Hello everyone.
I am trying to squeeze every bit of damage out of a Hellfire warlock build i possible can, but since I'm useless I'm not able to produce something really awesome, and therefore I seek your guys' wisdom. What I came up with was mixing the Hellfire blast with sneak attacking (maybe from inside darkness with devil's sight on?), but I am certain that my build is less that optimal. I wanted to progress in my invocations (at least to some degree), while still getting a lot of damage (from sneak attack) to complement my hellfire blast. I am not allowed to do the Uncanny trickster trick (+1 level of existing class features) to boost my HF damage after the three levels of Hellfire Warlock.
What I came up with was this build:
My main problem is the Beguiler dip, but the Unseen seer PrC seemed like my best chioce and this one dip lets me enter it. Another issue is that I am forced to be human (and picking able learner) to meet the Unseen Seer's skills pre.reqs.
On a final note: I don't care where the extra damage comes from (sneak attack just seemed like the most effective way), but I really would want at least two greater invocations (Invoker level 13). Comments on feat selection is also appreciated. These feats are not settled, but merely something I picked because I had no better ideas. I need help!
Best regards.
Hello everyone.
I am trying to squeeze every bit of damage out of a Hellfire warlock build i possible can, but since I'm useless I'm not able to produce something really awesome, and therefore I seek your guys' wisdom. What I came up with was mixing the Hellfire blast with sneak attacking (maybe from inside darkness with devil's sight on?), but I am certain that my build is less that optimal. I wanted to progress in my invocations (at least to some degree), while still getting a lot of damage (from sneak attack) to complement my hellfire blast. I am not allowed to do the Uncanny trickster trick (+1 level of existing class features) to boost my HF damage after the three levels of Hellfire Warlock.
The two bold bits are the problem here - Sneak Attack is not a terribly powerful alternative to the Legacy Trickster trick (the one you're banned from using), and without Legacy Trickster you really can't do that much damage with Hellfire Warlock. In general, warlocks are not very good. They have some appeal, but they lack strength to back up that appeal without cheesing, and if you're being blocked from cheesing...
THree observations on the build, with that out of the way.
1) No Hunter's Eye? It's a ranger exclusive spell, but you can cast it from a staff because warlocks rock at UMD (and there's an open discussion still about what happens if you UMD a staff - what CL does it take effect at? Some say, with a supremely high UMD, you can get it to take effect at an immensely high CL.), and it's the best way to add Sneak Attack via magic.
2) Eldritch Glaive is MUCH more useful than at BAB+6. Look at the Combat Reflexes feat. It's a different playstyle though, so I'm not sure if it's worth looking into.
3) You can't take Improved Critical without BAB+8, and you can't take Assassin's Stance as your first stance (all ToB adepts have a 1st level stance at level 1, regardless of their IL; a 2-level dip into swordsage would get it, along with Child of Shadow to protect you on the move).
I'll need to think a bit more about this. It's an interesting challenge, but don't expect miracles.
Sneak Attack is not a terribly powerful alternative to the Legacy Trickster trick (the one you're banned from using), and without Legacy Trickster you really can't do that much damage with Hellfire Warlock. In general, warlocks are not very good. They have some appeal, but they lack strength to back up that appeal without cheesing, and if you're being blocked from cheesing...
No one in my group is really experinced (with the most experinced being our main DM with 4 years) and we are still discovering new issues from time to time. I am the newest of the players but I am also the one most intrigued by optimization, which often is the reason why we meet these new issues (for an instance when I first introduced the group about the trickster-trick regarding Hellfire Warlocks), however often I read statements on the forum that my group doesn't share at all. For an instance; every one of my group seems to think that Warlocks in fact is not weak. The fact that they target touch AC makes their damage very reliable they all claim, and in the long run they will deal the same (if not more) damage than the typical big stupid fighter (by this I mean the typical melee character [NOT the figher class]), but with a reliable pace. It seems to me that this might be true to some degree. Why exactly is it that everyone on this site thinks that this steady and secure damage is so subpar to the damage produced by fighter classes?
1) No Hunter's Eye? It's a ranger exclusive spell, but you can cast it from a staff because warlocks rock at UMD (and there's an open discussion still about what happens if you UMD a staff - what CL does it take effect at? Some say, with a supremely high UMD, you can get it to take effect at an immensely high CL.), and it's the best way to add Sneak Attack via magic.
I didn’t know about this spell. It is awesome indeed. Can you direct me to a source stating the action for using a wand rely on the spell’s casting time? I always assumed that using a wand was a standard action.
2) Eldritch Glaive is MUCH more useful than at BAB+6. Look at the Combat Reflexes feat. It's a different playstyle though, so I'm not sure if it's worth looking into.
Yeah I know, but that build was not really focusing on melee and I therefore decided that it wasn’t all that useful before BAB 6.
3) You can't take Improved Critical without BAB+8, and you can't take Assassin's Stance as your first stance (all ToB adepts have a 1st level stance at level 1, regardless of their IL; a 2-level dip into swordsage would get it, along with Child of Shadow to protect you on the move).
Oh how embarrassing. You are absolutely right (regarding the feat). Regarding not being able to pick higher level stances at first adept class level: Where is this written? I always thought that that rule was RAI and some DMs allow it and other don’t
I'll need to think a bit more about this. It's an interesting challenge, but don't expect miracles.
Sound awesome. I originally made the build purely for fun, but recently i’ve considered playing a warlock and therefore I want to see how far it can go. I don’t expect much, but every input is great.
No one in my group is really experinced (with the most experinced being our main DM with 4 years) and we are still discovering new issues from time to time. I am the newest of the players but I am also the one most intrigued by optimization, which often is the reason why we meet these new issues (for an instance when I first introduced the group about the trickster-trick regarding Hellfire Warlocks), however often I read statements on the forum that my group doesn't share at all. For an instance; every one of my group seems to think that Warlocks in fact is not weak. The fact that they target touch AC makes their damage very reliable they all claim, and in the long run they will deal the same (if not more) damage than the typical big stupid fighter, but with a reliable pace. It seems to me that this might be true to some degree. Why exactly is it that everyone on this site thinks that this steady and secure damage is so subpar to the damage produced by fighter classes?
1)No one would actually want to play the "Fighter" class if the Tome of Battle is open. The Warblade is the Fighter done right. The Fighter is an NPC class that happens to have some utility in a few PC builds (in particular, Dungeon Crasher and Hit-and-Run Tactics variants).
2) People who think that rogues (and warlocks) deal a lot of damage have never seen what Power Attack is capable of doing. A typical ubercharge character (you can get everything together by level 6 feat-wise; the rest is just a matter of equipment) can one-shot kill just about anything of appropriate CR (with as good a hit rate as the warlock's, give or take), and that's without any serious optimization at all.
I didn’t know about this spell. It is awesome indeed. Can you direct me to a source stating the action for using a wand rely on the spell’s casting time? I always assumed that using a wand was a standard action.
Staff, not wand; wands are made at the lowest CL. Both, however, use, spell trigger, and check the Rules Compendium for action types and you'll see that using a spell trigger device takes the same amount of time as the spell in the trigger device. (RC 8-9, note 2 - "Activating [a spell trigger] magic item takes the same amount of time as casting the spell the item’s power duplicates.". See also RC 85, "Activating a spell trigger item takes the same amount of time as the casting time of the spell that the item stores, but activating the item doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity.").
Yeah I know, but that build was not really focusing on melee and I therefore decided that it wasn’t all that useful before BAB 6.
The other thing with GLaive is you build for it, or you ignore it. If you want it "just in case of melee", I'd strongly suggest a different feat - one that might make it so you don't ever have to be in melee in the first place. (Flyby Attack comes to mind, which would let you Fell Flight over a target, aim an Eldritch Cone DOWN (cones are 3-D, remember!) for a huge area, and then keep flying out of range.)
Oh how embarrassing. You are absolutely right (regarding the feat). Regarding not being able to pick higher level stances at first adept class level: Where is this written? I always thought that that rule was RAI and some DMs allow it and other don’t
Boilerplate text. The Maneuvers Known text lets you pick up any maneuver you qualify and is mum on maneuver level. The Stances known text says you learn a 1st level stance at level 1, and doesn't lock down your stance selection after that. Read it carefully.
Sound awesome. I originally made the build purely for fun, but recently i’ve considered playing a warlock and therefore I want to see how far it can go. I don’t expect much, but every input is great.
It won't be too terribly insane, you're right. Particularly if you have a competent ubercharger on board or a damage-based Mailman build. But that's part of the challenge.
1)No one would actually want to play the "Fighter" class if the Tome of Battle is open. The Warblade is the Fighter done right. The Fighter is an NPC class that happens to have some utility in a few PC builds (in particular, Dungeon Crasher and Hit-and-Run Tactics variants).
Sorry I was unclear. I didn't mean the fighter class per se. I meant the typical melee character (I edit'ed my previous post), ie an Warblade as you mention.
2) People who think that rogues (and warlocks) deal a lot of damage have never seen what Power Attack is capable of doing. A typical ubercharge character (you can get everything together by level 6 feat-wise; the rest is just a matter of equipment) can one-shot kill just about anything of appropriate CR (with as good a hit rate as the warlock's, give or take), and that's without any serious optimization at all.
But that kinda requires the character to use headless charge right? Making the character so vulnerable afterwards, but yeah, with White Raven charge maneuvers (and pouncing charge) you can get to ridiculous amounts of damage (pounce [not the maneuver] is banned in my group). If only my group would listen!
Staff, not wand; wands are made at the lowest CL. Both, however, use, spell trigger, and check the Rules Compendium for action types and you'll see that using a spell trigger device takes the same amount of time as the spell in the trigger device. (RC 8-9, note 2 - "Activating [a spell trigger] magic item takes the same amount of time as casting the spell the item’s power duplicates.". See also RC 85, "Activating a spell trigger item takes the same amount of time as the casting time of the spell that the item stores, but activating the item doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity.").
Thanks!
Boilerplate text. The Maneuvers Known text lets you pick up any maneuver you qualify and is mum on maneuver level. The Stances known text says you learn a 1st level stance at level 1, and doesn't lock down your stance selection after that. Read it carefully.
I'll give it a look.
It won't be too terribly insane, you're right. Particularly if you have a competent ubercharger on board or a damage-based Mailman build. But that's part of the challenge.
I'm excited to see what you can come up with.
But that kinda requires the character to use headless charge right? Making the character so vulnerable afterwards, but yeah, with White Raven charge maneuvers (and pouncing charge) you can get to ridiculous amounts of damage (pounce [not the maneuver] is banned in my group). If only my group would listen!
1) Heedless, not headless.
2) "So Vulnerable" is a misstatement. It's easy to make uberchargers who are fully capable of defending themselves through metrics other than AC, and those methods are not hosed by Heedless Charge. (Trivial example: Wall of Blades.)
3) Even without charging, a decent martial adept can keep respectable damage pressure up - but more importantly, unlike most of the warlock, he can also reliably keep the condition penalties growing. They're brief, but a brief window is all you need if you can kill effectively like most Power Attackers can. And not all Power Attacks are on charges...
4) ...and not all charges need Power Attack for +Damage. A basic White Raven charger doesn't need to use Power Attack at all to keep damage flowing (though it certainly helps!) since the WR charge maneuvers have disproportionately high flat damage for their level and access to the Leading the Charge stance. A 3rd level warblade with a masterwork greatsword and 15 Strength (he's human, so no racial modifiers) can Battle Leader's Charge at +8 for 2d6+3+13 damage (average 23, average critical 33*), vs CR 3 foes with average AC 16 (65% hit rate, or 6.5% critical and 58.5% chance of normal damage) and 27 HP (dead on the crit from full health, down to single-digit HP from a normal hit). And that's a really, REALLY simple, hardly optimized warblade at all.
5) Of course, you can put the two together with ubercharging if you want... White Raven is a good school for this. Ubercharge with your maneuvers, and use your swifts for boosts like White Raven Tactics to cover.
*This conservatively assumes that flat damage from maneuvers does not multiply.
Warlock level 20 eldritch blast damage = 9d6 = 31.5 damage on average 1 a round. He probably always hits so its consistant.
Fighter level 20 - BAB +20, Str of 16+4 Book+6 gloves is Str 26, +8. +5 greatsword. +33. Average CR 20 monster (in the monster manual) has an AC of 36.44, and a max of 40. Our fighter hits for 2d6+17 on each hit = 24 damage a hit, and has 4 a round.
Even with that level of optimization put into it (minimal to none) a fighter outshines the warlock. With actual effort the fighter can easily get his hit chance to near 100%, and can power attack for quite a bit upping his damage dramatically.
Now, dealing direct damage is a suckers game, which is why the fighter needs help. They are awesome at it, but its not a particulalrly awesome tactic.
The strength of the warlock comes from item creation, use magic device (wands) and their at will abilities. Warlocks suck at doing damage, but they aren't suckers so they don't really care.
Warlocks can use at will flight, invisability, and spider climb which is enough to autowin most encounters if the DM pulls monsters randomly from the book without paying attention to tactics. Although at this point, the "I stand here and hit it with a stick" tactic isn't terrible either.
Warlock level 20 eldritch blast damage = 9d6 = 31.5 damage on average 1 a round. He probably always hits so its consistant.
Fighter level 20 - BAB +20, Str of 16+4 Book+6 gloves is Str 26, +8. +5 greatsword. +33. Average CR 20 monster (in the monster manual) has an AC of 36.44, and a max of 40. Our fighter hits for 2d6+17 on each hit = 24 damage a hit, and has 4 a round.
Even with that level of optimization put into it (minimal to none) a fighter outshines the warlock. With actual effort the fighter can easily get his hit chance to near 100%, and can power attack for quite a bit upping his damage dramatically.
Now, dealing direct damage is a suckers game, which is why the fighter needs help. They are awesome at it, but its not a particulalrly awesome tactic.
The strength of the warlock comes from item creation, use magic device (wands) and their at will abilities. Warlocks suck at doing damage, but they aren't suckers so they don't really care.
Warlocks can use at will flight, invisability, and spider climb which is enough to autowin most encounters if the DM pulls monsters randomly from the book without paying attention to tactics. Although at this point, the "I stand here and hit it with a stick" tactic isn't terrible either.
The issue was never a level 20 fighter VS a level 20 warlock, but an medium optimized melee class (Warblade, crusader, Bearwarrior, frenzied berzerker, or whatever) VS an hellfire warlock. No one would want to play either a level 20 fighter or Warlock. In fact I myself would never progress further than 11th level in the warlock class since EB progresses slower from there on. My friends issue was that with a warlock 9/HF warlock 3 the character would deal 6d6+6d6 (+2 x 2d6 acid damage from vitriolic blast) damage targeting touch AC which makes it hit 19 out of 20 times which in fact is very consitent. They claimed that no melee character would be able to deal the same kind of secure damage (maybe besides the Frenzied berzerker but he is easily killed so that didn't bother them).
One thing I like to do is make a few changes to the Arcane Trickster PrC to make it Warlock compatible (and generally improve it overall but that's a different topic) by adding a least Invocation to fill the "Mage Hand" requirement of the class and allow a lesser invocation to substitute for the "able to cast 3rd-level spells" requirement.
There is only one house rule in effect for this build: it takes a flaw to get the Combat Casting feat. Feel free to drop it (although you might get interrupted with an unlucky roll casting the equivalent of 9th level spells) or swap it with whatever else you like that can be taken at level 1. The stats were obtained using 32 point-buy.
Even without any gear, if you can land all three hits with your Eldritch Glaive (and there is a good chance of this since your attacks ignore AC bonuses from armor), you can do 378 damage in a single round once per day without a critical which is enough to easily one-shot a dragon. Apply Vitriolic Blast to allow it to bypass Spell Resistance. I don't see many fighters who can say the same.
Items you will want to get are Codex Advocare (I'd use it on Dark One's Own Luck to boost your reflex save), Greater Chasuble of Fell Power, Gloves of Eldritch Admixture, Bracers of Entangling Blast, Warlock's Scepter, and Rod of Eldritch Power (Noxious Blast). You will also definitely want either Mithral Chainmail or Mithral Scalemail.
Edit: Made a typo in that the Binder level needs to add one more point to Knowledge (the planes) to make you eligible for Hellfire Warlock at level 10. Just take it out of Gather Information.
The issue was never a level 20 fighter VS a level 20 warlock, but an medium optimized melee class (Warblade, crusader, Bearwarrior, frenzied berzerker, or whatever) VS an hellfire warlock.[shortened] My friends issue was that with a warlock 9/HF warlock 3 the character would deal 6d6+6d6 (+2 x 2d6 acid damage from vitriolic blast) damage targeting touch AC which makes it hit 19 out of 20 times which in fact is very consitent. They claimed that no melee character would be able to deal the same kind of secure damage (maybe besides the Frenzied berzerker but he is easily killed so that didn't bother them).
Lion Barb 1/Fighter 11
Feats of note - Extra Rage, Power Attack, Leap Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Shock Trooper (5/12 assigned)
Level 12 AC: Average = 21.75. Max = 28.
You take -12 to AC vs all attacks. You have something like +12BAB, +7Str, +3 Weapon (+2 Rage). You have +25 to hit vs AC 22 on average. You wield a two handed weapon for +16 damage from str and +X. Power attack is going to give you +36 damage and you get +2d6 for a greatsword. per attack. You are throwing out 59 an attack, and have 3. All are very likely to hit, but 1 is gaurenteed.
Your warlock friend is throwing out 14d6+2 for 51 a round. It is basically gaurenteed to hit.
That is not an optimized build. Note it has basically no items, and less than half its feats are spent. It also has 11 fighter levels which everyone will tell you is a bad idea.
Tell your friends to build some sample characters, and actually run the numbers. They will quickly see.
I'm ignoring most of what was already written and I'm tired.
One thing I like to do is make a few changes to the Arcane Trickster PrC to make it Warlock compatible (and generally improve it overall but that's a different topic) by adding a least Invocation to fill the "Mage Hand" requirement of the class and allow a lesser invocation to substitute for the "able to cast 3rd-level spells" requirement.
That does sound reasonable, but as you said that is another matter. I will maybe suggest this to my DM if I want to play the build some day. Thanks!
Try this on for size: dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26912774/Bui...
Thank you for the effort! I’m not a big fan of “once a day”-super blast, but if I picked empower and maximize instead of maybe my stealth feats, I don’t see how this build is dealing more damage per round. Sure the maximize and empower deals a lot more damage when having more d6 on the EB, but overall the Sneak attack seems to deal way more damage in the long run.
The issue was never a level 20 fighter VS a level 20 warlock, but an medium optimized melee class (Warblade, crusader, Bearwarrior, frenzied berzerker, or whatever) VS an hellfire warlock.[shortened] My friends issue was that with a warlock 9/HF warlock 3 the character would deal 6d6+6d6 (+2 x 2d6 acid damage from vitriolic blast) damage targeting touch AC which makes it hit 19 out of 20 times which in fact is very consitent. They claimed that no melee character would be able to deal the same kind of secure damage (maybe besides the Frenzied berzerker but he is easily killed so that didn't bother them).Lion Barb 1/Fighter 11
Feats of note - Extra Rage, Power Attack, Leap Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Shock Trooper (5/12 assigned)
Level 12 AC: Average = 21.75. Max = 28.
You take -12 to AC vs all attacks. You have something like +12BAB, +7Str, +3 Weapon (+2 Rage). You have +25 to hit vs AC 22 on average. You wield a two handed weapon for +16 damage from str and +X. Power attack is going to give you +36 damage and you get +2d6 for a greatsword. per attack. You are throwing out 59 an attack, and have 3. All are very likely to hit, but 1 is gaurenteed.
Your warlock friend is throwing out 14d6+2 for 51 a round. It is basically gaurenteed to hit.
That is not an optimized build. Note it has basically no items, and less than half its feats are spent. It also has 11 fighter levels which everyone will tell you is a bad idea.
Tell your friends to build some sample characters, and actually run the numbers. They will quickly see.
Excellent analysis. Thank you. However I did convince the most stubborn group member realize that a pure Warblade would deal way more damage per round, after we played a mini session where he played one (Uber charger) for the first time. I might use this argument against the rest of the group if they keep protesting.
On a related note, you do have Shape Soulmeld, right?
Oh Mighty Joker what is this "nonsensical" as I assume I am the "Steven" you refer to yet I have posed no example?
While it may not measure you to your almighty level of optimization it would completely make sense that Arcane Trickster should have a few "upgrades" to make it mor usable with later material and also to bring it up to the standards that 3.5 created yet failed to give it when they just yanked it from T&B to throw in the 3.5 DMG.
Just because "updating" a class may not make close to the esteemed level you need to use in optimization calling such an update "nonsensical" shows how far beneath you all others are in you eyes. Perhaps it is best if you do not mix with we poor commoners in this public place and instead stay in some hallowed halls were entry is strictly forbidden except to the few you consider worthy.
Oh Mighty Joker what is this "nonsensical" as I assume I am the "Steven" you refer to yet I have posed no example?
Eh, I mixed up yours and Krusk's posts.
While it may not measure you to your almighty level of optimization it would completely make sense that Arcane Trickster should have a few "upgrades" to make it mor usable with later material and also to bring it up to the standards that 3.5 created yet failed to give it when they just yanked it from T&B to throw in the 3.5 DMG.
No, it would make sense to completely scrap Arcane Trickster and start from the ground up.
Perhaps it is best if you do not mix with we poor commoners in this public place and instead stay in some hallowed halls were entry is strictly forbidden except to the few you consider worthy.
I already have those hallowed halls, but I am charitable, and feel compelled to share my limitless wisdom with those even as undeserving as yourself.
Oh Mighty Joker what is this "nonsensical" as I assume I am the "Steven" you refer to yet I have posed no example?
Eh, I mixed up yours and Krusk's posts.
Oh, so you can admit to being WRONG.
Oh Mighty Joker what is this "nonsensical" as I assume I am the "Steven" you refer to yet I have posed no example?
Eh, I mixed up yours and Krusk's posts.
Oh, so you can admit to being WRONG.
No, I'm saying the car key gnomes snuck on, broke into Onesite and switched your names around while I was typing.
Like I said, that was hardly any optimization at all. I tried to keep it as barebones as possible because the response is always "Oh but thats with14 splatbooks, and no sane DM would rule that way". This is very clearly RAW and hardly puts effort in.
Like I said, that was hardly any optimization at all. I tried to keep it as barebones as possible because the response is always "Oh but thats with14 splatbooks, and no sane DM would rule that way". This is very clearly RAW and hardly puts effort in.
No, no, no. Being at a hundred damage per attack is "not putting effort into it" to the point of being laughable. What you're doing? That's more "gag-inducing for being so downright awful" territory.
Of course, comparing every damage dealer to an ubercharging water orc isn't necessarily helpful. I like to look at Optimization by the Numbers and make sure that anything I call a damage dealer can, at minimum, reliably take out CR appropriate enemies in two hits. That means reliably averaging around 250 damage per round at CR 20.
Hmm. I'm just posting from memory, but let's see. Level 6, water orc with a starting 18 in Strength, whirling frenzy lion totem barbarian/fighter. Give him Headlong Rush, Leap Attack and the Shock Trooper line. Assuming super minimal equipment (+2 Str item and a +1 greatsword), that would be 28 Str when raging and three attacks for... 2d6+13 Str +18 PA/leap attack +1 enhancement, or 2d6+32, an average of 39 points of base damage. Heedless Charge ups that to 78 per swing, or 234 damage on average for a full attack. That's pretty minimal, most notably in the item department, so it could go up. A valorous greatsword alone would bring the total up to about 350. Does that sound about right?
That looks about right, yeah.
Of course, comparing every damage dealer to an ubercharging water orc isn't necessarily helpful.
Why not? It's like comparing every gish to a Sorcadin. It's what works. It's the gold standard.
I like to look at Optimization by the Numbers and make sure that anything I call a damage dealer can, at minimum, reliably take out CR appropriate enemies in two hits. That means averaging around 250 at CR 20.
I don't. I measure by if it can one-shot level-appropriate dragons every time. Anything below that is too low, 'cuz that dragon is going to kill you.
Of course, comparing every damage dealer to an ubercharging water orc isn't necessarily helpful.
Why not? It's like comparing every gish to a Sorcadin. It's what works. It's the gold standard.
Eh, I've never liked the Sorcadin - cool in theory, terrible to play through at the low levels, less effective than a buffing wizard, who gets access to Shapechange 3 levels sooner.
But anyhow, I just think it's overkill for most games. There's definitely something beautiful about a super-simple, no nonsense orc that hacks at your face with a greataxe or greatsword and deals thousands of points of damage, but it doesn't mean that any build that doesn't do so isn't carrying their weight. Again, I look at it from the lens of how long it takes me to deal with a level-appropriate encounter.
I like to look at Optimization by the Numbers and make sure that anything I call a damage dealer can, at minimum, reliably take out CR appropriate enemies in two hits. That means averaging around 250 at CR 20.
I don't. I measure by if it can one-shot level-appropriate dragons every time. Anything below that is too low, 'cuz that dragon is going to kill you.
Well, the highest HP a dragon has at CR 20 is 459 according to a quick perusing of the SRD, so my rough estimate of 250 damage per round being the minimum needed for a build who is focused on hurting things is actually not holding up too poorly, since that means I'm two full attacks away from taking it out all by your lonesome. OK, sure, dragon's gonna kill me, but hopefully I'm not soloing the stupid thing. I shoot for one-shotting based on Optimization by the Numbers, I'm just saying that two hits is my minimum benchmark.
Eh, I've never liked the Sorcadin - cool in theory, terrible to play through at the low levels, less effective than a buffing wizard, who gets access to Shapechange 3 levels sooner.
And if you're a wizard ,you have better things to do than waste actions on being a gish. Wizards make terrible gishes, because they're too good.
But anyhow, I just think it's overkill for most games. There's definitely something beautiful about a super-simple, no nonsense orc that hacks at your face with a greataxe or greatsword and deals thousands of points of damage, but it doesn't mean that any build that doesn't do so isn't carrying their weight. Again, I look at it from the lens of how long it takes me to deal with a level-appropriate encounter.
Wrong. If the enemy is not dead after your first action, you've wasted that action.
Well, the highest HP a dragon has at CR 20 is 459 according to a quick perusing of the SRD, so my rough estimate of 250 damage per round being the minimum needed for a build who is focused on hurting things is actually not holding up too poorly, since that means I'm two full attacks away from taking it out all by your lonesome. OK, sure, dragon's gonna kill me, but hopefully I'm not soloing the stupid thing. I shoot for one-shotting based on Optimization by the Numbers, I'm just saying that two hits is my minimum benchmark.
If the dragon killed you, then you didn't do your job.
If a charger had a shot and couldn't kill it, then it's a failure, plain and simple. You lost the game of rocket tag, and you had no business doing so. Just because having friends is nice, what makes you think the dragon doesn't have friends? What makes you think that your friends were prepared for you to fail so spectacularly?
Then once it's crippled the charger, it should Wall of Force itself into a side of the room with just the casters and use AMF to prevent their escape/ability to do anything. A CR par dragon can be a very very scary thing.
The dragon should know better than to let the Ur-Charger anywhere near it. And if for some reason it has to fight on the ground should make sure there's charge preventing circumstances and a good way to **** block even the most elaborately ability padded charge.
Yes, but you should still be able to one-shot the dragon if you have a charge.
Then once it's crippled the charger, it should Wall of Force itself into a side of the room with just the casters and use AMF to prevent their escape/ability to do anything. A CR par dragon can be a very very scary thing.
Yes, we know. They're casters, although AMF is not the best way to go against a properly paranoid wizard.
What you're doing? That's more "gag-inducing for being so downright awful" territory.
Thats kind of the point. And it still outperforms the warlock...
What you're doing? That's more "gag-inducing for being so downright awful" territory.Thats kind of the point. And it still outperforms the warlock...
You're right. I just saw the build and completely missed the forest for the trees. Sorry about that.
You're right. I just saw the build and completely missed the forest for the trees. Sorry about that.
No issues. If preseted as a legitimate optimized build it probably would have been deserving of mocking.
Best of all, it features tons of skill points (even more if you pick human), lots of class skills, Trapfinding, and a whole slew of other bonuses. You can effectively be the nuker/party-face/skill-monkey all in one character and usually better than everyone else except for the dedicated nuking mages.
Don't. Sneak attack doesn't work. Oh, and Steven's example is also nonsensical. Chargers are hundreds of damage at level 6.
On a related note, you do have Shape Soulmeld, right?
No, that’s why binder was dipped at level 2, obviously. Regarding comparison to optimized chargers we aren’t allowed much of what’s needed to reach those levels of damage. Headlong rush, water races and spirit lion totem barbarian for an instance are all banned. Optimizing is generally pretty restricted in our group so when people argue that some choices are no way near what could have been reached by other means at same level, those other means are often not an option for us, but that’s off topic.
Hmm. I'm just posting from memory, but let's see. Level 6, water orc with a starting 18 in Strength, whirling frenzy lion totem barbarian/fighter. Give him Headlong Rush, Leap Attack and the Shock Trooper line. Assuming super minimal equipment (+2 Str item and a +1 greatsword), that would be 28 Str when raging and three attacks for... 2d6+13 Str +18 PA/leap attack +1 enhancement, or 2d6+32, an average of 39 points of base damage. Headlong Rush ups that to 78 per swing, or 234 damage on average for a full attack. That's pretty minimal, most notably in the item department, so it could go up. A valorous greatsword alone would bring the total up to about 350. Does that sound about right?
You need a lot of flaws (with non-1st level feats as traits) to get all that by 6th level. First you need PA (that’s not a problem), but Headlong rush requires 4 BAB and Leap attack 8 ranks in jump, which mean that those can’t be picked before 6th level. If you also want shock trooper you need improved bulrush (and 6 BAB).
OP: May I make a recommendation? Even though I personally love the Warlock class for its simplicity, if you want the best all-around caster that always has the right tool for the job and can still dish out respectable combat magic, I suggest the Beguiler/Wizard/UltimateMagus combo. It features both spontaneous and prepared casting at decent levels. It's also SAD so even with an extremely low point-buy you can be pretty effective.
Best of all, it features tons of skill points (even more if you pick human), lots of class skills, Trapfinding, and a whole slew of other bonuses. You can effectively be the nuker/party-face/skill-monkey all in one character and usually better than everyone else except for the dedicated nuking mages.
Characters with a lot of skills have always intrigued me, but moving from SLA to spells forces you to somewhat be careful with not spending everything too early each day (not that I don't like playing mages, in fact I love playing wizard (and beguiler) but I never play them as blasters). Anyways I will look into this. Can you maybe create a quick base build with or without feats?
Hmm. I'm just posting from memory, but let's see. Level 6, water orc with a starting 18 in Strength, whirling frenzy lion totem barbarian/fighter. Give him Headlong Rush, Leap Attack and the Shock Trooper line. Assuming super minimal equipment (+2 Str item and a +1 greatsword), that would be 28 Str when raging and three attacks for... 2d6+13 Str +18 PA/leap attack +1 enhancement, or 2d6+32, an average of 39 points of base damage. Headlong Rush ups that to 78 per swing, or 234 damage on average for a full attack. That's pretty minimal, most notably in the item department, so it could go up. A valorous greatsword alone would bring the total up to about 350. Does that sound about right?
You need a lot of flaws (with non-1st level feats as traits) to get all that by 6th level. First you need PA (that’s not a problem), but Headlong rush requires 4 BAB and Leap attack 8 ranks in jump, which mean that those can’t be picked before 6th level. If you also want shock trooper you need improved bulrush (and 6 BAB).
My mistake - like I said, I was running from memory. The problem isn't that you need more feats, so flaws wouldn't help - Barbarian 2/Fighter 4 would have feats to spare in this instance. It's that you've got two non-fighter feats that must be taken after level 3 (Leap Attack and Headlong Rush), and only one non-fighter feat slot there to put it in. If either of them was a fighter feat, it wouldn't be an issue.
Characters with a lot of skills have always intrigued me, but moving from SLA to spells forces you to somewhat be careful with not spending everything too early each day (not that I don't like playing mages, in fact I love playing wizard (and beguiler) but I never play them as blasters). Anyways I will look into this. Can you maybe create a quick base build with or without feats?
As it happens, I already have one. I'm currently working on one using Archmage but this is one that was posted a while ago on GitP. It uses the Master Specialist PrC.
Try this: dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26912774/Bui...
Use the array 10/12 /14/18/10/10 obtained via 32PB. This gives you a very versatile arsenal which I think you will be quite satisfied with; the reason mages don't get infinite spellcasting is because they can effectively end most encounters with only one or two spells.
On the Wizard side you have 4 0th-level spell slots, 6 1st-level spell slots, 5 spell slots for spell levels 2nd-5th, 4 6th-level spell slots, 3 7th-level spell slots, 2 8th-level spell slots, and 1 9th-level spell slot. Now add the bonus transmutation spell for each level as a transmuter wizard. Already, that's a decent arsenal of spells you can cast every day.
Now on the Beguiler side, not only do you have access to every 0th-5th level Beguiler spell and can cast spontaneously, but they are all the useful utility spells that most blasters wish they had but didn't have enough slots to devote to them. Also note that all the good illusion/enchantment spells you gave up as part of specializing in transmutation as a Wizard are part of the Beguiler list. You end up with 6 spell slots for 0th-3rd level spell, 5 spell slots for 4th-level spells, and 3 spell slots for 5th-level spells. With Easy Metamagic (Persistent Spell) bringing the spell level cost of persistent spell down from 6 to 5, you can use the Augmented Casting ability of the Ultimate Magus to persist up to 5th level Wizard spells, including all those mass transmutation buffs (Mass cat's grace, mass Bull's strength, etc) which you get for free.
And then, there is the trapfinding, extra skills, and always-on 100 ft. telepathy. Those are nice too.
LEGACY CHAMPION. since for 10 levels you get extra 16D6 to the blast, but most DM will not like it.
Also since your blast is spell like ability you can do the feat maxiumspell like ability and empower spelllike ability on them has well for some really nice damage. when you need it. Also I would try and talk your cleric into getting migrating suffering to semi remove the con damage for free.
As it happens, I already have one. I'm currently working on one using Archmage but this is one that was posted a while ago on GitP. It uses the Master Specialist PrC.
Try this: dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26912774/Bui...
Cool, thank you. That build does indeed look pretty nice. It probably won't be able to blast away like the Warlock, but if I played this build it wouldn't be in place of a warlock anyway. I never played an Ultimate magus before but I have looked into the class lately and this could be an great way to try it out.
Well if you really want your hell fire up. The standard abuse isLEGACY CHAMPION. since for 10 levels you get extra 16D6 to the blast, but most DM will not like it.
Yeah I know, but the legacy champion uses the same trick as the Trickster and aren’t allowed. My DM’s reasoning is that PrCs that grants the character class features from earlier classes like you had leveled them up, doesn’t offer the character more dice on the Hellfire blast because there are “no more levels in Hellfire warlock” and thus you can’t level it further.
Also since your blast is spell like ability you can do the feat maxiumspell like ability and empower spelllike ability on them has well for some really nice damage. when you need it. Also I would try and talk your cleric into getting migrating suffering to semi remove the con damage for free.
I know, and it has also been mentioned earlier in the thread
.