's effect as an extra damage rather than a seperate damage roll. And it would be more homogene with how -retroavtive- damage process works to take Dire Radiance as an exemple.
Also the damage is supposed to trigger once per turn as well. This only works on powers that can hit the opponent outside of your turn though - how many of those does the warlock have? None that I can find. They all require a sustain to make another attack - again making the hit happen on your turn, so you are still limited to applying curse damage on your turn which is once per round.
What am I missing here? Quote from the release page:
wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/warlo...
Most respondents were quite pleased with the power damage increases and the change in Warlock’s Curse damage from once per round to once per turn.
Also more minor... they reversed the blue text for Dire Radiance. They made the Con parts blue but they are adding Cha to it....
I guess I don't really mind but it's just surprising. I expected there to be another name to distinguish the "classic" warlock from the hexblade and binder.
Not really any comment on the rules changes as I'm not really a Warlock expert, but I think it's interesting that the "classic" warlock didn't get a new name like all the other updated classes did. Or did I miss something?
I guess I don't really mind but it's just surprising I expected there to be another name to distinguish the "classic" warlock from the hexblade and binder.
Agreed, that's a missed opportunity.
When it comes to giving implement users damage dealing capability the designers have no spine. Just remember folks: weapons = hardcore, Implements = pissweak.
Couldn't agree more. So broken.
I don't understand something. In reaction to complaints about the how the star warlock depends on both constitution and charisma they changed dire radiance to depend on both.
Several community members wrote in to bemoan the plight of the star pact warlock, who relies equally on Charisma and Constitution as primary stats. Fear not, Far Realm lovers; you can now use Charisma or Constitution with dire radiance.
I don't see how this resolves the issue... if you look in the updated pdf at pact related powers you see that:
Infernal => Constitution only
Fey => Charisma only
Star => Constitutuion or (not and) Charisma
I still see a problem with star warlocks needing both Con and Cha to fully utilize their powers.
I don't see any real benefit from the change. Am I missing something?
Yes, you won't get free choice of all the Star Pact powers. But you might be interested in some Fey or Infernal powers, and I think there's now a Star power at almost every level that uses either stat.
Yes. You don't pick the Star pact powers that use the other stat. Now, because of the fix, your at-will uses either stat, and your PHB paragon path uses either stat. So you can use either stat.
Yes, you won't get free choice of all the Star Pact powers. But you might be interested in some Fey or Infernal powers, and I think there's now a Star power at almost every level that uses either stat.
Don't forget that there are Infernal Pact powers that key off of Charisma as well.
Theoretically, they could make Constitution powers for Fey Pacts and Dark Pacts, and Charisma powers for Vestige Pacts in the future as well.