PDA

View Full Version : Warlock/IotSV (The Wish) Playable 1-20?



veovius
2010-05-30, 09:47 AM
I noticed this in another thread, that was talking about the Wish and the Word. I love the flavor of the warlock, and was originally going to play a Warlock 9/Hellfire Warlock 3/? in a 1-? campaign. Then I saw the crazy make-the-rules-cry-uncle way that warlock managed to get into Sevenfold Veil. I love it!!!

I'm wondering though, do you think that The Wish would be playable from 1-? If it helps, I'm probably going to take 2 flaws to pick up Magical Training and Precocious Apprentice at lvl 1, and picking up Combat Casting and Nymph's Kiss for my other two feats (human warlock). I think we also house-ruled two extra feats by level 5.

Or even better, could I shoehorn in say...Warlock 9/HfW 3/IotSV 7? :smallbiggrin:


Edit: I forgot to ask, is there any particular reason I have to pick Wizard/Int as my caster level for Magical Training? Wouldn't Sorcerer be a better fit since I'm using Charisma as my Warlock stat?

Critical
2010-05-30, 10:16 AM
Precocious Apprentice works only for a sorcerer/wizard... And I suspect Magical Training does too.

EDIT: Okay, it is possible, but I still fail to see how do you get 2 4th level abjuration spells.

veovius
2010-05-30, 10:29 AM
Apparently I can use Warlock invocations (specifically the dispel magic ones) since they cast as the spell, with a caster level of 4th.

Edit: From The Wish CO wiki :
(To get into IoSV, you need five Abjurations, with one at 4th level. Combined with the Warlock Invocations that are Abjuations effects like Devour Magic. Voracious Dispelling, and Entropic Warding and spell gained from (which count as spells for meeting PrC requirements per the Complete Arcane pg 70) and spells from Magical Training off the Wizard list for more abjurations, while Precocious Apprentice provides the needed ability to cast 2nd level spells.)

Cog
2010-05-30, 10:31 AM
EDIT: Okay, it is possible, but I still fail to see how do you get 2 4th level abjuration spells.
It requires - what seems to me - a very poor reading of the way invocations can qualify you for prestige classes. RAW, if an invocation provides the same effects as a specific spell you need, it counts; the Wish build seems to assume abjuration-like invocations can therefore count as invocation spells.

Spell-like abilities don't actually have schools, though, not being spells.

Critical
2010-05-30, 10:37 AM
It requires - what seems to me - a very poor reading of the way invocations can qualify you for prestige classes. RAW, if an invocation provides the same effects as a specific spell you need, it counts; the Wish build seems to assume abjuration-like invocations can therefore count as invocation spells.

Spell-like abilities don't actually have schools, though, not being spells.

That's what I'm talking about - they have no schools, making this build illegal.

veovius
2010-05-30, 10:52 AM
Voracious Dispelling (Lesser, 4th) : You can use "dispel magic" as the spell.

IotSV : Prereq: Able to cast five abjuration spells.

Since Dispel Magic is an abjuration spell, not seeing the problem?

Boci
2010-05-30, 11:00 AM
Voracious Dispelling (Lesser, 4th) : You can use "dispel magic" as the spell.

IotSV : Prereq: Able to cast five abjuration spells.

Since Dispel Magic is an abjuration spell, not seeing the problem?

Dispel magic is a spell. You are using an invocation that functions just like dispel magic. That does not change the fact that it is not a spell.

So RAW, I'm pretty sure the build is not legal. But it looks cool so I would allow it as a DM.

veovius
2010-05-30, 11:14 AM
Dispel magic is a spell. You are using an invocation that functions just like dispel magic. That does not change the fact that it is not a spell.

So RAW, I'm pretty sure the build is not legal. But it looks cool so I would allow it as a DM.

Complete Arcane p.72 : A requirement based on a specific spell measures whether the character in question is capable of producing the necessary effect, and as such, invocations and spell-like abilities that generate the relevant effect meet the requirements for specific spell knowledge. For example a prestige class with a spellcasting requirement of "must be able to cast darkness" is met by a warlock who chooses darkness as one of her invocations, or by any creature with darkness as a spell-like ability.

So, if you replace the wording "darkness" with "abjuration spell", doesn't it still make sense? Or dispel magic, in this case.

Just for the record, I'm pretty new to this CO stuff. I've floated around the boards for several months now, and I've got melee combat down fine (lots of time doing it in SWd20), but I've never really been comfortable with magic in D&D. Maybe it's because I started with magic in Palladium before giving up completely :p This warlock was supposed to be my first real entry into magic-using, so I'm still fuzzy on stuff like schools, spell lists, etc.

Boci
2010-05-30, 11:19 AM
Complete Arcane p.72 : A requirement based on a specific spell measures whether the character in question is capable of producing the necessary effect, and as such, invocations and spell-like abilities that generate the relevant effect meet the requirements for specific spell knowledge. For example a prestige class with a spellcasting requirement of "must be able to cast darkness" is met by a warlock who chooses darkness as one of her invocations, or by any creature with darkness as a spell-like ability.

So, if you replace the wording "darkness" with "abjuration spell", doesn't it still make sense? Or dispel magic, in this case.

Doesn't work because whilst darkness is a specific spell, 5 abjurational spells are not.


Just for the record, I'm pretty new to this CO stuff. I've floated around the boards for several months now, and I've got melee combat down fine (lots of time doing it in SWd20), but I've never really been comfortable with magic in D&D. Maybe it's because I started with magic in Palladium before giving up completely :p This warlock was supposed to be my first real entry into magic-using, so I'm still fuzzy on stuff like schools, spell lists, etc.

It takes a bit of time to get use to. Beguiler from PHII is probably one of the easiest casters to play (after the warlock) since the vast majority of your spells are already selected for you and you do not need to prepare them.

veovius
2010-05-30, 11:30 AM
Hmm....

Ok, well as much as I love the IotSV stuff, I wonder if there's any other cool PrCs that I can qualify for using that Precocious Apprentice/Magical Training trick?

I'll approach my DM about the IotSV, but I don't know if he'll approve it. I would like a backup for it, since I have all these extra feats to play with :D

arguskos
2010-05-30, 11:39 AM
I'd like to note that the Wish and the Word are theoretical optimization at it's finest and most perverted fashion and were never truly meant to be played, or even attempted in a real game.

Technically, RAW is fuzzy enough that they could in theory be played if you had a very broad acceptance of these terms, BUT, no one was ever meant to play them ever, and merely suggesting them is grounds to get smacked across the gob for being a bastard.

Also, if you're starting with magic in d20, there are buckets of better ways that picking up the Wish/Word and running with it. Try a Beguiler/Warmage/Dread Necromancer/Warlock and go from there.

Arakune
2010-05-30, 11:43 AM
In CArc or CM probably have rules for Warlocks entering PrC meant only to wiz/sorc from sources before the book in question were written. I remember some old guide that listed the IoTSV as one option for warlocks.

veovius
2010-05-30, 11:59 AM
I want to mention that I don't want to play The Wish as The Wish, with crazy rings of infinite wishes, etc. I want to play a Warlock who prestiges into IotSV, because it's fluffy with good crunch (sounds like a cereal.....). Just because it takes some amount of rule-twisting to get in doesn't make it any less fluffy. I like the idea of a character who can throw up crazy strong defensive shields as a startle reflex, especially since I'm playing in a RP-heavy devil-flavored campaign.

Originally I was going to Warlock/HFW with Strongheart Vest to offset Con damage (yes I cleared that with the DM first), but so much time has passed since I came up with the concept that I started to look at other stuff. I came across the Sevenfold Veil, and it sounds great. If I could totally change my character concept, I probably would have gone Factotum :p

arguskos
2010-05-30, 12:02 PM
In that case, I'd present him the build, explain you don't want the insanity, and ask if he'll permit this to work.

It's "technically" possible to read it in such a way that it works, so ask him

PId6
2010-05-30, 12:13 PM
SLAs that emulate spells still have the same schools, so I see no reason why a warlock with 5 SLAs that emulate abjuration spells wouldn't qualify for Iot7FV. And it's the warlock, for crying out loud! Warlock needs more love.

But for qualification purposes for warlock, your best bet is usually to dip a casting class like wizard, sorcerer, or cleric so that you can fulfill requirements like Iot7FV's without wasting invocation slots and fulfill requirements like "Able to cast 2nd level spells" at all.

In this case, a 1 level dip of (cloistered) cleric would probably work best. You get a bunch of domains that you can trade for devotion feats, Turn Undead, and enough abjuration spells that you only need to take two 4th+ abjuration invocations as warlock (Voracious Dispelling/Devour Magic/Caster's Lament).

DragoonWraith
2010-05-30, 12:36 PM
I agree that a reasonable DM who would allow a Wizard to become an Iot7V should allow a Warlock to do the same.

Though Iot7V isn't really that reasonable...

Optimystik
2010-05-30, 01:12 PM
Warlocks CAN qualify for Iot7FV. It's just not a very good idea, because doing so eats up way too many Invocations, especially since 3 of them are just dispels.

Entropic Shield (least)
Cold Comfort (lesser)
Voracious Dispelling (lesser, 4th)
Relentless Dispelling (lesser, 4th)
Devour Magic (greater, 6th).

If you really want to go this route, a dip in Wizard can give you some cheap Abjurations, freeing up Entropic Shield, Cold Comfort and one of the others to be used for something else.

PId6
2010-05-30, 01:28 PM
If you really want to go this route, a dip in Wizard can give you some cheap Abjurations, freeing up Entropic Shield, Cold Comfort and one of the others to be used for something else.
Cleric dip is probably better, since you get Domains/Devotion feats and Turn Undead (though Abrupt Jaunt is certainly tempting). Iot7FV doesn't specify that the abjuration spells must be arcane, so divine ones work just as well.

veovius
2010-05-30, 02:13 PM
Well, due to houseruling, we get two bonus feats sometime before level 5. I was also planning on taking 2 flaws as well. I was going to spend them on either the Magical Training/Precocious Apprentice shenanigans, or the Spell Focus/Skill Focus prereqs for IotSV. However, a dip is starting to look better and better.....

How exactly would the cloistered cleric thing work? Just take a bunch of abjurations for the cleric spells, and go play with the devotion stuff?

PId6
2010-05-30, 02:32 PM
You don't even need to do anything special with spells. Clerics automatically know their entire spell list, and having that is enough to satisfy 3/5 of the requirements. For Domains, just pick two Devotion feats and get Knowledge Devotion as well. I recommend Water and Law devotions, but most of them are pretty good. Even just keeping domains is fine, since there are some great domain powers that are basically just bonus feats (Time Domain grants Improved Initiative, for example). See Dipping Cleric 1 (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2773.0) for details.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-30, 03:10 PM
Why not just ask your DM: "Hey, can I qualify for Iot7V if I do this?" where this is getting some Abjuration invocations/SLAs from feats, including at least one that emulates an Abjuration spell that is at least 4th level when cast by a Wizard, and having a Caster Level equal to 7 (since that is what a Wizard would need to qualify). Assuming Iot7V is not banned, I can't think of any reason for a DM to have a problem with this.

The Cat Goddess
2010-05-30, 03:12 PM
You don't even need to do anything special with spells. Clerics automatically know their entire spell list, and having that is enough to satisfy 3/5 of the requirements. For Domains, just pick two Devotion feats and get Knowledge Devotion as well. I recommend Water and Law devotions, but most of them are pretty good. Even just keeping domains is fine, since there are some great domain powers that are basically just bonus feats (Time Domain grants Improved Initiative, for example). See Dipping Cleric 1 (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2773.0) for details.

Planning Domain (for Extend Spell) is good.
One of the Domains gives you the Shield spell, doesn't it?

And you can only convert two of your Domains by RAW, not all three. Converting Knowledge Domain to Knowledge Devotion is good, since you can use Knowlege Devotion to get Know: Nature and you already have Divine, Arcane & Planes. The only one you wouldn't have would be Dungeoneering... which is important for Abberations and a few others, but that's it.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-30, 03:15 PM
And you can only convert two of your Domains by RAW, not all three. Converting Knowledge Domain to Knowledge Devotion is good, since you can use Knowlege Devotion to get Know: Nature and you already have Divine, Arcane & Planes. The only one you wouldn't have would be Dungeoneering... which is important for Abberations and a few others, but that's it.
I've heard 1 and I've heard 3. I believe 3 to be correct, personally. Where on earth are you getting 2? Either you can only do the transfer once (in which case you need to spend Feats to get up to your 3 limit), or you can do it repeatedly but can only have 3 devotion feats total (in which case you can do it three times since you have three domains). Where on earth does the 2 restriction come from?

PId6
2010-05-30, 03:21 PM
And you can only convert two of your Domains by RAW, not all three.
Not true. "You can choose to give up access to a domain in exchange for the corresponding domain feat." Nothing limits this to two domain feats, so you can exchange all three of your domains this way.

Warlocks also don't have much use for Extend Spell since invocations are not spells (and they can be used at will regardless).

Edit: Yeah, only one is arguable. I don't think it's correct, since nothing stops you from doing it multiple times, but it's still arguable.

The Cat Goddess
2010-05-30, 03:28 PM
Read the "Appropriate Theme" section, then read the "Clerics and Domain Feats" section.

Taking things out of context is what often leads to broken interpretations.

DragoonWraith
2010-05-30, 03:34 PM
Huh? What on earth do those have to do with whether you can transfer 2 or 3 Domains to Domain feats?

And how would that be broken anyway?

All it says is you cannot have two Domain feats in opposition (I see none that are suggested), and you must be able to justify why your character has the feats - just as you would have to justify your Domains.

What have been the suggestions, Planning, Law, and Water? Well, Law and Planning just make sense together - as do Planning and Water, what with the regularity of the tides, the need to plan for a long voyage due to the isolation, etc etc. For all three, a Cleric who serves on a ship that hunts pirates would seem quite justifiably devoted to all three. Why not?

PId6
2010-05-30, 03:36 PM
Read the "Appropriate Theme" section, then read the "Clerics and Domain Feats" section.

Taking things out of context is what often leads to broken interpretations.
I just did, and didn't see anything supporting that view. Would you mind quoting the relevant pieces?

There's also nothing broken with switching out three domains for three domain feats; many domains already grant bonus feats anyway, this just marginally increases the options.

veovius
2010-05-30, 03:40 PM
Relevant text :


"You can select a domain feat at any level. Once you have
chosen one, however, you cannot select another unless the
second fi ts thematically with the fi rst. Furthermore, you can
never have more than two domain feats (except as specifi ed
in Clerics and Domain Feats, below)."

....

"In addition, you can choose to give up access to a domain
in exchange for the corresponding domain feat. Doing so
allows you to select up to three domain feats, but you cannot
prepare domain spells or use the granted power of the sacrifi
ced domain."


(I had it open while I was reading the post)

DragoonWraith
2010-05-30, 03:42 PM
Yes, but that doesn't say you can only turn two Domains into Devotions...

nedz
2010-05-30, 03:50 PM
What have been the suggestions, Planning, Law, and Water? Well, Law and Planning just make sense together - as do Planning and Water, ... Why not?
Warlocks have to be Chaotic or Evil.
How would you justify taking Planning and Law unless the character is LE ?
Some other domain choices might fit perhaps ?

PId6
2010-05-30, 03:53 PM
Warlocks have to be Chaotic or Evil.
How would you justify taking Planning and Law unless the character is LE ?
Some other domain choices might fit perhaps ?
What's wrong with LE?

And there's no reason a chaotic character can't plan. Chaotic != raving lunatic.

The Cat Goddess
2010-05-30, 04:03 PM
The words "In Addition".


What's wrong with LE?

And there's no reason a chaotic character can't plan. Chaotic != raving lunatic.

I think the argument is that a Chaotic character shouldn't be able to get the Law Domain/Devotion... not the Planning Domain/Devotion.

Also, one of the Cloistered Cleric's Domains must be Knowledge, remember? So Planning, Law & Water isn't possible.

PId6
2010-05-30, 04:05 PM
The words "In Addition".
That has been argued to mean that you can only trade a single domain for a domain feat, though there's still nothing restricting you from doing it multiple times, and I've no idea how you can come up with two. Can you explain your reasoning further?

The Cat Goddess
2010-05-30, 04:09 PM
That has been argued to mean that you can only trade a single domain for a domain feat, though there's still nothing restricting you from doing it multiple times, and I've no idea how you can come up with two. Can you explain your reasoning further?

In addition... meaning "also, you can do this, adding to what you can already do."

You can already spend a Feat to get a Devotion Feat (that matches your Deity/Focus). In addition, you can trade out a Domain to get the corresponding Devotion Feat. In addition, you can end up with three Devotion feats this way.

By RAW, one of your Devotion Feats must come from spending a Character Feat, otherwise you're not meeting the "in addition" clause.

PId6
2010-05-30, 04:17 PM
In addition... meaning "also, you can do this, adding to what you can already do."

You can already spend a Feat to get a Devotion Feat (that matches your Deity/Focus). In addition, you can trade out a Domain to get the corresponding Devotion Feat. In addition, you can end up with three Devotion feats this way.

By RAW, one of your Devotion Feats must come from spending a Character Feat, otherwise you're not meeting the "in addition" clause.
I'm not seeing it. I think you're reading too much into that one word phrase. I seems like a simple paragraph transition to me. The first paragraph of the section only lists what Domain feats clerics have access too, and ends in an example. I can't imagine your reading being intent, and I don't think it's RAW either. If the "in addition" didn't come at the start of a new paragraph, you can maybe make a point, but this is just too unlikely.

veovius
2010-05-30, 04:22 PM
Hm, maybe I should post the whole section of the "in addition"

Clerics and Domain Feats: If you are a cleric (or any
other character class who gains access to a domain), you
can choose any domain feat corresponding to the list of
domains offered by your deity, even if you do not have
access to those particular domains. A cleric of Pelor, for
example, can choose to cast spells from the Good and
Healing domains but select the Strength Devotion and
Sun Devotion feats.
In addition, you can choose to give up access to a domain
in exchange for the corresponding domain feat. Doing so
allows you to select up to three domain feats, but you cannot
prepare domain spells or use the granted power of the sacrifi
ced domain. In essence, you trade in a domain for an extra
feat slot that you can spend only on a specifi c domain feat.
For example, the above cleric of Pelor could choose to give
up the granted power and spells of the Good domain for the
Good Devotion feat.

Optimystik
2010-05-30, 04:35 PM
I'm in favor of the "only trade 1 domain" reading personally, but I can see how both readings are possible. While the common argument on the "Trade 3" side is that "a domain = a feat anyway, so you should be able to trade them all," I posit that characters that would trade all three of their domains weren't going to take the domains that are equal in utility to a free feat slot anyway.

veovius
2010-05-31, 03:49 AM
So I talked to my DM.

He's cool with me going Warlock, Cleric 1, Hellfire Warlock 3, then Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil 7 :D

...Of course, I'm probably going to be dead long before I get near the end of Hellfire Warlock.....

So far, it looks like Warlock 8 / Cloistered Cleric 1 / HFW 3 / IotSV 7
With the Cleric level being taken when it's character-appropriate. Hellfire Warlock has to be my 10th level, since it has a 12 rank Knowledge prerequisite. Actually, so does IotSV......hmm.....maybe I'll switch the two....